(no subject)

[rivkat]

cesperanza should be particularly interested in this NYT story about directors claiming copyright in their particular stage directions for plays, whether the plays themselves are copyrighted or not. It's a very good story, though it contains a legal error about the amount of statutory damages available (it's $150,000 per work infringed maximum, no matter how many times you infringe, so it's hard to imagine how to get up to $3 million based on one play). There are also some resonances with debates about fandom -- how, if at all, can we compare the director's contribution to the play as performed with that of the playwright? Does making the director into an auteur necessarily involve diminishing the contribution of the playwright? As with many relationships, legal categories come in and cut up once-fluid bonds, ending the living give-and-take that produced the stage directions in the first place.

Comments

[fenwic.livejournal.com]

I was a stage manager on and off for 10 years, so I found the article particularly interesting. I can certainly understand Mr. Mantello taking issue with Mr. Hall's staging, but I think few cases are that clear. Actors and writers contribute ideas all the time. At its best, playmaking the most collaborative of processes, so where do you draw the line? I guess we'll find out.

Thanks so much for the link :)

[cathexys.livejournal.com]

very cool, thanks!

*giving up, taking ball and going home!*

[cesperanza.livejournal.com]

OH FOR CHRIST'S SAKE!

Re: *giving up, taking ball and going home!*

[rivkat.livejournal.com]

Okay, but once there, you should call and/or email me!

[j-bluestocking.livejournal.com]

From a personal emotional standpoint, I found this about as depressing as what's going on with the Supreme Court.

In other news, I just saw a link to this article:

http://www.stockphotographer.info/content/view/77/98/

and wondered what you thought.

[rivkat.livejournal.com]

Briefly, I think the elimination of noncommercial use is silly and bad, though there'd still be an exception for criticism and commentary (and a requirement that a use be likely to dilute, which is a vague concept but might nonetheless put some limits on trademark owners' rights). I am impressed with the high quality of the response from the artistic/consumer community, which has focused admirably on uses of trademarks that don't seem conventionally critical but should nonetheless be freely allowed. Often the rhetoric in IP issues gets overblown, but Public Citizen (who's representing the VW Bug guy and one of whose lawyers took my TM class last year) seems to be doing an excellent job coordinating a reasoned campaign for change. I only hope it is effective.