tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post2271334793470467289..comments2024-03-26T10:41:35.852+00:00Comments on The 1709 Blog: More on television formatsMarie-Andree Weisshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17125973798789498436noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post-49909310246673087882012-08-21T16:43:15.738+01:002012-08-21T16:43:15.738+01:00In Portugal we still have a registry for copyright...In Portugal we still have a registry for copyright at the Inspeção Geral das Atividades Culturais. IGAC. The register at IGAC is not constitutive of any rights (the right is recognized upon the creation of the work and does not depend on its register or any other formality), but constitutes a presumption of the right's property. In case of judicial dispute, the burden of proof falls on the other part. TV producers usually negotiate television formats holding the document that certificates the register of the guide lines of the programs made in theirs names, although, in fact, they negotiate the plans of the boat and not the boat itself – the old idea / expression dichotomy – . But, to what extent could one consider that the copied TV program is no more than a derivative work of the television format owned by the TV producer that needs his authorization to be used ? If it is sufficiently detailed could an analogy with the films scripts be established ? João de Almeida e PaivaJoão de Almeida e Paivanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4513524515428334509.post-85572059105321811212012-08-21T09:50:44.802+01:002012-08-21T09:50:44.802+01:00The situation is very simple although vested TV in...The situation is very simple although vested TV interests have and contagious stupidity has blocked progress for decades.<br /><br />Formats should be protected like (not "as") copyright works - as I proposed decades ago. We might have got there had the late Hugh Laddie not screwed it up in the Privy Council before my involvement. <br /><br />The law is set out and remains as set out in the long articles that Shelley Lane and I wrote for EIPR much to Tony Martino's chagrin. <br /><br />The draft bill prepared by Shelley Lane's husband's firm was defective by a drafting error of theirs - the use of the word "resemble" in stead of "reproduce" (in that the latter requires copying although the former does not). It was leaped on by Alan Williams, but he balked at at the overall solution for reasons about which I speculate. But that was (IMHO) the bill's only material defect. <br /><br />A format is ideally suited to copyright-style protection. The double uncertainty of the ambit of the work and the ambit of infringment (a postulate of the malign Peter Britton and his proteges in the civil service) is EXACTLY the sort of issue that copyright-style law is suited to evaluate.<br /><br />You will understand that I say "copyright style" to avoid international convention overprotection. <br /><br />The ongoing rows prove I was right - a protection is needed. Richard McD Bridgehttp://www.kingprior.co.uk/about_us/staff/noreply@blogger.com