ASK & DISCUSS INDEX

4 years, 3 months ago - Alwyne Kennedy

This question comes up from time to time. There were some good answers given last time, particularly regarding the US Library of Congress (UK people can register scripts on it - I have dealt with them myself).

Here are those answers: https://shootingpeople.org/ask/view/0845f32a8aad990da6663318

4 years, 3 months ago - Alwyne Kennedy

Sorry, didn't latch on to the stated fact that it is a treatment you wish to copyright not a script. But I think a treatment - the more detailed the better - would be copyrightable. In fact, it is strongly implied by the information given on this link:

https://screencraft.org/2019/11/12/5-things-screenwriters-should-know-about-copyright-law/

In particular, look at section 1.

4 years, 3 months ago - John Lubran

Yes, a treatment does have copyrightable prospects. I've had a case where I wrote a four page treatment amounting to a story narrative. Another writer joined me in developing that narrative into a screenplay. We fell out because of social reasons that had nothing to do with me. My co-writer the took her screenplay to another producer. My top media lawyer deemed my narrative treatment to be my original work. A registered Declaration of Source and ownership lodged with any official or state entity does provide some force if evidence, even if not unassailable.

I'm always happy when Common Law trumps policies and statutes; so important in these troubled times of political usurpation and presumption. So whilst Copyright registers are helpful, it's the evidence of unique originality on one hand and evidence of intellectual improprieties attempting to claim false coincidence or prior originality on the other that have lawful supremacy.

The main vulnerability is accidentally placing ones property into the 'Public Domain'. If another person or entity places a property into the public domain without authorisation of the legitimate copyright holder, then it's usually not in the public domain but is stolen.

Simply including a self declared Copyright notice with the name of owner and date of first declaration has as much force, in principle, as any other form of registration; provided it can be backed up by actual evidence if challenged. The same goes for the Library of Congress or any other grand entity. Grand registrations are no less assailable than any other declaration. It's the common sense of Common Law.

4 years, 3 months ago - Alwyne Kennedy

HI John, apparently the US Library of Congress is attractive because when you pay your modest fee, their service includes covering legal expenses should you have to defend your copyright. I haven't combed through the Library of Congress website to verify that, but I have viewed a video made by a producer who states that that is the case - watch the first 45 seconds of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-e5qjqT2Zo&t=521s

If anyone knows this is not the case, please contradict me.

4 years, 3 months ago - John Lubran

I agree with you Alwyn. If Library of Congress copyright registration includes litigation insurance it's an astonishingly good deal.

My point essentially is that copyright isn't something provided by policies or even by statute per se. Copyright exists because of protected original discovery and unique provenance. It exists with or without labeling. It's fundamentally a Common Law thing and that's why breach of copyright can only be remedied under Tort Law, which is a Common Law jurisdiction.

So whilst registering ownership is indeed a sensible and efficient thing to do it nevertheless can still be assailed by anyone who asserts that the registration is invalid because they can prove some earlier ownership of all or part of the property at issue.

What this reveals is that ultimately it's not the registered copyright that has precedent but proof of unchallenged original, and importantly, protected ownership, whether registered or not. Registration is more, in terms of law, a great convenience, rather than a structural principle. Registration is an Declaration of Fact or an Affidavit. It's deemed to be the truth unless successfully challenged.

For me the discussion is an opportunity to consider the fundamental, and indeed constitutional Law upon which all statutory and policy based instruments depend. Protect ones property according to the best expediences available, such as registration; but don't lose sight of its place in the hierarchy of legal precedents. As the guy in the video suggests, litigation over intellectual property can be expensive and tricky with no guarantee of success, even if one has registered. He also wisely advises that one ought not release a property Declaration until it's finished and completed.

I recall a famous case between two famous bands/performers, I can't remember the names, but what impressed me was the outcome. One side claimed original ownership of some music but the other side won after proving that almost all contemporary music had roots in a number of early classical and other arrangements, including the claimed property.

Watch out for that public domain, there's a lot in it.