Do we put greater value on music and “other materials” which gives them longer copyright protection than that given to visual entertainment?

They most certainly can not.

…Actually, Cory, having worked for a See-BS affiliate, I know from first hand experience that this is exactly what they’ll claim. During my highly unsuccessful attempts to get copies of the network’s coverage of NASA’s various missions – Apollo 11, the Surveyor I hour-long special, the Gemini VII bulletins, etc – one of the things I learned is that there were, at the time, some tens of thousands of hours of programming that would probably remain in the network vaults because some suit had determined that even though they had been advised by their attorneys that remastering for the home market – VHS at the time – would give them *sole* rights to distribution and profity, there wouldn’t be enough demand to justify even hiring the lawyer to file the copyright paperwork involved. This mostly applied to shows that had a sole sponsor, as many of those sponsors never got copies of the shows due to lack of interest once the show was aired.

* “Laura Leff, the “President” of the Jack Benny Fan Club she began a few years ago” – I started the club 30 years ago, so we’re a well-established and respected group that has been doing research on the work of Jack Benny for a long time.

* “starting a Facebook petition against CBS” – I did not start this petition, but I do support the effort.

* “CBS is also aware of the fact that Ms. Leff has a library of many existing shows
and charges for making copies” – Our video library is just that…a library, which operates within the definition of our organization as a 501(c)(3) non-profit group. While we encourage voluntary donations for obtaining material from the library to support the costs of operating the organization and efforts such as preserving the shows, I have never turned down an order that didn’t make a donation.

* “CBS doesn’t know how she was “supervising” a transfer of one of the color shows as that is not her job. True, it was an NBC special and maybe she was invited to see a conversion but “supervising”?” – Perhaps there’s a clarification on the term “supervising”. The Estate authorized me to arrange transfers of the color specials to long-term preservation media. I was at CBS Television City during this work. While I can’t tell the folks who work there how to operate the equipment, I was there as an agent of the Estate to see the transfers being done.

*”CBS isn’t the only source for 16mm kinescopes. They even told her to try to find
them through other avenues” – This is completely untrue. CBS never made any such statement to me.

Additionally, I specifically asked my contact at CBS if this was an issue with us being an nonprofit and not a production company, since it was taking so long to get a response. I was told they were dealing with it just as they would for anyone else.

I’m sorry that Mr. Taffel doesn’t support our efforts to preserve this work, but I guess you can’t have everyone agree with you. The Benny family wants his work to be out and available so that people can enjoy it for generations to come. And that’s what the International Jack Benny Fan Club is trying to do.

–Laura Leff
President, IJBFC
http://www.jackbenny.org

What are they thinking?

I’m not defending CBS here, but two considerations exist:

1. CBS probably doesn’t own the shows. A production company that holds the writers’ rights claims co-ownership. Their claims (and others, such as union payments due) need to be resolved before any official release.

2. The shows are very likely NOT in the public domain. Those who claim they are PD typically rely on an error of interpretation. Until 1979, publication of a work without proper copyright notice threw it into the public domain in the United States. Just like almost all TV programming from the 1950s and 1960s, kinescopes typically don’t have copyright notices. But unlike films, books, recordings, etc., kinescopes were never published in the legal sense. US copyright law defines “publication” as selling or offering to sell copies, or giving away or offering to give away copies. This has not happened in the case of kinescopes. I would be extremely surprised if these shows were in public domain (not to mention the music, etc. that they contain.)

Two takeaways: First, copyright law often inhibits public literacy, free expression, cultural awareness, and causes many works to physically disintegrate before they can reach potential audiences. It needs to change. But even if we won a model 14-year (or 5-year) copyright term for both published and unpublished works, and it went into effect tomorrow morning, that would not change hundreds of thousands of restrictive contracts that limit free distribution of cultural materials.

And second: Don’t believe everything you hear about copyright law. Since we put 2000 of our films online for free in late 2001, I’ve heard just about every Net-enabled assertion about copyright law, and I’ve concluded that copyright law on the Internet is what people WANT to believe is true, rather than what is actually true.

Rick Prelinger

Details here:

http://www.againstmonopoly.org/index.php?perm=593056000000003426

They most certainly can and will.

That’s what happened with the Beatles remasters, and all the classic rock stuff. BoingBoing actually covered that a few months ago. The original masters aren’t under copyright, but the remasters are – as they’re considered new work.

Corporate America is corrupt to the core. Those tapes aren’t going to be released till everyone gets their share of the gold that they are worth. It is all about greed. Greed is good and America is full of Gordon Geckos.

Stan also tells me he’s just been speaking with a company who is trying to secure a license to release the shows.

Again, I’m just reporting what others have said, and have no personal stake or opinion other than that these shows should be made available to those who fervently want to see them.

Stan’s comment:

“I have spoken to my source at CBS and am happy to report that the “hype” is just what it is; all hype.

CBS is ready and willing to sub license any property (as they did with Studio One etc.) for a fee.
Laura Leff, the “President” of the Jack Benny Fan Club she began a few years ago, is very good at generating P R and has done a very good job at starting a Facebook petition against CBS and getting articles and giving interviews pleading for the release of 25 Benny shows. She says that CBS has “locked” these films away and will not be preserved. This is not the case.

The 25 Benny shows as well as the full run of the series is stored in state of the art facilities. The film elements are safe and in good shape. CBS is also aware of the fact that Ms. Leff has a library of many existing shows and charges for making copies; dupes of both copywritten and PD shows are offered from her website. 

While I applaud her tenacity and love for Jack Benny (she organized a fine website and a convention a few years ago), it seems that the truth has been diluted and the actual state of the predicament has been reported in error. She is great at “self promoting”.

What it boils down to is this: She is a huge fan who just wants to have copies of the shows and has gone this route to try and obtain them. CBS doesn’t know how she was “supervising” a transfer of one of the color shows as that is not her job. True, it was an NBC special and maybe she was invited to see a conversion but “supervising”? She is friends with Joan Benny (Jack’s daughter) so perhaps that’s how she was invited to see the inner workings. She has gained attention to her fan club and her plight, however misrepresented it is.

CBS is not the enemy here; they will sub contract The Jack Benny out. As these are supposedly P D shows (and that’s not definite) there are other sources to locate them and once they’re out, anyone can dupe them and sell them for no fee. CBS isn’t the only source for 16mm kinescopes. They even told her to try to find them through other avenues, fully aware she wants to add them to her “collection”.

Should these films be available – of course. However, business is business and CBS pays for the storage of these and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of elements and that’s not cheap. To give copies to her for her archive is not so simple even if she pays for her copies. Maybe some company will come forward and these shows will be seen. Time will tell.”

Still, I just can’t believe this.
Having the opportunity to release unique, public domain media, with the cost of it taken care of by a third party and … just refusing ?

What the hell, CBS ? Seriously ?

I mean, it even would have been fairly easy to turn this into a decent PR stunt and win some love at little cost.
I hope there will be a better explanation to this non-sense at some point, I’m curious as to what those “issues” could be.

And as someone pointed out on the original post’s comments, masters aren’t exactly the most stable of things, they won’t last forever.
Would be sad to see them lost, especially in those circumstances and because of the very company that made money out of them.

There is nothing in copyright law that requires the content to be made available for copying after the copyright expires. If the preservation folks can get other copies to use as masters, nothing stops them from copying them to their hearts’ content.

I might CBS are being d-bags for their behavior here, but there’s nothing legally requiring them to cooperate.

I’ve written a blog post about it – I’m not sure I’m saying anything that hasn’t already been said, but I want to add one more voice.

http://borasky-research.net/2010/01/19/please-help-save-the-jack-benny-masters/

CBS isn’t being the dog in the manger. CBS is refusing to release out of fear that the release will infringe someone else’s copyright, combined with an apparent desire to maintain file copies for itself.

If CBS wanted to burn the footage, that would be its right. If CBS were to give away the footage in its surviving form, that would not be the subject of copyright; CBS is the rightful owner of the media, and has “first sale” rights to dispose of them as it pleases. It’s only the act of copying the footage for the fan club that would be the subject of copyright law at all.

Alas, CBS is forced into the position where the footage may have to moulder in the archives. If it no longer has the copy rights (its rights to soundtrack music may have reverted to the composers and performers, for instance), it cannot digitize; it cannot broadcast; it might as well burn, because by the time the copyrights expire, the film will have degraded beyond usability.

Copyright today advances progress by making sure that new works must be created – because old works become inaccessible through situations like this. If a network is to have anything to air, it must continue to create new material because the rights to the old are so uncertain. I suppose that’s progress of a sort.

If putting out 25 half-hour episodes of vintage comedy would hurt CBS in any way, they have much bigger problems. Thats just ridiculous. And who says they have to give it away for free?

This is vintage, historical footage. Seems the would have an obligation to at least preserve it, have it remastered. They could air it themselves if selling it would bankrupt them, as you suggest.

Way to go, Benny estate.
Way not to go, pretty much any other estate (Jean Miro, Hendrix, etc)

It’s the really weak part of U.S. copyright law, effecting music more than any other area, that there ISN’T any provision for protecting our cultural heritage. Too often the law is used to prevent that protection, rather than provide it, as the constitution was intended to do.

As one of the policy makers for the first copyright laws had said, copyright is an evil, but it is a necessary evil. He also mentioned this kind of thing happening saying that once copyright gets out of control it is only evil, and thus unnecessary. I can’t remember the exact words of how it was said so I’ll leave it out of quotes, but with enough research you can probably find the guy who said it.

- The Jack Benny tapes are of very-good quality, and the best out there.

- If CBS digitizes & restores these tapes themselves, they can claim Copyright protections on the remasters, and sell them.

- If CBS gives them , or a 2nd generation xfer, to the Jack Benny Fan Club, they lose having the only ‘best’ copies out there… and would have to compete if they decided to remaster and sell them at some point.

I’m pretty sure the ability to claim copyright on remasters is the huge issue here. It’s a concept that has danced around probably 1/3 of the copyright issues on BoingBoing posts, while sheer stupidity and greed seem to dominate the other 2/3.

We need CopyResponsibility laws too.