I was watching an old West Wing episode today in which a Senator goes on a one-man filibuster. He had to basically keep talking the whole time in order to delay a vote, and eventually resorted to reading Charles Dickens and various cookbooks to fill the time.
While this was a fictional program, I have this vague memory of such events happening in the past, though to my knowledge it hasn’t happened in quite this way for many years.
Assuming C-Span provides constant coverage of the Senate, the thought occurred to me that some enterprising Senator could undertake reading books under copyright, and C-Span would have no choice but to broadcast. (Or maybe they wouldn’t, I’m not sure.)
So is this completely hair-brained, or could we have the reading of the entire Harry Potter series on the Senate floor, for example, and viewers could thus have a copy of these books on tape, as it were, as read by your favorite Senator?
And what about marketing? Can one tape and resell Senate speeches, even those which include copyrighted material? Does C-Span own the broadcasts? Can they sell “Harry Potter” as read by the Filibustering Senators?
I know this question may seem way out there… but I have to admit, it is one I haven’t heard asked before, and I am really curious as to what the answers would be…
Since a congressperson cannot be called in front of a court for anything he says on the floor, there would be no legal repercussions for such a reading. Of course, you have to wonder if anyone would bother.
Reading Harry Potter on the Senate floor is not a copyright violation. You’re perfectly free to read whatever you want out loud – you’re not making a copy.
Broadcasting it on C-SPAN is not a copyright violation. C-SPAN is merely reporting and broadcasting the event. Again, no copy is being made.
Private recording of the reading is not a copyright violation. You have the right to record things off the air for your own personal use.
If C-SPAN sells a tape of the broadcast, though, then copyright becomes an issue (for C-SPAN, not the senator). A copy is now being made, and not for personal use. You would need to have Rowling’s permission to do so.
If you record it privately and then try to sell it, you are no longer recording for your own personal use and thus you need permission for Rowling to do so.
Technically, the reading would be put into the Congressional Record. That’s where things get interesting. The Congressional Record is public domain (as are all government documents), so it could be argued that it would put Harry Potter in the public domain. I don’t know if there’s a mechanism to deal with this sort of thing, but I would guess that the Congressional Record would just avoid quoting the copyrighted material in order to protect Rowling’s rights.
Why do I suddenly have the urge to send a link to this thread to one of my Senators?
This could be an interesting angle if the Pirate Party or equivalent, or even just someone sympathetic to their cause, gets elected in the US.
During a filibuster in the Canadian Senate, a senator read the entire text of one of his books into the record. He was accused (among other things) of taking advantage of the system to have his book translated into French for free.
Of course, since our Hansard is not in the public domain but is Crown copyright, I’m not sure what good this would have done him, but never mind.
That’s an inaccurate argument. Public performances are copyright violations if copying the info to text or other formats would be a violation. The “copy” in copyright can and does include public performances. Reading books out loud is in itself a copy.