Question about copyright/intellectual property

[Acsenray]

@Exapno Mapcase

So what’s the answer to my questions then? Hmm?

Oh, you’re wanting a good lawyer, then.

[Acsenray]

From what I have said so far, a professor’s lecture qualifies as a copyrightable work, so long as the fixation issue is dealt with.

[Cliffy]

@Exapno Mapcase

Why don’t the Doper lawyers ever come into these threads?

What am I, chopped liver?

–Cliffy, Esq.

[Exapno_Mapcase]

@Cliffy

What am I, chopped liver?

–Cliffy, Esq.

Wait a second. A lawyer saying “I’m no expert”? Twice in one thread? Where’s the Bar Association’s SWAT team when you need them?

[Gfactor]

If the professor were to set the lecture to music . . .

§ 1101. Unauthorized fixation and trafficking in sound recordings and music videos
Release date: 2005-08-01

(a) Unauthorized Acts.— Anyone who, without the consent of the performer or performers involved—
(1) fixes the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance in a copy or phonorecord, or reproduces copies or phonorecords of such a performance from an unauthorized fixation,
(2) transmits or otherwise communicates to the public the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance, or
(3) distributes or offers to distribute, sells or offers to sell, rents or offers to rent, or traffics in any copy or phonorecord fixed as described in paragraph (1), regardless of whether the fixations occurred in the United States,
shall be subject to the remedies provided in sections 502 through 505, to the same extent as an infringer of copyright.
(b) Definition.— As used in this section, the term “traffic in” means transport, transfer, or otherwise dispose of, to another, as consideration for anything of value, or make or obtain control of with intent to transport, transfer, or dispose of.
(c) Applicability.— This section shall apply to any act or acts that occur on or after the date of the enactment of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act.
(d) State Law Not Preempted.— Nothing in this section may be construed to annul or limit any rights or remedies under the common law or statutes of any State.

17 U.S. Code § 1101 - Unauthorized fixation and trafficking in sound...

At least in California, lectures are protected by state law:

66450. (a) Except as authorized by policies developed in accordance
       with subdivision (a) of Section 66452, no business, agency, or
       person, including, but not necessarily limited to, an enrolled
       student, shall prepare, cause to be prepared, give, sell, transfer,
       or otherwise distribute or publish, for any commercial purpose, any
       contemporaneous recording of an academic presentation in a classroom
       or equivalent site of instruction by an instructor of record. This
       prohibition applies to a recording made in any medium, including, but
       not necessarily limited to, handwritten or typewritten class notes.

(b) Nothing in this section shall be construed to interfere with
the rights of disabled students under law.
(c) As used in this section:
(1) “Academic presentation” means any lecture, speech,
performance, exhibit, or other form of academic or aesthetic
presentation, made by an instructor of record as part of an
authorized course of instruction that is not fixed in a tangible
medium of expression.
(2) “Commercial purpose” means any purpose that has financial or
economic gain as an objective.
(3) “Instructor of record” means any teacher or staff member
employed to teach courses and authorize credit for the successful
completion of courses.

California Code, Education Code - EDC § 66450 | FindLaw

[mazinger_z]

@Exapno Mapcase

Whether a professor at a public institution delivering a verbal lecture constitutes a public figure the way a politician does is another legal question that I don’t have an absolute answer to. If anyone can shed some light on that I’d appreciate it.

Why don’t the Doper lawyers ever come into these threads?

You know, I swear I posted to this thread yesterday, those damn hamsters! This is the third time I’ve noticed a post gone missing. :mad:

Anyway, I am a lawyer, all standard disclaimers apply as in my last post. I used to practice copyright law, too, but that was 6 years ago.

A professor is not a public figure the same way a politician or a rock star is a public fiure. (Btw, this isn’t a copyright issue). Unless, however, the politician is also famous in some other way, like Milton Friedman, Paul Simon (the Senator from IL, not the rock star, though, he’s famous too), Richard Posner, etc. There is no bright line test to evaluate whether or not someone is a public figure. However, being a public figure does not factor into whether something is copyrightable or not.

What I think you’re saying is if making speeches in public is copyrightable? Generally, no, because it’s made in public, and besides, it doesn’t meet the fixed requirement. However, to use someone else’s recording of the speech does entail copyright measures and protections. Public universities are not public fora. The school and the professor both have a right to prevent recordings of their speeches/lectures…