Oolite Bulletins

Anybody care to comment:

http://thenextweb.com/media/2012/03/13/ ... s-to-kids/

Just checked what I already thought to be true with Mrs SandJ, who is a librarian:

In the UK, every time you check a book out, a royalty goes to the author. When the library holds a reading session in the library, they check the book out. So, when reading books to children, the author is paid as if the book had been borrowed. Why shouldn't they be? It is a public performance of the author's own work.

If the Belgian libraries are reading books to children and not paying the author a royalty, they are probably in breach of the copyright law which is fairly standard across Europe.

SandJ wrote:

Just checked what I already thought to be true with Mrs SandJ, who is a librarian:

In the UK, every time you check a book out, a royalty goes to the author. When the library holds a reading session in the library, they check the book out. So, when reading books to children, the author is paid as if the book had been borrowed. Why shouldn't they be? It is a public performance of the author's own work.

If the Belgian libraries are reading books to children and not paying the author a royalty, they are probably in breach of the copyright law which is fairly standard across Europe.

Thanks for this - I wasn't sure - so it's why I posted - I was cautious because SABAM already has such a bad press.

I have spent a lot of time, effort and money to encourage my children to read books. All three now enjoy reading books and, on average, I would say that each one will read about a book every week. Ultimately I spend a considerable amount of money on books. The local library can't keep up, especially since my children mainly read English and I now live in Norway. When I read things like this I wonder why I bother. I do understand that authors should be compensated for their work, but reading out laud at the local library is not where they should look for income, this is where they light the spark for future income.
Not happy about this at all.

I am Belgian, and can tell you this: The people at Sabam belong in the loony house, there was even a plan to tax truck drivers to listen to belgian radio stations, since they were listening to the music "at work". People who think up rules like that should be shot. Period.

We have enough rules as it is, we will do fine without them. And don't get me wrong, artists should get the credit and pay they deserve, but these guys ... ha, a kick in the nuts I can tell you that.

And they said it couldn't happen here:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/15/the_hobbit/

NigelJK wrote:

And they said it couldn't happen here:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/03/15/the_hobbit/

I've liked the FB page, but it's an interesting case. It is alleged that the word "Hobbit" predates Tolkien, he just took and folklorish name and modified its usage - so on those grounds ZSC don't really have much to go on - HOWEVER, the pub sells Middle-Earth themed drinks (bit dodgy as its starting to look like "merchandise") but use posters and cardboard cut outs from the films (so technically (c) New Line if they haven't got permission to re-use this imagery) - therefore ZSC is basically saying that by associating the contents of the film, which we own, with the name of your pub, you're relating your pub to something we own...

If the landlady wishes to keep the name of her pub (her main gripe is the cost of rebranding) then all she has to do is drop the film associations - since the name Hobbit isn't specifically Tolkien and therefore can't be claimed without context she should be fine (IANAL (but I have spoken to a friend who is about it)).

I find it more sad that these guys: http://www.visionarymedia.co.uk/ are getting a cease and desist from ZSC because ZSC say they're selling Hobbit-holes, even though they make no mention of Hobbits on the site, they're above ground, so not holes, and have square doors not round ones, so ZSC seem to be trying to prove breach of (c) or TM on a circular shaped living space... (even though Hobbit-holes aren't circular once you're inside)

DaddyHoggy wrote:

HOWEVER, the pub sells Middle-Earth themed drinks (bit dodgy as its starting to look like "merchandise") but use posters and cardboard cut outs from the films (so technically (c) New Line if they haven't got permission to re-use this imagery) - therefore ZSC is basically saying that by associating the contents of the film, which we own, with the name of your pub, you're relating your pub to something we own...

If the landlady wishes to keep the name of her pub (her main gripe is the cost of rebranding) then all she has to do is drop the film associations

Spot on.

This is another case of bad journalism, being picked up by nobody bloggers who don't do any research, which is then reported as 'news', FFS.

She is using other people's artwork and imagery for profit. At no point was she told to change the pub's name.

Dammit, just look at the pub sign: it is Gandalf from the film, surrounded by 4 other actors, from the film, wearing outfits, from the film. It's not even a hobbit in the middle. She has been ripping off work done by others and is, quite rightly, being told to pack it in.

SandJ wrote:

In the UK, every time you check a book out, a royalty goes to the author. When the library holds a reading session in the library, they check the book out. So, when reading books to children, the author is paid as if the book had been borrowed. Why shouldn't they be? It is a public performance of the author's own work.

If the Belgian libraries are reading books to children and not paying the author a royalty, they are probably in breach of the copyright law which is fairly standard across Europe.

That is ludicrous!
Any writer who's that desperate for income should probably be driving a cab!

What you have to realise is that organisations like SABAM are not really in the business of getting money for authors of copyright-able works. They have to give them money but it is just an annoying outgoing. What they are really in the business of is make money for themselves out of the works of others. This is why they keep coming up with, what most people deem as ludicrous, schemes to enforce some possibly minor breach of copyright. This is what they exist to do. They will probably have lots of people employed to search the nooks and crannies of real life uses of copyright-able works looking for the next revenue stream. Some don't even care if they have the license. German's GEMA don't even have to prove that they own or act on behalf of those that own the copyright. They can get anything blocked in Germany and then you have to prove they don't own the copyright. This stupidity is back up by Germany's laws.

Expect a long line of these type of attempts to enforce copyright.

[Edited for grammar/spelling issues.]

dertien wrote:

I am Belgian, and can tell you this: The people at Sabam belong in the loony house, there was even a plan to tax truck drivers to listen to belgian radio stations, since they were listening to the music "at work". People who think up rules like that should be shot. Period.

Not shot, we need something more cruel. They should be forced to listen to the songs by SABAM's CEO all day long.

Phasted wrote:

That is ludicrous!
Any writer who's that desperate for income should probably be driving a cab!

A lot of them probably are (or they're holding down some other full-time job elsewhere). Being an author is not – with a few incredibly highly paid exceptions – a hugely profitable career.