The play Power by Arent was made as part of the Federal Theatre Project in the 30s. The program was disbanded eventually. A student radio show I am involved with wants to perform that play on air. They asked me to figure out how to obtain the rights to play it.
My research into the matter told me to contact the publishing house that published it. Of course that publishing house no longer exists. Plus it was a Federal agenecy.
Does that mean our show can play it without worrying? I'm really flummoxed as how to proceed...
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Arthur Arent is probably the one who held the original copyright; that's usually who holds the copyright on plays. The publishing house would only have copyright if the author signed it over. That's fairly common with books, but less so with plays.
I'm downloading the bulk dump of copyright information right now (it'll take another hour or so), and I'll take a search through it if I can narrow in reasonably quickly. The US gov't charges for searches from before 78, but you can get their complete records here: http://bulk.resource.org/copyright/
The key thing looks to be whether or not the copyright was renewed (though there are all sorts of variant situations courts love to create what with resetting timelines and the like), for a work from that period. If it was renewed, it is under copyright (and it is up to you to find the holder). If it wasn't renewed, it is in the public domain.
Actually, the copyright holder might not even be relevant. Since the Federal Theatre Project plays were intended for distribution for others to put on, that says there was a license granted to do so (or the plays were in the public domain). The question is whether such a license, if it exists, is still in effect. If not, you'd need a new license from the copyright holder (if there is one).
Posted by CaySedai (Member # 6459) on :
quote:The Library of Congress is not aware of any copyright in the materials in this collection. Generally speaking, works created by U.S. Government employees are not eligible for copyright protection in the United States. Privacy and publicity rights may apply.
Best I can do tonight.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Ah, I had missed that link before. If the work of the playwrights qualified as work for hire, then yes, the plays would be in the public domain (since their employer was the US Gov't). I had assumed the relationship was more like an independent contractor, in which case the play's copyright would likely have resided with the creator.
Honestly, that sounds good enough for me, especially as I can find no record of an original copyright filing or renewal for the play in the copyright database (which, granted, is full of errors, so a full search takes quite a while). However, as I can't find records of any of the plays made by that project (just a remake of one of them for video), I think it is safe to say they are in the public domain.
Posted by Phanto (Member # 5897) on :
Wow, guys thank you so much for helping me out. I have all my midterms coming up (not to mention increasingly hard math problems for an advanced calc class for physics majors that my business concentration - for no reason whatsoever - makes me take) and having this random task thrown at me was really making me even grumpier than I normally am.
You guys totally rock! *doles out internet cookies*
Posted by HollowEarth (Member # 2586) on :
Its a shame, "some guy on the internet said so" isn't likely to be considered proof by any sane person. (Not to insult you fugu, but this is a random internet forum.)
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Funnily enough, there is no proof of public domain status for a work as old as this is, absent a finding of fact by a court (with jurisdiction), no matter who finds something. Even lawyers don't get to (and most lawyers don't know terribly much about historical copyright law, anyways).
However, this isn't just some guy said so, this is the LoC says it probably is, and the records of the US copyright office don't have a record of either an original copyright filing (as was required then) or a renewal (as would have been necessary for the work not to fall into the public domain).
That's some pretty persuasive, objective evidence.