{"id":98508,"date":"2009-12-24T11:52:00","date_gmt":"2009-12-24T16:52:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/techdirt.com\/articles\/20091223\/1052437485.shtml"},"modified":"2009-12-24T11:52:00","modified_gmt":"2009-12-24T16:52:00","slug":"clothing-company-sues-cbc-over-copyrights-for-taping-a-fashion-show","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/98508","title":{"rendered":"Clothing Company Sues CBC Over Copyrights For Taping A Fashion Show"},"content":{"rendered":"

Rob Hyndman<\/a> points us to the news that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) is facing a copyright lawsuit for sneaking into a fashion show and filming it<\/a>. As the article notes, since the event was held on private property, you can make a reasonable argument for trespassing. But copyright? The fashion company is claiming that it should be able to copyright its fashion shows as a “performance,” but it’s difficult to see how a fashion show, by itself, is covered by copyright (what’s the fixed expression?). A film of it would be covered, but in this case, the filming was done by the CBC, so it<\/i> should own the copyright. The fact that only a limited number of press were invited, and they signed agreements limiting how they would distribute any recordings of the event shouldn’t have any bearing on the copyright question at all. There are some other odd claims in the complaint, such as the fact that the cameraman acted “aggressively” when confronted. I’m unaware of any part of copyright law in which that would matter. All in all, this seems like yet another attempt to abuse copyright law based on a false belief over what it covers, and a misguided sense of “ownership.”<\/p>\n

Permalink<\/a> | Comments<\/a> | Email This Story<\/a>
\n

\n

\n\"\"<\/a>
\n\"\"<\/p>\n

\n<\/img><\/a> <\/img><\/a>\n<\/div>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Rob Hyndman points us to the news that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) is facing a copyright lawsuit for sneaking into a fashion show and filming it. As the article notes, since the event was held on private property, you can make a reasonable argument for trespassing. But copyright? The fashion company is claiming that […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-98508","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/98508","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=98508"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/98508\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=98508"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=98508"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mereja.media\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=98508"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}