Is this music from Star Trek? Star Wars? Help!

[Darth Vader]

 

 

And that is why I do not watch television. They do not make shows like that anymore!

 

Oh yes, bring back Weepy Wyman.

[eurovision]

Dallas! Central Park West, when Borrowman was sexy and tolerable.

[flamingjimmy]

My guess is it is an original piece that was written to the brief 'write us something that sounds like the Jurassic park theme'

[L00b]

your confusing me here. if ownership is nothing to do with the copyright, then what is it?

Well, in reply to my earlier request for a relevant excerpt of the UK CDPA 1988 (about the "15 seconds"), you posted:

there are only a few countries that dominate the media industry and even less that do so in the music sub genre.

Here's how it works (Copyright 101 ):

 

Copyright only exists because a country's Law says it does (in the UK, the CDPA 1988 ). So, you write a song in the UK, the CDPA says that you own the copyright in the written song. But if you write it in France, the CDPA has nowt to do with it - it's the Code de la Propriété Industrielle which says that you own the copyright in the written song.

 

Who owns the copyright is determined under the country's Law of where the copyright arose in the first place. So, you write a song in the UK, of your own bat, the CDPA says you own the copyright in the written song. If you are employed or commissioned to write the song in the UK, the CDPA says your employer or the commissioner owns the copyright in the written song.

 

After that, copyright (of one country, e.g. the US) is recognised in another country (e.g. the UK), only if both countries are parties to the Berne Convention.

 

The point: Countries, few or many, haven't got anything to do with the '15 seconds'. The media industry, regardless of where it is based, might be relevant to the question of ownership (media majors usually try to own all copyrights past/present/future originally belonging to any artist they sign up), but it still hasn't got anything to do with the '15 seconds'.

 

So, as I said, different kettle of fish altogether.

look up fair dealing in uk copyright law, its there.

I know uk copyright law well, believe me. I think I even quoted the relevant sections in an earlier post

 

The only copyrights ITV "can" infringe under the fair dealing provisions, are those vesting in material used in ITV's news bulletin and reviews. That doesn't include recently-released songs used as soundtrack for program advertisements (royalties are paid for that use).

 

ITV regularly infringes copyrights (of rights owners that don't matter, e.g. in material used by the "TV Burp" programs) and avoids paying license fees, knowing full well that rights owners don't have the first penny to sue them and/or it's not worth their while to sue.

 

ITV might call it "fair use", but them doing so doesn't make it so (turkeys rarely vote for Xmas, do they? ).

i wasn't answering a question but giving examples of two media organisations who do and don't use this part of the law. itv do one thing while the bbc do another.

They don't. The BBC has a different arrangement to ITV about royalties, because its broadcasts (in the UK) are not commercial (BBC does not derive a revenue in the UK from advertisers/program sponsors/etc.)

[WeX]

loob anyone can copy and paste from wiki or numerous other websites, but less can speak from experience.

 

i have and still do work in the media industry. the 15 seconds rule is widely used in all uk broadcasters other then the bbc who i have said a number of times now have blanket agreements with the music industry.

[L00b]

loob anyone can copy and paste from wiki or numerous other websites, but less can speak from experience.

I have been practicing copyright law for over 10 years (and advised some BBC production teams in the matter, notably the one responsible for a certain program about enterprising winged reptiles)

 

You are right in that "less can speak from experience", though: copyright law is extraordinarily complex (in the UK alone, never mind internationally), and traditionally the bane of legal practitionners, very few of whom specialise in it.

 

I am simply interested in getting to the bottom of this '15 second rule' you mentioned, as the legal basis for it escapes me completely. One thing I am sure of (on the basis of how you have explained it so far), is that it has nothing to do with the "fair dealing" provisions of the Act.

[donuticus]

It has that John Williams "epic" feel to it hence the references to Star Wars and Jurassic Poke.

 

I think it may well have been composed deliberately in that style to add a sense of gravitas.

[WeX]

I am simply interested in getting to the bottom of this '15 second rule' you mentioned, as the legal basis for it escapes me completely. One thing I am sure of (on the basis of how you have explained it so far), is that it has nothing to do with the "fair dealing" provisions of the Act.

 

the rule is nothing more then what many use as the maximum length. Im no expert but have worked with people from the BBC, ITV (inc regional variants) Sky, MTV Group etc. All use 15 seconds and I can only assume its due to the "10%" as discussed.

[eurovision]

Oh well. Thanks for trying everyone!