Christmas speech 1932 - ownership / permission to use

[wdsteele]

I put together a track a couple of years back which uses some dialogue from what I believe was a BBC Empire transmission by George V in 1932. To complicate things more I believe the speech had some extracts from Rudyard Kipling .

Mad as it sounds , there is also a sample of the nursery rhyme "Mary,Mary quite contrary " from Listen with Mother ( 1950's radio programme ) arranged by Ann Driver and sang by George Dixon.

I've only got the audio clip samples now and can't be sure of the actual origin ,so, can anyone shed any light on who the owner might be ( BBC presumably ? ) and what permissions might be required to use freely?

[The Red Bladder]

That depends on what your source material is.

In the UK, recordings last 70 years from the date of publication. To take advantage of that period however, you need to have the original and not a later copy as source material.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... recordings

[wdsteele]

Thank you for that pointer - I thought the source was from a BBC archive which I stumbled upon as I clicked on various links from the main BBC site.

I can still find the archive page but not that particular recording for some reason.

I heard the BBC were quite reasonable around programme use for educational purposes , not so sure about this particular project though.

I have a bit of work still to do on the mix anyhow so plenty of time to research.

[The Red Bladder]

I suggest you contact the BBC before you go any further, if this is for commercial use of any sort.

Re-releases inc. on-line archive stuff is usually watermarked in various ways, so you need to be able to show that you have a source (e.g. old 78 record) that is older than 70 years.

[Drew Stephenson]

Interestingly there was no copyright on broadcast works until 1957 and the 1956 law wasn't retroactive. Making a copy of an uncopyrighted work should not create a new copyright - otherwise you could extend copyright indefinitely by simply making a licensed copy at the end of the original period. Even after 1957 re-broadcasting a recording doesn't create a new copyright, it exists for 50 years from the date of the original broadcast.
Contact the BBC and see what they say.

[wdsteele]

Okay , I see what you mean, thank you to both.

No real commercial plans , it just seems to continue to stand up better and better every time I re-visit.

It's a reflection on the demise of empire and the home nations pulling and tugging against their union e.t.c. which will sound terribly contrived on paper but the peice is musically sound I hope , and, to me at least , seems somehow relevant today.

It seems kind of ironic that the King's use of radio technology , which allows him "to speak to all my people" is in essence the same kind of technology which gave a louder voice to alternative ideas and counter arguments to empire.

The dialogue just helps to re-inforce the story and I love the tone of those old BBC announcements - but these particular ones have something over and above the usual examples.

Sorry for the soliiquay , will be mixing tonight , so seemed good to put those thoughts down and read back to myself as an aid to focus !

[The Red Bladder]

Interestingly there was no copyright on broadcast works until 1957 and the 1956 law wasn't retroactive. Making a copy of an uncopyrighted work should not create a new copyright - otherwise you could extend copyright indefinitely by simply making a licensed copy at the end of the original period. Even after 1957 re-broadcasting a recording doesn't create a new copyright, it exists for 50 years from the date of the original broadcast.
Contact the BBC and see what they say.

Yes and no. If I remaster an old jazz record from 1936, the remastered version is now copyright 2017. If you make a copy of my remastered version, then you have infringed my copyright. I will recognise the remastered version with great ease, as key changes will have been made to watermark that version.

All the above only applies to the mechanical. You still have to pay for the intellectual rights in the usual way.

[Drew Stephenson]

If I remaster an old jazz record from 1936, the remastered version is now copyright 2017.

I knew that this had recently been codified in the states, didn't know it applied in the UK as well? Terrible ruling either way in my opinion but I suspect my views on copyright are in the minority on this site.