[78-L] O/T Films

[Elizabeth McLeod]

For as long as the films were under copyright, the content belonged to the
studio that originated it, regardless of who posessed the physical artifact
of the film. That remains true of "lost films" today -- if the studio that
created them renewed copyrights, they still own the productions, even if no
physical copies exist. If somebody turns up a complete copy of "Gold Diggers
of Broadway" tomorrow, for example, they will have no legal right to exhibit
or otherwise exploit it because the production still belongs to Warner Bros,
which renewed the copyright in 1957. Because it was under copyright when the
copyright revisions of 1976 were enacted, it remains under copyright today.

Films that weren't renewed because their originating studios were out of
business when the initial 28-year term expired would have probably fallen
into the public domain, assuming there were no underlying story rights that
could be claimed by the heirs of the original author or some such. The
Dawson City find would be all public domain anyway, since with few
exceptions all American-made films prior to 1923 have been ruled PD.

It wasn't uncommon for theatrical film exchanges to sell used film reels to
manufacturers of toy projectors. These reels would be cut into 60 foot
lengths and these clips would be packaged in little metal cans and sold
along with the toy projectors for home use without regard for fire safety.
It was even possible for consumers to buy entire 1000-foot reels of used
film from mail order companies -- well into the 1930s the Johnson Smith
novelty catalog listed film reels. "No choice of subject, all reels shipped
by Railway Express." These sales did not include the right to exhibit the
reels for profit, and may explain why random bits and pieces of "lost films"
sometimes turn up in attics and garages with no explanation for how they got
there.

Elizabeth


On 8/4/14 6:21 AM, "Julian Vein" <julianvein at blueyonder.co.uk.invalid>
wrote:


> Despite what one of them said, there was no real environmental
> consideration given to how the films were to be disposed of, no official
> policy of any sort. No concerns about pollution or the poisoning of the
> water table etc. "Out of sight, out of mind" seems to have been the
> philosophy of the day.
> 
> The other question is who became the legal owner of the film if the
> distributor didn't want it back?
> 
>       Julian Vein
> _______________________________________________
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l