Comments on: Should there be a “Director’s Copyright” in stage directions? (Reader survey)

By: Gordon Firemark

Gordon Firemark — Sat, 24 Jul 2010 00:22:36 +0000

John,

Thanks for your thoughtful and detailed response. To answer the issue about the Stage Managers Prompt book as fixation, I’d argue that the stage manager is “Fixing” the contents of the prompt book as an employee of the producer, and that therefore, the results and proceeds of those efforts are property of the Producer, and not the SM. But, since the production agreement between authors and producer provides (in most cases) that any changes, additions, etc. are property of the Author, the prompt book contents, arguably belong to the Authors of the show.

By: John Hood

John Hood — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 22:23:40 +0000

While directors, actors, designers, dramaturgs, and the multitude of other folks who contribute their skills and insights to stage productions might–and often do–contribute creatively to a production, their work is, at best, derivative of the original author’s (playwright’s) work. To create separate copyrights for these myriad artists and artisans would lead to an impossibly intricate maze that would encumber theatre organizations and producers in a nightmarish clearance process for nearly every aspect (designs for scenery, lighting, costumes, makeup, properties, effects, mechanisms, etc.) of a production.

A stage manager’s prompt script is the closest fixation of the many components of a production; as the person who assembles, harmonizes, coordinates, and records disparate elements into a unified presentation, should not the stage manager have a dominant interest in the copyright ownership of a production–more than a director who merely propounds concepts and ideas that the stage manager “fixes”? Why is a stage manager more “for hire” than a director?

In some instances, directors (and indeed, entire performing companies) have been named as co-authors in both copyrights and credits for a dramatic work. Practically, collaborative writing with a joint copyright seems to be a straight-forward and practical contract arrangement to include a director (or other significant creative contributor) in a single copyright.

The current copyright statutes seem easily to accommodate co-authorship. A “director’s copyright” would instigate a complex, cumbersome array of derivative copyrights that would stymie and ultimately prevent multiple productions of a playwright’s script.

A playwright has a hard enough time getting a play produced and performed without his/her script being locked into a single production concept by a previous director’s derivative claim. Eventually, we’d wind up with so much fear of litigation, that plays would only receive one original production and then disappear from the market. This way lies madness.

By: Gordon Firemark

Gordon Firemark — Fri, 02 Jul 2010 17:01:26 +0000

There's a good article on a related subject by Jennifer Womack from the Fordham Law Review you can find it at 18 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J.. 225-251 (2007)

By: Gordon Firemark

Gordon Firemark — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 00:55:59 +0000

Yup, good catch!

By: Passingthrough

Passingthrough — Sat, 26 Jun 2010 00:50:17 +0000

“…belongs to the employer, rather than the employer.”

I think you were looking for employee the second time.

By: Steve Peterson

Steve Peterson — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 21:09:28 +0000

That feels a little risky to me. If we’re both working from the same source material and we’re working in the confined space of a theater it seems that there’s a good chance we’d hit on a lot of similar ideas for implementation.

By: Julia Quinn

Julia Quinn — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 16:19:00 +0000

The director is a royalty recipient just like the playwright, composer and lyricist, so I don’t see how the work-for-hire argument applies here, unless we are talking about certain non-profit theaters where the artistic director is also the director of the production. Maybe some clarification is necessary in that aspect.

As for the main question, I feel that the director’s work falls into the “idea” realm more than a tangible, you-can-nail-it-down-to-this kind of work. Staging is just one aspect of it, and what about the contribution of the set designer? What about pacing, tone and body language – is there a way to copyright those and on what grounds?

So the provision to copyright director’s work is by itself very flawed. That’s the issue to address.

By: arghetta

arghetta — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 02:50:40 +0000

Here’s one for you, Mr. Firemark.
A director wanted to direct my playwright friend’s play in an Off Broadway theater. My friend agreed. After getting the booking, the director then demanded the playwright sign a contract. This contract would give the director the right to be attached to all future productions of the play.
The playwright said, “Sure. When hell freezes over.”

By: J.D. Schleimer

J.D. Schleimer — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:47:58 +0000

Absolutely not. Blocking is kinetic and as such it is not “fixed in a tangible medium of expression,” a prerequisite for copyright protection.

Moreover, no director should be allowed to encumber the playwright’s work, which could (and already has) led to frivolous lawsuits. If the playwright gives consent to the creation of a “derivative work,” that’s another story, but that’s not likely to happen.