Talk:United States copyright law in the performing arts

United States: Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wikipedia Ambassador Program assignment[edit]

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at New York University supported by the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2011 Spring term. Further details are available on the course page.

Above message substituted from {{WAP assignment}} on 15:10, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

This has focus issues[edit]

This article's title implies that it addresses copyright issues in the performing arts as a whole, but it seems to be focused exclusively on theater and Broadway-type productions in particular. It should either be re-titled or broadened significantly to include issues around classical and popular music outside of the context of theater and anything else that fits well under the 'performing arts' heading. The former would be more simple, and the latter would be much more useful (and would require significantly more effort). 69.14.158.236 (talk) 17:21, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move to proper home?[edit]

This material should be either moved to copyright or performing arts so that people can actually edit it. It's been sitting here pretty stale, no less in part because of it's daunting title. Nobody wants to read an article titled "Intellectual property in the performing arts in the United States". <grin> --71.161.214.135 02:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article is now named "United States copyright law in the performing arts", it's still a verbose title, but at least it's properly placed beneath U.S. copyright law, and is narrowed from so-called "intellectual property". The articles on copyright are too long to add every single type of work or field of endeavor to which copyright applies. --71.169.134.216 02:41, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is slanted in favor of a director's copyright[edit]

And when I added information to balance the article, my contribution was deleted by Edward Einhorn (DrMajestico) who sued me on just this issue. He couldn't be less neutral.

There is no possible justification for this article to include a link to Edward Einhorn's "Case for a Stage Director's Copyright" but NOT a link to my article which appeared in the Dramatists Guild newsletter arguing against the same - entitled "The Strange Case of Edward Einhorn v. Mergatroyd Productions"

Edward Einhorn v. Mergatroyd Productions is the name of the case tried in federal court by Lewis A. Kaplan in April 2006.

And it should be noted that the case is still not completely settled because Einhorn said that he would cancel the unauthorized derivative copyright he registered on my play TAM LIN, and yet seven months later still hasn't made good on it.

There is a link to information about the case - but only Edward Einhorn's side. Nobody could possibly argue that this if fair.

And until a neutral party is found to ensure that both sides of the issue are addressed equally, I will continue to ensure that this article isn't totally one-sided myself, although clearly I'm no more disinterested than Edward Einhorn.

I don't want to get into a revert war, but if there are no resources at Wikipedia to address this gross injustice, it may come to that. All the Wiki mediation services are backlogged. Nancymc 21:24, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for mediation[edit]

I have located this on the talk page, as I believe that is the correct location, rather than in the bulk of the article. I would be glad to have third party mediation on this.

I have removed the second link to the director's copyright essay, which I would have removed originally if I had noticed it. This is an attempt at compromise.

I believe all of Nancymc's comments reflect a personal agenda, related to the law case. Quotes are selective and "facts" are extremely slanted.

I have not written any entries onto this page, because I too have a strong viewpoint, and I feel it is inappropriate to comment. Nothing on the page comes from myself or any friend that I know of.

My proposal is that we both leave this page to other parties, in order to avoid an ongoing battle.

DrMajestico

Request for Comment[edit]

This is a highly controversial topic. Two editors here, Nancymc and DrMajestico, are involved in a real-world dispute (Edward Einhorn v. Mergatroyd Productions). It was tried in Manhattan's Southern District court in April 2006 by Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, and although it seemed to be settled, is currently the subject of further court actions.

Nancymc contends that the article was edited with a non-neutral point of view, possibly by friends and/or sock puppets of DrMajestico, and includes (one or more) links to DrMajestico's personal web site essay arguing one side of the case([1] http://www.untitledtheater.com/DirectorsCopyright.htm.)

When NancyMc added text and links to represent the other side of the case, they were reverted out by DrMajestico. NancyMc maintains that the DrMajestico version also includes opinion and subjective language such as "Stage directing is clearly an expression of an idea, rather than the idea itself, and is therefore eligible for ownership rights" and "The Dramatists Guild has been angered by the recent rise in copyright actions from directors"

19:03, 22 November 2006 (UTC)