|i think sets and costumes are the two areas that are vague|
|Posted by: dramedy 04:13 pm EDT 06/16/19|
|In reply to: "Whose Production is it anyway?": violating Copyright in Theatre - Dawson 03:53 pm EDT 06/16/19|
|definitely copyright exists since both are put down on paper (or other visual medium). But sets are tough--how do you do Present laughter or Boeing Boeing without a bunch of doors into a living room? How much leeway is there in A Play That Goes Wrong---the script almost demands a certain set. Les Mis can be done without a rotating set. I think costumes are a little less copied unless its a period piece and that depends on where the company gets the costumes--rentals vs making their own. I understand the directors want a cut, but i have a harder time justifying that since it really isn't on paper more than directions. The concept of redesigning Cabaret, Chicago and the recent Atlanta Titanic are nice--but they are concepts that aren't necessarily copyrighted unless put to paper, which really requires the sets and costumes to be put on paper to realize that director's concept. So really, should the set and costume give part of their royalty to the director?|
|Previous:||re: "Whose Production is it anyway?": violating Copyright in Theatre - ryhog 04:32 pm EDT 06/16/19|
|Next:||re: i think sets and costumes are the two areas that are vague - whereismikeyfl 05:10 pm EDT 06/16/19|
Time to render: 0.048695 seconds.