Clause 13.—(COPYRIGHT IN CINEMATOGRAPH FILMS.) (Hansard, 24 October 1956)

§ Mr. Alport
I beg to move, in page 20, line 35, to leave out from the beginning to the end of line 42.
This Amendment is intended to meet a point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Crosby (Mr. Page) during the Committee stage. The proviso as it is at present drafted assumes that the maker of the goods is the man who makes the contract with the maker of the film where that film is required for advertising the goods of the first person I have mentioned. My hon. Friend the Member for Crosby, however, pointed out that it was normal commercial practice for these contracts to be made not between the maker of the goods and the maker of the film direct but usually between the advertising agent representing the maker of the goods and the maker of the film.
In these circumstances, as my hon. and learned Friend the Parliamentary Secretary said during the Committee stage: Obviously, we do not want to spell out a proviso which does not govern what normally happens in the commercial sphere. I quite 770 appreciate that there is a case for looking at this proviso again."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Standing Committtee B, 10th July, 1956 ; c. 306.] As I have said, we have done so and we have come to the conclusion that my hon. Friend's criticism is well-founded and that it would be far batter for us to leave the position with regard to the ownership of the copyright of the film to be a matter to be decided in a contract made between the two main parties in this matter, that is the maker of the goods and the advertising agent concerned. I hope, therefore, that my hon. Friend will feel that we have gone quite a long way, indeed fully, to meet his point by moving this Amendment, and that it will commend itself to the House.

§ Mr. Page
Again I rise only to express gratitude that my point has been fully met.

§ Mr. Speaker
With regard to the next Amendment in the name of the hon. Member for Crosby (Mr. Page), there is an Amendment in the name of the President of the Board of Trade which goes some way to meet the point raised by the hon. Member. I do not know whether, in these circumstances, he wishes to move his Amendment.

§ Mr. Page
I would not wish to move the Amendment in page 21, line 6, in my name.

§ Mr. Alport
I beg to move, in page 21, line 6, at the end to insert: (6) The copyright in a cinematograph film is not infringed by making a copy of it for the purposes of a judicial proceeding, or by causing it to be seen or heard in public for the purposes of such a proceeding. This Amendment goes part of the way to meet the point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Crosby (Mr. Page) during the Committee stage.

§ Mr. Speaker
I dislike interrupting the hon. Member, but would it be convenient—I am not sure whether it would—for him to deal at the same time with the Amendment to Clause 14, in page 24, line 9, at the end to insert: (9) The copyright in a television broadcast or sound broadcast is not infringed by anything done in relation to the broadcast for the purposes of a judicial proceeding. 771 which seems to have similar provisions with regard to television broadcasts, etc.? I do not know whether that relates to the same point.

§ Mr. Alport
I am most grateful to you, Mr. Speaker. If it is in order and agreed, it would be convenient to do as you suggest. It is little more than a consequential Amendment once the principle is accepted with regard to the Amendment which I am moving.
When my hon. Friend the Member for Crosby originally moved his Amendment it took the form of the Amendment which he is now not proposing to move and which we are considering in conjunction with the Amendment which I am moving. It was wider in scope and dealt with matters of research as well as with copyright for judicial proceedings. We felt that, in certain circumstances, that might lead to abuse. The reason was that there might be occasions when the interpretation of research went far beyond what is normally considered to be research, that is research for purposes of study other than commercial purposes.

Mrs. White
On a point of order. It seems to me that the hon. Gentleman is in fact referring to an Amendment not moved, in regard to research, and if he is permitted to discuss an Amendment which has not been moved, I should like to speak on it.

§ Mr. Speaker
I think that it would be better to deal with this question as if the Amendment of the hon. Member for Crosby was not in fact before us. I think that all the Minister was trying to do was to explain why his Amendment differed from what was originally suggested. I think that as the hon. Member for Crosby is not moving his Amendment, we can, for the purposes of this stage of the Bill, proceed with the Minister's Amendment.

§ Mr. Alport
I am very grateful, Mr. Speaker. I was merely trying, in view of the cogency of my hon. Friend and the interest which the House showed during the Committee stage, to explain some of the reasons which brought us to the modified Amendment which we are now considering. Earlier on we were doubtful whether this Amendment would 772 have any practical effect, but we now realise that it may have some effect. We certainly do not wish that there should be any charge for cinematograph films or, indeed, any charge in respect of copyright where a work is used in connection with a judicial proceeding. In those circumstances, I hope that this Amendment will commend itself to the House and will be accepted by it.

§ Mr. Page
A very real point arises out of this Amendment, mainly in connection with television commercial films. It is a practice for one advertiser to monitor, as it were, the films of other advertisers in order to check for any passing off of goods, any breach of the Merchandise Marks Act, any trade marks breaches, and so on. Of course, the same sort of thing is done with newspaper advertisements, but, in that case, one has the newspaper and can cut out the advertisement and thus have the evidence of it. In the case of commercial television broadcasts the evidence is ephemeral, except that it is likely to be repeated.
This Amendment would give the person who believes that there has been some breach of a trade mark, or something of that sort, an opportunity of taking a photograph of the film so as to have the evidence for the purpose of judicial proceedings, but only, as the Amendment now stands, for that purpose. If the Amendment were not introduced there might be some grave injustice in that the person who suffered was unable to preserve and provide the evidence.

§ Mr. Alport
I beg to move, in page 21, line 28, to leave out "production" and insert "sequence of visual images."
This Amendment is moved in response to a point raised by the right hon. Member for Colne Valley (Mr. Glenvil Hall) during the Committee stage. It deals with a fairly technical point and I will try to explain it briefly. The present reading of the subsection refers to production. The right hon. Member for Colne Valley suggested that the word "production" might be confused with the actual production of the film as opposed to the film itself. By the film I mean the negative, that is, the film strip itself.
Having further considered the matter, we came to the conclusion that there 773 might be another source of confusion in that "production" might be considered as referring to something made up, that is, to a film which was made up as opposed to a film which was a record of actual facts such as a nature film or a news film. In those circumstances, it seemed to us entirely right that an Amendment should be made and it will, I think, meet the point raised by the right hon. Gentleman by substituting for the word "production" the words "sequence of visual images."

§ Mr. Alport
I beg to move, in page 21, line 30, to leave out from "capable" to the end of the line and insert: by the use of that material.—

(a) of being shown as a moving picture, or

(b) of being recorded on other material (whether translucent or not), by the use of which it can be so shown".

This Amendment again is in response to a point raised by the right hon. Member for Colne Valley (Mr. Glenvil Hall), and it is a highly technical one. There are two steps in the process of making a film. The first is the creation of the negative and the second is the production of the positive film record from the negative. The right hon. Member was apprehensive that there was a danger, on the present wording, of the restriction on the use of copyright applying only after the point when the negative has been transferred to the positive. He was concerned to ensure that the sequence of images should be protected as a film from the moment that it is fixed on the negative itself, irrespective of any steps still to be taken in order to make it available for actual showing from the film projector on to the screen. Our Amendment is designed to meet this important and highly technical point and I hope that it will have the approval of the House.