HL Deb 30 October 1956 vol 199 c1170

Clause 10, page 18, line 10, at end insert— ("Provided that where a person commissions the making of a sound recording, and pays or agrees to pay for it in money or money's worth, and the recording is made in pursuance of that commission, that person, in the absence of any agreement to the contrary, shall, subject to the provisions of Part VI of this Act, be entitled to any copyright subsisting in the recording by virtue of this section.")


My Lords, this is a different point. The effect of this Amendment is to vest the ownership of a commissioned recording in the commissioner. Under subsection (3) of the clause as it stands, the ownership of the copyright in recordings vests in the maker of the recording (although of course it would be possible by contract to produce different results). In another place it was argued that this was not the right result when a person goes into a recording studio and specifically commissioned the recording, whether for a private message, for the private recording of a song or whether the recording was commissioned for commercial purposes, for example, as an advertisement. Certainly, in the case of commissioned private recordings (and possibly in the case of commercial ones), questions of copyright are unlikely to be in the mind of the commissioner; but it would certainly not be his wish to leave the copyright in someone else's hands. We have seen recently what has happened in Germany when things get into unexpected hands. The case is similar in principle to that where the copyright vests in the commissioner. I think this is a reasonable provision and I hope your Lordships will see fit to agree to this Amendment. I beg to move that this House doth agree with the Commons in the said Amendment.

Moved, That this House doth agree with the Commons in the said Amendment. —(Lord Mancroft.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.