The Russian Federation Presidential Judicial Chamber for Information Disputes received a request from ITAR-TASS General Director V.N. Ignatenko to provide clarification of the following questions:
1. Is an information product (report, commentary, video and photographic materials, etc.) that is created by the collective of an agency and disseminated to consumers of information copyrightable?
2. Does ITAR-TASS have the right to use a copyright sign and place it on its information products?
3. Can news agencies and mass media organizations collect money for an ITAR-TASS information product when they adapt it to fit their specific conditions and regional features?
In accordance with Article 21 of the Statute on the Russian Federation Presidential Judicial Chamber for Information Disputes, as confirmed by the Russian Federation Presidential Decree No. 228 of January 31, 1994, the Judicial Chamber makes the following recommendations:
1. In accordance with Article 7 of the Russian
Federation Law “On Copyright and Related Rights” literary, audio-visual
(including video films and other film and television productions), and
photographic works are copyrightable.
Pursuant to Article 8 of said Law, reports about events and facts
that are of an informational nature are not subject to copyright.
If the material goes beyond a report of an “informational nature,” that
is, it contains commentary, analysis or is the product of some other creative
activity of the author, then it is subject to copyright.
2. In accordance with Article 14 of the Russian Federation Law “On Copyright and Related Rights,” ITAR-TASS has exclusive rights to a work that was created by an author in the course of fulfilling employment duties and tasks, if the contract between ITAR-TASS and the author does not provide otherwise.
Pursuant to Article 9 of this Law the holder of an exclusive copyright is entitled to use a copyright sign.
3. In accordance with Article 16 of the Russian Federation Law “On Copyright and Related Rights” material copyrighted by ITAR-TASS can be reproduced in an adapted form only with its permission.
If an editorial office of another mass media organ lawfully adapts ITAR-TASS material (with additional commentary, analysis, etc.) it can collect fees as stipulated in a contract with respect to such adaptations.
Chairman of the Judicial Chamber
A.V. Vengerov
October 14, 1994
Published in Rossiiskaia Gazeta on October 22, 1994. Translated into English by Frances Foster.
The private banking group Most (Bridge), managed by Vladimir Gusinsky and closely associated with Moscow’s mayor, Yuri Luzhkov, is expanding its investments and involvement in Russia media.
Most has become the focus of a controversy initiated by the government-run newspaper, Rossiiskaya gazeta which, in a November commentary, accused the banking conglomerate of attempts to undermine the national administration. Among the contentions was that Most was expanding its influence in order to catapult the Moscow mayor into the presidency.
The essay listed, as part of the strategy, the investments by Most in NTV (Igor Malashenko’s independent television channel), in Moscow Echo Radio and its attempts to gain control of the daily newspaper, Moskovsky Komsomolets, the Ostankino Broadcasting Company, and St. Petersburg TV. The essay also criticized the way in which NTV, presumably with Most’s help, gained control of valuable channel space in Moscow.
In the essay, the writer sought to demonstrate Most Bank’s influence by crediting it with securing Sergei Gryzunov as head of the Committee on the Press; the Bank was also charged with hiring ex-KGB staff and other so-called “crimes” in the interest of the West as opposed to Russian “national aspirations.”
The rumors of Premier Chernomyrdin’s possible resignation originated in an Echo Moscow broadcast: this was seen to be evidence of Most’s strategy, as was a campaign against Foreign Minister Kozyrev campaign on NTV’s newscast “Itogi” and general support of Luzhkov.
The essay was widely discussed in the Moscow press and some newspapers labeled it a revival of “the spirit of ’37,” the year of Stalinist purges.
On December 1, a renovated Sem dnei (Seven Days), a weekly TV and Radio guide, began national distribution as a result of an investment by Most. The concept of the moth long pilot project is based on market research, yielding a 36-page full-color, Finland-printed publication with an estimated initial circulation of 220,000.
The new chief editor is Irina Petrovskaya, a TV critic with experience at Nezavisimaya gazeta and Obshchaya gazeta. The editorial plan is to convert a dull weekly of listings and highlights into a well-written publication with essays, gossip stories, news on the life of broadcasters and reports from abroad. Most has pledged an investment about $15,000 per issue. Editors will be remunerated at a monthly level of about $800 with reporters receiving at least $300 per month.
The banking group was not listed among the potential investors in Ostankino’s privatization. This means, most likely, a keen competition between NTV and the transformed Ostankino. Mass media scholars of the Russian press have reason to rejoice. For the first time in decades they can observe—and criticize—a real private media tycoon being born on the national soil.
Andrei Richter
Moscow State University
These are excerpts of responses by Igor Malashenko during a recent interview with Anna Carugati of Crain Communications, Inc., published in Electronic Media. Malashenko, Managing Director of NTV:
We start at 6 p.m. with animated cartoons for 30 minutes. We were using mostly Soviet cartoons, but shortly we start to broadcast American product. We have signed a first contract with Turner International.
At 6:30 we have a time slot for factual programs, such as Greatest Crimes and Tales of the Twentieth Century (BBC) and Secrets and Mysteries (ABC). We have purchased National Geographic’s “Survival” series. At 7 p.m. we have our first news bulletin. From 7:30 to 8:15, we broadcast sports programming (partly as a result of a presidential decree that requires attention to sports). After that, we have feature films, seventy percent of which are U.S. produced or of European origin.
At 10 p.m. we have another news bulletin, followed, at 10:30, by a one hour series (such as Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman). At 11:30 we usually have a locally produced program, followed at midnight by a variety of programs, including Russian produced features or feature films.
What we want is to have a very strong and understandable schedule. A problem for our competitors, the state-controlled broadcasters . . . is that for them for them it’s difficult to have meaningful schedules because of the bureaucracy—too many people placing their programs in the scarce airtime.
At present we do not have any quotas and I think that’s good. I think a quota provision would do more damage than good.
The state control system is disintegrating.
State-controlled broadcasters are very much commercialized. Indeed,
it’s a ridiculous situation when they have the same opportunities for gaining
advertising that we do and have more advertising than their private competitors.