In theory she has copyright in her oral speech as much as what she writes (so long as it has some kind of "literary" merit - which really just means in this context that it was more than a few words long and made some kind of sense) - so yes, she then controls "public performances" of the tape.
In reality though enforcing this is completely impossible, but you did ask.
The physical tape itself is his property - but she can demand that he not play it to anyone without her consent.
He has also possibly committed a criminal offence of some kind - I'm less sure on that - but the civil law is really what you want for the remedy required.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-07-24 01:45 pm (UTC)In theory she has copyright in her oral speech as much as what she writes (so long as it has some kind of "literary" merit - which really just means in this context that it was more than a few words long and made some kind of sense) - so yes, she then controls "public performances" of the tape.
In reality though enforcing this is completely impossible, but you did ask.
The physical tape itself is his property - but she can demand that he not play it to anyone without her consent.
He has also possibly committed a criminal offence of some kind - I'm less sure on that - but the civil law is really what you want for the remedy required.