1971: Film director loses copyright 02

We haven't looked into the details of overseas film copyright laws, but we'll start by quoting some topics from overseas.

In American and British films, production and copyright are clearly stated separately.

The production company that actually makes the film is usually written as "production" or something similar, and the company that holds the copyright is usually written as "©" at the end.
"The Omen 2" was produced by ”Harvey Bernhard Production”, but the copyright is clearly stated as "20th Century Fox" at the end.
I'm sure many people see the major film company mark at the beginning and assume that the company made the entire film.
Especially in Japanese film databases and Wikipedia, when introducing foreign films, 99% of the time the name of the production company on site is ignored and only the major film company is clearly stated.
It is true that the major film companies invest the production costs in the on-site production companies and have them make the films. However, it is the staff on set who actually make the film.
In the audio commentary for "The Omen 2," the producer repeatedly explains the power relationship and the flow of money between the copyright company and the production company.

And he laments, "The production companies provide the funding and the on-site production companies actually make the films, but the only ones who benefit are the big companies that invested."

"The Omen 2" credit：20th Century Fox/Harvey Bernhard Production

（*From now on, even if the copyright owner and production company are separate, we will list both.）

"Amblin Entertainment" is displayed at the beginning of "Gremlins 2 The New Batch", and "©20th Century Fox" is displayed in the end credits.

In the audio commentary, the main staff members say, "Amblin's credits come first, but in fact, we (the people on the set) made this movie." The on-set production company is listed after Amblin Entertainment.

"Gremlins 2 The New Batch" credit: 20th Century Fox/Amblin Entertainment/Michael Finnell production

In Japan:

In 1971, the Japanese Film Copyright Law was changed so that the copyright of a film was not held by the director or the staff on the set, but by the film company that invested in it (as mentioned above).
In the revised law of 1971, the company that had the monopoly on the copyright was written as "製作 (Seisaku)", and the on-site production company that did not have the copyright was written as "制作 (Seisaku)". Both are pronounced the same way, but the structure of the kanji is slightly different.

Therefore, from then on, the use of these two kanji was reflected in the credits of movies and television.
Of course, the law did not say to change it like that, but many movie companies followed the legal kanji.
Movie companies that had written "制作" before changed it to "製作".
At that time, there were almost no copyright notices in Japanese movies. Therefore, the difference in the use of these kanji was used to distinguish them.　(This is based on an explanation given by the liberal human rights lawyer, Takezawa, who I introduced last time.)

credit: Toei

Also, if multiple companies collaborate to make a film, this will be displayed at the beginning of the film.

In Japan, copyright holders change frequently due to film studios going bankrupt, and when this happens, the new company that acquires the copyright will modify the film, add their own name, or delete the mark or name of the previous production company. While they wield their copyright, they also use it to tamper with copyrighted works. Of course, they have never been present at a film production site. They only think of films as a tool to make money, a product to be consumed.Japan is a country that is backward in human rights and culture.

In Japan, neoliberalism began to take hold in 1981, and in 2001, Prime Minister Koizumi of the Liberal Democratic Party, who blindly followed President Bush, positioned movies and anime as national policy and national strategy, and changed laws one after another. Japanese movies became "products" rather than "works." The government and large corporations began to use them, and the long history and tradition of Japanese movies that had existed until then was shattered into pieces.
Around that time, the "製作委員会(production committee)" method, in which many companies pool their production costs together to make a movie, began to proliferate.
These are difficult to explain, so we will not mention them this time, but we may mention them again in the future on this blog.
One thing we will mention is that in 2010, Harada was working on the children's TV anime "Hanakappa" for NHK (a public broadcaster, but since about 2000, its reporting has become a public relations agency that is extremely pro-Liberal Democratic Party). However, the production company went bankrupt, leaving behind more than 600 million yen in debt. Harada's fee was not paid. At the time, the copyright was held by the "Production Committee" (a group of large companies). However, even when small companies went bankrupt and the people involved suffered, the Production Committee, which reigned above them, did nothing to provide relief or compensation, and simply ignored the situation. They wanted to think about nothing other than making money for themselves.
Eventually, Toho (a company that once carried out the red purging), a member of the Production Committee, reluctantly paid part of the unpaid wages to the anime workers.

"Hanakappa" Storyboard by Hiroshi Harada

These observations about copyright are based on the materialism of Marx and Engels.