OLIIVER @ IPAC

Kerri wrote: > I remember clearly going to see a play written by a friend > of mine at a school , only to find that the entire meaning > of the play had been changed, scenes had been rewritten, > characters had been changed and the entire show was nothing > like the original. I swear I must have been to see the same show Kerri is referring to - or at least I've been to quite a number very like it. :-\ A license to perform most certainly is not a license to rewrite. > I really think that the whole area of copyright needs to > be made far more clear to community theatre groups, > schools and the like. I think it is important to make the distinction here between copyright law and a license to perform. This is an important distinction. If it were against copyright law to make these sorts of changes then it wouldn't matter what the playwright said, you'd be breaking the law to alter the text. But, as Kerri suggests, under contractual arrangements with the playwright or their agent it may well be permissible to make changes. While too, too many playwrights (and audiences) have had the horror experience of finding scripts re-worked without permission and often very poorly, it is important to acknowledge that with prior, written permission it may not only be possible but highly advantageous and appropriate to produce modified versions of an original script to fit particular circumstances. We're all familiar with examples where scripts have made the transition from stage to screen and there are a number of companies that have very successfully made the transition in the opposite direction - with written permission. The final word rests with the copyright owner. If they don't approve of the suggested changes, don't do the play. Cheers Grant