It has rained a lot (it has been very long) since Giovanni Ricordi, at the beginning of the nineteenth century, bought and exploited musicians´s rights for editing their work, since such rights were adjusted by law in the Universal Convention of Berna in 1886, since in 1899 the Spanish Authors General Society, the Universal Convention of Geneva of 1952 – reviewed in Paris in 1971 and confirmed by Spain in 1974 –, and even since the Spanish Intellectual Property Law was proclaimed, in 1987. It has been very long, very hard and had cost much because, above all, new technologies have changed –since the Cinema and Disc industry is managed by computer–, the original work in something able to be reproduced, distributed and sold instantly all over the world.

As everybody knows, musicians were the first to collect copyrights for the reproduction of their work; then were theatre authors and both principles were accepted, more or less easily, by managers, almost all over the world. However, the rain became a start of storm when came the Audio Visual, that is to say: Cinema, which would led afterwards in all it has led. A new author was born: the Cinema Director, who imposed his moral authority over the manager´s material property, that is to say, the producer, who accepted it because of the high economical profitability he got in return thanks to the imagination and the expressive ability, the willing and strength showed by new creators. The storm, however, was just at the beginning and strongly burst when the MPA –Motion Pictures Association–radically declined to admit the statue of the author: for them only the producer property exists –defined as "Coppy Right"–. Everybody else is employed for a salary, with no more rights than those accurately agreed depending on the strength of the creator or technician involved. Consequently, the United States –with the shadow of Hollywood planning over the town-hall–, never signed the Geneva declaration of 1952 nor has ever defended the rights of any author for the integrity of his work, because such author does not exist: there are just employees whose job is to produce, to get paid and to keep silent.

Some years ago now, during a meeting between European –FERA– and American –Directors Guild– Directors in Venice, they asked for our support –guaranteed by our laws– for the Washington government to accept the European model on which the director of a film is considered as "Author". In his speech, Steven Spielberg, frankly showing a triumphal smile, emphatically proclaimed: "let´s demand first the moral right and then will also come, as a logical consequence, the economical right". He should never had said so as, since that precise moment, the MPA cut with all kind of negotiation on that matter, the "Directors Guild" quick to put pressure on anybody and Spielberg himself kept silent as he were death: the long arm of Jak Valenti has cut the wings of all of them. For the MPA the "job" does not exist, just "the product" does, and its single purpose is the Market and its single author, money. This is so in the Powerful Union of North America, and the worse is that the example is beginning to expand itself in the old Europe. Always in the name of Freedom, of course, and above all, the "market freedom" which, as it is well known, is an accurate version of the Stronger´s Law, that is to say: the Sylvan Law.

We can, of course, meet ourselves and deeply discuss about who is the audio visual job´s author from or not from the Cinematographical one: if the parts´s authors are also the whole´s authors and if the moral right belongs to them as a recognition and respect of their integrity: we can analyse the authorship or the value of ideas in respect of the final and specific work, we can give a fine shade of meaning to the creative pursuit of the vital collaborations needed by a kind of work to be considered as a collective work... We have the freedom to talk, of course, to discuss, even to reach agreements and exact definitions, as we can also sit down to contemplate the tragic beauty of the storm which is threatening us, black clouds, the volatile wound of beams... We can lock up ourselves at home and keep discussing in a totally free way, but the storm will keep on, inexorable.

Laying metaphors apart, I think we must be conscious of the real problems we confront and follow solid, undoubtful attitudes. Let´s return the sentence of Spielberg and claim for our economical right, as the moral right will come by itself. I am referring to those audio visual sectors –including Cinema-, whose authorship could be discussed as it, and consequently, ends banished to the simple condition of rewarded part. In spite of the fact that I am director and in my country I can at least enjoy the rights to be an author, I corroborate claims of those who do not and say: let´s claim for our work to be economically valued every time it is reproduced and, therefore, every time it makes benefits. Those are "reproduction" and "public media" rights, legally recognised as "image" rights and therefore, save from any subjective consideration. It also means the right to dispose of the job –or the result of the work-, in order to avoid it being used with other purposes than those which were agreed to by a particular authorization, etc, etc...

Let´s keep away our –legitimate- vanity as authors and let´s go straight to the main point, because storm is in the point to break out if it has not already done it. Let´s go forward, under the umbrella of the existing laws, bearing in mind that sooner or later, no matter what we may feel, what was meant to be will happen. It has rained a lot since art workers started to defend their rights and, as we can verify, it is still raining. Although it does not always rain enough for everybody, of course. Ok, we already know things are like this. Let´s try, then, to be the ones who decide how much it rains, for once. And let´s hope this time will not be the last one.

Jordi Grau - Spain