If something more tangled the YouTubers is the treatment of the audiovisual work. The audiovisual work as conceived in the norms is a work that necessarily is carried out by several people.
All these rules, in their beginning were covering the space of which an audiovisual, cinematographic work was a cumbersome work to do.
Orson Welles I would agree.
In the definitions it includes that it is also created to be able to project it; in our case, in , the platform that means (streaming on-demand).
So far, all normal.
The rules come to describe that the authors of the cinematographic work are multiple, so the director, the author of the script, the one of the music and the drawers (if it were of animation) are authors; but (and here he is but big) the patrimonial rights are of the producer.
There Yuya I would not agree.
The mess is that if one deals with the audiovisual work, necessarily as a collective work is obviating the fact that at this moment everyone has a smartphone in the pocket, that a video can be made by a single person - who is both director, producer, protagonist, editor, screenwriter and all the roles imaginable - fulfills all the roles of production and creation associated with the work.
What is deviant is the collective work label.
Clear. These rules were written to make movies, and to avoid the most problems of interpretation when many intervene. But it was not conceivable that one (1) would fulfill all the roles.
I bet that was not in the plans.
For the inkwell: under the multi-tasking scheme of today's audio-visual projects, it would be worthwhile to leave the roles clear and balance the percentages of exploitation. The normative standard model will continue to apply; but there is room for new, more equitable and contemporary remuneration schemes; there is room for production from the creative to the production from the production. Everybody will see.
Colombian and community standards
Definition of an audiovisual work: "creations expressed through a series of associated images, with or without incorporated sound, which are intended essentially to be displayed through projection devices or by any other means of public communication of image and sound" (Law 23 of 1982, Art 8, Decision 351 of the Commission of the Agreement of Cartagena, Art 3, Pérez de Castro, 2001, P. 24)
(...) "susceptible of becoming visible and, if accompanied by sounds, susceptible of becoming audible" (460 Decree 1995, Art 23, lit. f).