- I did a few searches with the Stanford database and found nothing (I
searched on book titles and also for "Paul Kenyon"). That doesn't mean
the copyrights are no longer in force but it does reinforce
suggestions that they might not have been renewed.
This is part of what the Stanford website has to say:
"This database makes searchable the copyright renewal records received
by the US Copyright Office between 1950 and 1992 for books published
in the US between 1923 and 1963. Note that the database includes ONLY
US Class A (book) renewals.
The period from 1923-1963 is of special interest for US copyrights, as
works published after January 1, 1964 had their copyrights
automatically renewed by statute, and works published before 1923 have
generally fallen into the public domain. Between those dates, a
renewal registration was required to prevent the expiration of
copyright, however determining whether a work's registration has been
renewed is a challenge. Renewals received by the Copyright Office
after 1977 are searchable in an online database, but renewals received
between 1950 and 1977 were announced and distributed only in a
semi-annual print publication."
I don't know what is meant by "US Class A (book) renewals"
--- In TheBaroness@yahoogroups.com, "James Reasoner" <james53@...> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bob Vardeman" <bobv451@...>
> To: <TheBaroness@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 10:37 AM
> Subject: [TheBaroness] Re: Ebooks
> > My memory is vague on the changes made in copyright
> > law, but I believe the B. titles were done under the
> > 27 year period with a 27 renewal. The problem I have
> > is, if the initial 27 year period is up (which it
> > would be) would a renewal be under the new copyright
> > law which would extend the period to 70 years? Or
> > were the copyrights ever renewed at all?
> Copyright is an incredible can of worms now, isn't it? I think that
> anything published after 1967 doesn't have to be renewed, the copyrights
> renew automatically, and therefore the books would still be
> only thing you can be absolutely sure of is that anything published
> 1923 is in public domain. Between '23 and '67, renewals were
> therefore some things are PD and some aren't. Even an improper original
> registration can void copyright and make a book public domain.
> > How do you check the current status of a book's
> > copyright? I don't know.
> The Library of Congress has an on-line database covering all copyright
> registrations since 1978. It's notoriously unreliable as far as
> house-name books to the actual authors, but at least it shows the
> registrations. Stanford University has an on-line database covering
> copyright renewals between 1923 and 1967. I don't have the URL
handy, but a
> Google search ought to turn it up. I've poked around in the Stanford
> database some and was surprised at the number of books that were never
> renewed. A lot of pre-1967 popular fiction is in public domain.
> > As far as I can tell "The Baroness" was never
> > trademarked.
> Yeah, it's doubtful that it would have been. The books certainly
> TM on them anywhere.
> > If the copyright is up, was not renewed, that would
> > put the titles into public domain. So they could be
> > e-copied and distributed. My 2% of a $1 worth.
> > Bob
> I always tell people that if something isn't already in public
> never will be, because when the time comes the corporations will just
> pressure Congress to change the laws again, like they did the last time.
> Public domain as a concept is dead in the water, at least in the U.S.
- From the way it is written, I'd say Class A refers only to books as opposed to short stories, articles, etc.
Maybe writing to the Permissions Dept at S&S might shed light on this?