Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

4627Re: [medieval-leather] copyrights...

Expand Messages
  • Marc Carlson
    Jul 2, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      At 08:48 PM 7/2/01 +0100, Mel wrote:
      >>If in the US, in the UK when they fell into line with Europe, expired
      >>copyrights, became copyrighted again although I don't think retrospective
      >>action could be taken but new infrigment eg now was is not allowed, very
      >>complex.

      (Note: I'm not a professional lawyer, so this has no legal standing. OTOH, I am
      an Interlibrary Loan Librarian, which means that this stuff keeps me employed :) )

      I'm pretty sure that when the copyrights aren't extended backwards over
      previously uncopywritten material. The purpose was to keep things from
      losing their protection, not to protect things previously unprotected.

      I believe the UK and the US are signatories of even the most recent Berne and
      Vague, er, Hague, and the Universal Copy Conventions rules. Ultimately this
      means that if you copy without permission, you may be violating copyright,
      whether or not you intend to profit financially.

      The US has something called "fair use", and if I understood Mel correctly,
      most people in Britain won't sue if the copying is for non-profit reasons.
      The Berne convention recognizes neither of these as valid. However,
      neither British Law nor US Law would supercede either -- international
      violations are covered by the BC.

      In short, if it was published before 1923, its in the public domain. If it was
      published from 1923 - 1964, and had no copyright notice or renewal, or before
      1978 with no copyright notice, it appears to be Public Domain (however, just
      to be safe -- don't mess with it).

      Marc
    • Show all 13 messages in this topic