4627Re: [medieval-leather] copyrights...
- Jul 2, 2001At 08:48 PM 7/2/01 +0100, Mel wrote:
>>If in the US, in the UK when they fell into line with Europe, expired(Note: I'm not a professional lawyer, so this has no legal standing. OTOH, I am
>>copyrights, became copyrighted again although I don't think retrospective
>>action could be taken but new infrigment eg now was is not allowed, very
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).
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>