On 8/17/2011 7:02 AM, Wjhonson wrote: > Litigation under the rules of plagiarism.... > Can you cite that law for me? > > I'm not a lawyer, but I seem to recall that a Tort can be filed for just about anything that is perceived to cause injury. Note that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism mentions copyright infringement as a related issue to plagiarism... > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robin McCain <ro...@slmr.com> > To: foundation-l <foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > Sent: Tue, Aug 16, 2011 7:43 pm > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] copyright issues > > On 8/16/2011 2:50 PM, Wjhonson wrote: > > The year of publication applies to published material. The year you > > make it public, to the public, for public consumption. > of course, that is the definition of publication > > But look athttp://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/303.html > > Unpublished works (in the United States at least) have copyright > protection. If nothing else, the creator(s) has/have moral rights to the > work. Usually they also have legal rights. (I'm no lawyer, but my > entertainment attorney told me to assume everything has rights unless > you find a specific exemption under the law) > > Unpublished material, if it enjoys copyright protection at all, would > > be based on the year of creation. That however might be a red herring > > if it, in fact, does not enjoy any copyright protection. Does > > copyright protect material not published? > Yes it can. For example: Members of the Beatles recorded some material > and did not publish it. According to the layers of copyright, the > creator(s) owned it from the moment it was recorded, the recording > studio and producers (if any) also had rights dated back to that time. > Since it wasn't published there were no publishers rights. Whoever was > given a copy of the recording also had the tangible right of ownership > of a copy. > > Many years later it was published as part of Anthology 1. see > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles%27_recording_sessions for details. > > For the US, also see: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Term_Extension_Act> > > Plagiarism and copyright are seperate issues and should not be > > conflated, as different approaches apply to each. > > > > > True. In the case cited below, the Manuscript Story would have had > copyright protection under current US law but had no such protection > under the 1790 law. It wasn't until the 1976 law that protection was > extended to unpublished works. As such, the only litigation possible at > that time would have been under the rules of plagiarism and such > litigation was considered. > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Robin McCain<ro...@slmr.com <mailto:ro...@slmr.com>> > > To: foundation-l<foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > <mailto:foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org>> > > Sent: Tue, Aug 16, 2011 2:36 pm > > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] copyright issues > > > > On 8/16/2011 12:51 PM,wjhon...@aol.com <mailto:wjhon...@aol.com> > > <mailto:wjhon...@aol.com <mailto:wjhon...@aol.com?>> wrote: > > > I don't believe your claim that you can take something which is PD, > > make an > > exact image of it, slap it up in a new work of your own (enjoying copyright > > protection automatically) and then claim copyright over that PD image in > > your > > work. > > > > > > Copyright applies to the presentation of your work, showing > > creativity. An > > image that you reproduce faithfully shows no creativity and can enjoy no > > new > > copyright, no matter how hard you push your view. That's it. Period. > > > > > > So I can freely copy any PD image, from any source, and not need to > > worry > > about copyright violation. PD doesn't change simply because a PD item is > > republished. The presentation of the item is copyright, not the item > > itself. > > I personally agree with that. However, it often costs more to prove your > > right to use something in court than to knuckle under if an aggressive > > rights owner comes after you. This is especially true when you are > > planning to distribute your own work worldwide - just getting a letter > > from the publisher telling you that they either give you the right to > > use an image or have no rights over that image is necessary before your > > work will be accepted by a publisher or distributor. > > > > > > An additional minor quibble. At least in the US a person does*not* > > need > to > > reapply for copyright each time they revise an item. Copyright is an > automatic > > process, merely by the fact of presenting something in a fixed media. > You*can* > > file a copyright. You do not*need* to file a copyright, in order to enjoy > > copyright protection under the law. > > I also agree with you - except that the registered version has an > > ironclad protection you can protect in court while revised versions > > afterwards may not be so easy to protect unless they are also > > registered. It becomes a kind of "chain of custody" issue. If I were to > > create something original and show it to no one else for 50 years until > > I published it and died 5 years later, which would apply to the > > copyright expiration date - date of author's death, date of creation or > > date of publication? > > > > In the real world there are many examples of published books and > > screenplays that could clearly be seen as derivative - even plagiarized > > works from one or more unpublished sources. This is a big deal within > > the Writer's Guild and the reason for their online system of protecting > > manuscripts by registering before a work is shown to others. > > > > One of the most (in)famous books in American Religion is "The Book of > > Mormon", parts of the first edition of which were (alleged to be) > > plagiarized from the "Manuscript Story" and arguably violated the 1790 > > Copyright Act.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Spalding The work > > has been revised at least nine times (not counting translations) to make > > it "fit" the theology of the modern day church. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon > > _______________________________________________ > > foundation-l mailing list > > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > <mailto:foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > > <mailto:foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > <mailto:foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org?>> > > Unsubscribe:https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > Unsubscribe:https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l