Thread: CopyRight Question
View Single Post
Old 04-30-2008, 03:02 PM   #21
Nate the great
Sir Penguin of Edinburgh
Nate the great ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Nate the great ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Nate the great ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Nate the great ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Nate the great ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Nate the great ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Nate the great ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Nate the great ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Nate the great ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Nate the great ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Nate the great ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Nate the great's Avatar
 
Posts: 12,375
Karma: 23555235
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: DC Metro area
Device: Shake a stick plus 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmbs View Post
Since Harry and Nate the GREAT have different opinions on the guidelines and the "facts" I'd say you don't have clear guidelines. Is there a post with guidelines written by someone who knows the law? Where is it? Or are we playing "interpret the law any way that we want it to go" again?

And I suppose I'll again say that a person or company (copyright holder) can extend a copyright so there are no blanket copyright laws that apply - this according to US law. You'd have to search for a current copyright on each individual book to be sure it hasn't been extended. I believe Gutenberg does this, that's why I intend to stick with distributing Gutenberg books or books with clear cc licenses: I don't have the time, knowledge, or money to go searching the copyright status of every book I might want to post online. And I don't want to illegally distribute anything. I'd rather distribute nothing than steal people's work.
I do know the law. You are slightly incorrect about extending copyright under US law. Anything created after 1964 is absolutely positively in copyright for a fixed number of years. The works created before 1964 did have to have the copyright renewed in its 28th year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cmbs View Post
I am thinking that if I copyright a book in the US then other countries don't have any right to decide it's legal to make and sell copies without my permission. There must be international copyright laws. MR could easily consult with a copyright attorney and have some legal guidelines written up.

And wikipedia is good (I love it) but is in no way a source of information you can consider to be accurate enough to use to make legal judgements.
If your own country can decide to make it legal to make copies without your permission, then why can't other countries? Or, we can turn your assumption around. Why would you think your country can make laws that are legally enforcible in other countries?

P.S. Copyright is a privilege, not a right. At some point the privilege will expire. When it expires varies from country to country.
Nate the great is offline