The Jim Butcher Files: Dresden . Codex Alera . Cinder Spires & More

[haertig]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Wrong. Copyright does not have to be "claimed". It exists the instant the work is created.

I think we may have different definitions of the word "claim". You appear to be using is as a synonym for "register" (e.g., do some paperwork to make it official in the governments eyes). I am using it as a synonym for "give notice" (e.g., announce to the world that, "Hey, that's my work they are copying!")

I don't think anybody is taken to task for violating copyright unless the owner claims ownership of the copyright and pursues the offender (maybe different in exceptional cases, see below). It is not an offense where the police will come after you automatically, on their own determination, even if they have clear evidence that you may have violated a copyright. The owner of the copyright has to claim their ownership of it, take you to court, and provide a convincing argument that you violated their copyright.

I believe there may be exceptions to the above in the most severe of cases, which I think are called willful infringement. An example of one of these severe cases might be something like a company reproducing a bunch of different works, by a bunch of different authors, and selling them in volume. Even then, I'm not 100% sure that the original copyright owner(s) would not have to first get involved and claim copyright. But I think the copyright notices you find in the start of most every novel you read, or the little "C" with a circle around it symbol, or a watermark on a picture, might suffice for this claim. This may vary from country to country though - there is not one international copyright law, it's up to individual countries.

I do believe that in most every case with the possible exception of the "severe" ones, the copyright owner must "take you to court" by claiming their copyright. I don't believe that the police will come knocking on your door, absent any claim, and arrest you.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by haertig

I think we may have different definitions of the word "claim". You appear to be using is as a synonym for "register" (e.g., do some paperwork to make it official in the governments eyes).

No, I'm saying no such thing. In any country that is a signatory of the Berne Copyright convention, copyright comes into being the instant the work is created. No "registration" or "announcement" is required. It just exists as an inherent right of the author.

[haertig]

Originally Posted by HarryT

No, I'm saying no such thing. In any country that is a signatory of the Berne Copyright convention, copyright comes into being the instant the work is created. No "registration" or "announcement" is required. It just exists as an inherent right of the author.

You misunderstood me. I never said you had to "register" or "claim" or "announce" your work for a copyright to exist. I agree, the copyright is there when the work is created.

What I did say however, is that if someone infringes on this copyright that enforcement is not "automatic". The police will not come after you on their own volition, even if they have strong suspicions that you are violating a copyright (as I said previously, there may be exceptions to this in extreme cases).

The copyright owner has to "claim" (or "announce") that they own copyright to start the legal process off. Typically this would be done by filing a lawsuit. And this claim/announcement is of course done in the legal arena, not with a megaphone and handing out fliers to random people in the city square. Without this claim of copyright in the legal arena, the infringer has nothing to worry about. In the non-extreme case, you can violate copyright all day long without penalty ... right up until the copyright owner claims "Hey that is my work!" and takes you to court. But if the copyright owner does not claim his/her work, then the police are not going to come after you (again, extreme cases may be different).

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by haertig

What I did say however, is that if someone infringes on this copyright that enforcement is not "automatic". The police will not come after you on their own volition, even if they have strong suspicions that you are violating a copyright (as I said previously, there may be exceptions to this in extreme cases).

Yes, it's a civil offence. Similar the police won't come after you if you breach the terms of a contract or trespass on someone's land - all are civil offences. But in all these examples you are nonetheless breaking the law.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Wrong. Copyright does not have to be "claimed". It exists the instant the work is created.

Indeed that's right. You can REGISTER the copyright, but legally, it exists from the moment that the book is completed.

The real difference has to do with enforceability under law. Sans registration, you can't sue and collect damages, for infringement. That's the diff.

Hitch

[alansplace]

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by haertig

The copyright owner has to "claim" (or "announce") that they own copyright to start the legal process off. Typically this would be done by filing a lawsuit.

Except you could have spared us a lot of theoretical mumble jumble. The copyright holder will sue and win. Not possibly or maybe if they feel like it. Especially since the book in question is formally copyright registered and has a Library of Congress entry.

[Hitch]

Originally Posted by haertig

You misunderstood me. I never said you had to "register" or "claim" or "announce" your work for a copyright to exist. I agree, the copyright is there when the work is created.

What I did say however, is that if someone infringes on this copyright that enforcement is not "automatic". The police will not come after you on their own volition, even if they have strong suspicions that you are violating a copyright (as I said previously, there may be exceptions to this in extreme cases).

The copyright owner has to "claim" (or "announce") that they own copyright to start the legal process off. Typically this would be done by filing a lawsuit. And this claim/announcement is of course done in the legal arena, not with a megaphone and handing out fliers to random people in the city square. Without this claim of copyright in the legal arena, the infringer has nothing to worry about. In the non-extreme case, you can violate copyright all day long without penalty ... right up until the copyright owner claims "Hey that is my work!" and takes you to court. But if the copyright owner does not claim his/her work, then the police are not going to come after you (again, extreme cases may be different).

The chances of the police, ever, showing up on a copyright case are somewhere in the vicinity of .000000001%. (Honestly, I wish that the did--it would make copyright infringement taken more seriously than it is.) It's pretty much up to the copyright holder to sue in civil court. Are there some instances where a cop might show up? Sure, if the DA is involved or the feds, in a case, but as noted, that would be exceedingly rare. Some sort of massive infringement operation.

Even people being sued aren't going to be escorted anywhere by the cops.

Hitch

[haertig]

Originally Posted by DuckieTigger

Except you could have spared us a lot of theoretical mumble jumble.

All that I initially said was "Maybe the original artist never claimed copyright? (it's not automatic)"

Everything else after that was me trying to explain that enforcement is not automatic, when it appeared that others were proposing that it was.

I thought this statement I made would serve to clear up any different interpretations of "claim copyright",

"I think we may have different definitions of the word "claim". You appear to be using is as a synonym for "register" (e.g., do some paperwork to make it official in the governments eyes). I am using it as a synonym for "give notice" (e.g., announce to the world that, [b]"Hey, that's my work they are copying!"[/b[)"

...but apparently it didn't, as what I said was rebuffed again.

As the thread continued I realized that maybe some countries don't interpret the expression "file a claim" as it is normally used here in the US. "Filing a claim" is synonymous with "taking a person to court".

Whatever. I originally made a simple statement. That was pounced upon. I tried to clarify what I intended to say, realizing there may be different regional interpretations of the words I used. Then I was pounced upon for attempting to clarify. Tough crowd. Like water off a duck's back though, no harm, no foul.

p.s. - Another possible regional difference is the use of "mumble jumble". That is not common (in the US). "Mumbo jumbo" is how it is commonly written in the US. Now I think we should get on to discussing my newly introduced topic of contention, "water, ducks, and fouls ('fowls'?)"

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by HarryT

No, I'm saying no such thing. In any country that is a signatory of the Berne Copyright convention, copyright comes into being the instant the work is created. No "registration" or "announcement" is required. It just exists as an inherent right of the author.

While it is true that you don't have to register for the copyright to exist in the US, it's not because they are a signatory of the Berne Copyright convention, but rather because the enabling legislation says it's so. There are actually differences between the US implementation of copyright law verse the rest of the world, fair use being the major difference. Until the enabling legislation is passed by Congress and signed into law by the President, a treaty does not override US law, even if the treaty is approved by the Senate.

[alansplace]

As Jim approaches completion of his manuscript for “Peace Talks,” he’s excited to talk about Harry’s latest exploits with his fans. The long-awaited 16th novel of The Dresden Files is set at a summit of the various supernatural movers and shakers who shape Harry’s world, united to formulate a peace treaty with the Fomor. However, Jim has noticed an unsettling trend among his readers, and he wanted to put a stop to some of the misinformation circulating around the fandom.

“Folks seem to have gotten the wrong impression about this book. It’s called ‘Peace Talks.’ It’s about peace.

See above link to read entire article.

[DuckieTigger]

Originally Posted by alansplace

http://www.jim-butcher.com/[


See above link to read entire article.

Please correct the link. You meant this: http://www.jim-butcher.com

ETA: I don't believe it for a second even if it was posted before April 1st. There has to be violence, and not just against Graham's crackers.

[cc_in_oh]

I assume everyone has seen today's Bookbub email with Furies of Calderon for 99 cents?

[alansplace]

Westercon 2019
July 4 - July 7

« Superstars Writing Seminars 2019

Jim will be Westercon 2019’s Author Guest of Honor, and his wife Kitty Krell will be the Cosplay Guest of Honor.
+ Google Calendar+ iCal Export
Details

Start:
July 4
End:
July 7
Website:
https://www.spikecon.org/

Venue

Davis Conference Center
1651 North 700 West
Layton, UT 84041 United States + Google Map

[cc_in_oh]

Anyone familiar with the Rivers of London series? I see Nick Frost is bringing it to TV - sounds like it could be good?