Copyright question: died with no heirs

[Elfwreck]

Anyone know what happens to copyrights when someone dies intestate with no heirs? I've found several references that say "if someone dies without a will, assignment of copyright is done by intestate law," according to whatever state/region/whatever. But nothing indicates how an heir is chosen for a person with no living relatives--and unlike physical property, like a house, nobody demands that copyrights be assigned to *somebody.*

Is it, "find some distant relative, no matter how distant, and that's who inherited the rights?" Or if there's no relative in range of standard intestate law (roughly, through grandparents, and maybe aunts/uncles/cousins), does ownership "revert to the state?" (Which I'd think would mean "become public domain," but just because that seems reasonable doesn't mean it's true; this is copyright law.)

[plib]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Anyone know what happens to copyrights when someone dies intestate with no heirs?

It goes to Disney!

[GA Russell]

Elfwreck, you might want to study the David Goodis case.

As I recall my reading, Goodis left everything to his brother, who died without heirs. Goodis's estate was suing a movie studio for unpaid royalties. They settled low because there wasn't anyone to care about it anymore.

[susan_cassidy]

Since copyright in the USA is life plus 70 years, even though the owner is unknown, that still doesn't make it public domain.

[Ninjalawyer]

In my particular jurisdiction, there's an Intestate Succession Act that describes the distribution of your property on your death if you have no will. The Act explicitly goes into who receives your estate (or portion thereof if there's multiple heirs at a "level").

So in my case, if I died the Act would provide that my wife would receive the entirety of my estate, including certain intellectual property rights. If I had no wife or children, my estate would go to my parents or their issue if they were dead (i.e. brothers or sisters), or to their issue if they were dead.

If there's none of those people, the estate would go to my grandparents, or their issue if they were dead. If I was the last of my line, my estate would go to the Crown, and I'm not sure what is done with intellectual property rights at that point; I suspect they would simply be sold at auction by the Crown.

[plib]

Originally Posted by susan_cassidy

Since copyright in the USA is life plus 70 years, even though the owner is unknown, that still doesn't make it public domain.

Which just highlights the whole idiocy of life+xxx copyright in the first place.

I've yet to see a convincing argument as to why a book, tune, movie, or a ruddy big-eared Mouse has a greater right to protection than lifesaving drugs and life changing technology, other than the fact that Disney spends it's political campaign money more effectively than Pfizer.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by plib

Which just highlights the whole idiocy of life+xxx copyright in the first place.

I've yet to see a convincing argument as to why a book, tune, movie, or a ruddy big-eared Mouse has a greater right to protection than lifesaving drugs and life changing technology, other than the fact that Disney spends it's political campaign money more effectively than Pfizer.

Well, the advantages of putting a lifesaving drug in the public domain are much greater than the advantage of putting LOTR in the public domain.

[JeremyR]

Originally Posted by Andrew H.

Well, the advantages of putting a lifesaving drug in the public domain are much greater than the advantage of putting LOTR in the public domain.

That's debatable.

Look at all the products that have resulted from LOTR.

Then look at all the products that resulted from Dracula. Far, far more, creating more jobs and economic activity. Oh sure, the estate of Mr. Stoker is worse off than Mr. Tolkien's, but everyone else has been the better for it.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by plib

It goes to Disney!

Originally Posted by GA Russell

Elfwreck, you might want to study the David Goodis case.

As I recall my reading, Goodis left everything to his brother, who died without heirs. Goodis's estate was suing a movie studio for unpaid royalties. They settled low because there wasn't anyone to care about it anymore.

Thanks! I'll look into that.

In my case, I have a friend who has manuscripts from a friend of hers who died with no family (and no will, because see above, no family); she knows she'd have his blessing to publish them, but of course that's legally irrelevant. She's trying to figure out how much searching of what type might be needed to find out who would have the rights.

(Before anyone asks:

• The manuscripts are not pre-1963.
• They are not, exactly, unpublished works; they are drafts of works that were later published in various places. However, the drafts were changed rather a lot for publication, and she knows there'd be interest in the earlier versions.
• "No family" means a divorced spouse, no children, no living parents at time of death. Unsure about cousins, although that could possibly be researched. Assume for sake of discussion that no family can be found--I want to know if there's any legal precedents covering IP rights "reverting to the state" or similar.)

[darryl]

Most common law jurisdictions (US, UK, Australia, NZ, Canada etc) have rules about intestacy. Just look at Copyright as being property owned by the deceased. Whoever is entitled to it holds it. Normally intestacy rules have ever more remote degrees of relatives until finally the Government steps in to take it.

[Elfwreck]

With physical property, at some point the gov't takes possession. In most states in the US, intestacy checks for a couple of generations back (parents, grandparents) before giving up; while distant relatives might make a claim for land or other property of substantial value, I don't think the state looks for them indefinitely before reassigning ownership.

I'm not sure the gov't in the US can take possession of IP; its publications are automatically in the public domain. And I find it fascinating that googling turns up *nothing*, as if this were an obscure situation that's never come up in any legal setting.

[rogue_librarian]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Anyone know what happens to copyrights when someone dies intestate with no heirs?

There's always somebody who inherits (if there is anything worth inheriting, that is). If somebody has no natural heirs and died intestate the estate is usually picked up by the state in the end. (It's a lengthy process, though.)

... does ownership "revert to the state?"

Yes.

Which I'd think would mean "become public domain"

No, not at all. The state becomes the new owner and can do with it what he wants, just as any rights holder could. The free state of Bavaria famously owns the rights to Hitler's My Struggle, e.g., and does not allow any new editions.

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

With physical property, at some point the gov't takes possession. In most states in the US, intestacy checks for a couple of generations back (parents, grandparents) before giving up; while distant relatives might make a claim for land or other property of substantial value, I don't think the state looks for them indefinitely before reassigning ownership.

I'm not sure the gov't in the US can take possession of IP; its publications are automatically in the public domain. And I find it fascinating that googling turns up *nothing*, as if this were an obscure situation that's never come up in any legal setting.

Or a situation that companies like google have a vested interest in keeping out of the public eye.

[Ninjalawyer]

It would also be nice if, when the government picked up patents, they became public but that's not what happens. There too they are typically sold or granted to particular corporations interested in doing research.

[darryl]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

With physical property, at some point the gov't takes possession. In most states in the US, intestacy checks for a couple of generations back (parents, grandparents) before giving up; while distant relatives might make a claim for land or other property of substantial value, I don't think the state looks for them indefinitely before reassigning ownership.

I'm not sure the gov't in the US can take possession of IP; its publications are automatically in the public domain. And I find it fascinating that googling turns up *nothing*, as if this were an obscure situation that's never come up in any legal setting.

I'm not a US lawyer nor an expert on US law. However, I suspect that you may find that any policy of State or Federal Governments in relation to making IP public domain is likely a policy rather than an actual statute. This would mean that in the very few cases where this happens the Government concerned would be entitled to the IP but you would need to identify and look at the particular policy as to how it would be treated. Also, if your succession law is state based then presumably it is the state government concerned to whom the property will pass.

Look at the policy of the government concerned.