Copyright (yes, again): When is it breached?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Muckraker

If an American writer first publishes a book with a US publishing house and that book is in the public domain in the US then the book is also in the public domain of every signatory country of the Berne Convention--which is just about every country other than the US--due to the "rule of the shorter term." This rule states that signatories will consider work to be in their own public domain if the work is public domain in its country of origin. A complete list of countries is located here: http://www.copyrightaid.co.uk/copyri...on_signatories

I'm currently battling Createspace over this matter because they are claiming that US public domain material cannot be sold in their newly-offered European Distribution Channel because it may not be public domain in the countries that channel covers--UK, France, Germany, Spain, and Italy. I'm pointing out to Createspace that all of those countries signed the Berne Convention and adhere to the completely logical and simple "rule of the shorter term." Any US-generated, US-published public domain work is also public domain in every country Createspace distributes to.

I'm afraid you're overlooking one extremely important thing, which is that many countries have bilateral intellectual property treaties with other countries which override the rule of the shorter term. Both the UK and Germany, to name but two countries, have copyright agreements with the US which mean that the "rule of the shorter term" does not apply between those countries. A book that is published in the US is still protected by copyright in the UK if it remains under UK copyright even if it's in the US public domain, and vice versa. Such bilateral treaties are specifically permitted by Article 20 of the Berne Convention.

Ie, Createspace are right.

[Greg Anos]

Quite correct.

There are places in the copyright world that PG US still won't tread in. For example:

What is the US copyright status of a UK author who first published his/her work in the US, and the US copyright was not renewed? There is no case law for such a situation, so PG won't treat such works as public domain. If they had been published under the same terms by an American author, they would be.

Example: many of the Eric Frank Russell short stories.

You have a similar problem the other way, too. An American author published a work in the UK in 1930, and later in the US. The author died in 1940. Is it P.D. in the UK while still being under US copyright?

It's a jungle out there, and they've outlawed machetes...

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

You have a similar problem the other way, too. An American author published a work in the UK in 1930, and later in the US. The author died in 1940. Is it P.D. in the UK while still being under US copyright?

It would most assuredly be in the UK public domain, since the author died more than 70 years ago. I believe, though, that (provided its copyright was correctly registered and renewed in the US) it would still be protected by copyright in the US, because the "rule of the shorter term" does not apply between the US and the UK.

[Greg Anos]

A point of curiosity, Harry. What is the term for video/cinema I.P. in the UK? I know that the performance was 50 years and up'ed to 70, but I have never heard about cinema.

Australia gives it 50 years for the actual film, but life + 70 for all the parts. (script, actors, music, props, ect...)

[Lynx-lynx]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

A point of curiosity, Harry. What is the term for video/cinema I.P. in the UK? I know that the performance was 50 years and up'ed to 70, but I have never heard about cinema.

Australia gives it 50 years for the actual film, but life + 70 for all the parts. (script, actors, music, props, ect...)

Australia'a book copyright changed in 2005 in order to accommodate a US Trade Agreement - that's when books authors were copyrighted to death + 70.

However up to 2005 the ruling was death + 50 years.

So if an author died in 1954 or prior then the 50 year ruling applies, as the law is not retrospective.

Just thought I'd make that distinction re books and authors. (In the event of some unwitting confusion because the reader didn't realise that you were talking of video/cinema)

[Lynx-lynx]

For info, Project Gutenberg Australia specialises in Crime, Detection, Mystery, Thrillers.

There are many English language authors and titles, all of which are public domain from 1955 and back.

http://gutenberg.net.au/crime-mystery.html

[Lynx-lynx]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

A point of curiosity, Harry. What is the term for video/cinema I.P. in the UK? I know that the performance was 50 years and up'ed to 70, but I have never heard about cinema.

Australia gives it 50 years for the actual film, but life + 70 for all the parts. (script, actors, music, props, ect...)

I'm preempting Harry, but as I was looking through the link provided by Muckraker I found this:

Duration of copyright UK

The 1988 Copyright, Designs and Patents Act states the duration of copyright as;

For literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works

70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the last remaining author of the work dies.

If the author is unknown, copyright will last for 70 years from end of the calendar year in which the work was created, although if it is made available to the public during that time, (by publication, authorised performance, broadcast, exhibition, etc.), then the duration will be 70 years from the end of the year that the work was first made available.

Sound Recordings and broadcasts

50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was created, or,

if the work is released within that time: 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was first released.

Films

70 years from the end of the calendar year in which the last principal director, author or composer dies.

If the work is of unknown authorship: 70 years from end of the calendar year of creation, or if made available to the public in that time, 70 years from the end of the year the film was first made available.

Typographical arrangement of published editions

25 years from the end of the calendar year in which the work was first published.
Broadcasts and cable programmes

50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the broadcast was made.

http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/co..._copyright_law

[Lynx-lynx]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Australia gives it 50 years for the actual film, but life + 70 for all the parts. (script, actors, music, props, ect...)

Ralph Sir Edward you got me curious about this statement so I did a search.

Here's an excerpt from an Introduction to Copyright and Related Issues for Documentary Makers, (published in 2008):


From 1 January 2005, copyright in a film and sound recording lasts for 70 years after the expiration of the calendar year in which the film or sound recording is first published. Prior to 1 May 1969, there was no separate copyright in films, however, copyright in the “underlying” works of such films (for example, the scripts) may still exist.

Copyright in a television or sound broadcast lasts for 50 years after the expiration of the calendar year in which the broadcast is made. Like films, however, there was no separate copyright in broadcasts prior to 1 May 1969.

--------------------------------

I think that the 70 years + ruling applies to all aspects of the film as well as the film itself, unless the film was pre 1969.

http://www.screenaustralia.gov.au/fi...ghtBooklet.pdf

[Lynx-lynx]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm afraid you're overlooking one extremely important thing, which is that many countries have bilateral intellectual property treaties with other countries which override the rule of the shorter term. Both the UK and Germany, to name but two countries, have copyright agreements with the US which mean that the "rule of the shorter term" does not apply between those countries. A book that is published in the US is still protected by copyright in the UK if it remains under UK copyright even if it's in the US public domain, and vice versa. Such bilateral treaties are specifically permitted by Article 20 of the Berne Convention.

Ie, Createspace are right.

Harry, I'm a bit confused by the statement in bold because Muckracker referred specifically to a book that was authored by a US citizen and first published in the US, and is subject to the Berne convention.

Originally Posted by Muckraker

If an American writer first publishes a book with a US publishing house and that book is in the public domain in the US then the book is also in the public domain of every signatory country of the Berne Convention--which is just about every country other than the US--due to the "rule of the shorter term." This rule states that signatories will consider work to be in their own public domain if the work is public domain in its country of origin. [/url].

How is then that UK copyright could have relevance if a UK person purchased this book, or ebook, or got it for free, from a US published source, eg Gutenberg?

I think some more explanation of the applicable Treaty may assist.

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

Harry, I'm a bit confused by the statement in bold because Muckracker referred specifically to a book that was authored by a US citizen and first published in the US, and is subject to the Berne convention.



How is then that UK copyright could have relevance if a UK person purchased this book, or ebook, or got it for free, from a US published source, eg Gutenberg?

I think some more explanation of the applicable Treaty may assist.

I think I can explain. First there is a treaty protecting from the shorter term. This dates back to the 1890's (1894 I think, but don't hold me to it). Berne did not override existing treaties, it was added to areas not already legally defined.

US copyright law was particularly arcane before 1978, it was much more like Patent law. Like a Patent, it had to be registered (and a fee paid) to have a copyright. However you didn't have to prove all the things a Patent does. Copyright only lasted 28 years, with the option to extend it at expiration for another 28 years. If you didn't extend, it fell into the public domain. it fell anyway at the end of 56 years. PG US researched the renewal lists to see if an item is PD in the US.

In 1978 the law was radically changed, but like the Austalian shift to Life+70, the existing P.D. was grandfathered in. But it got weirder - everything not in the public domain at the time was extended, regardless of author's death, and has been continually extended. Except for one year (1922) slipping into the public domain in 1998 (due to our Congress not getting the extension bill passed on time, nothing has gone into the public domain here in 34 years.

So for example, Zane Grey, died in 1939. He was a prolific writer. In the UK all of his non-posthumus works are PD (he left 20+ novels unpublished at his death - ones were released from 1939 to 1962. Posthumus work have their own timers...) But in the US all the ones published after 1923 are still under copyright, as they were renewed by his estate as they came due. The earliest one could become PD would be 2019. However, expect another extension to be passed by Hollywood, to protect all those sound movies...

Since the shorter term is blocked by previous treaty, one place it's PD and another is not.

[plib]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

The earliest one could become PD would be 2019. However, expect another extension to be passed by Hollywood, to protect all those sound movies...

And when they do, I wonder how much they'll be called "thieving scum and bastards"?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

Harry, I'm a bit confused by the statement in bold because Muckracker referred specifically to a book that was authored by a US citizen and first published in the US, and is subject to the Berne convention.

How is then that UK copyright could have relevance if a UK person purchased this book, or ebook, or got it for free, from a US published source, eg Gutenberg?

A person in the UK could perfectly legally buy a printed book of such a US public domain work from a US bookstore, but they'd be breaking UK copyright law in downloading it from PG (or any other source). That's why PG (and other reputable book libraries, such as MR) tell you to check whether or not the book is in the public domain in your country before you download it.

In reality, though, I very much doubt that anyone would care about such downloads for personal use. You're only likely to find yourself in trouble if you were to do something like try to publish the copyrighted work in the UK.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by Lynx-lynx

Harry, I'm a bit confused by the statement in bold because Muckracker referred specifically to a book that was authored by a US citizen and first published in the US, and is subject to the Berne convention.

No, it's governed also by the UK/US bilateral treaties.

The link provided by DrNefario explains it all very clearly.

In short, the rule of the shorter term wasn't followed for US copyrights in the UK between November 5, 1956 and 1 January 1996.

[Lynx-lynx]

Okay, the following explains why I've been a bit confused re the UK copyright situation - my Aus situation is as follows (which is not the UK way):

The excerpt is from Logan:

'For instance, because Australian copyright law follows the rule of the shorter term, we automatically know that a Public Domain book from the U.S. is also Public Domain in Australia.'

The link as provided by Pdurrant above:

http://www.publicdomaintreasurehunte...ks-in-the-u-k/

Thanks everyone for your help!

[peegee]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The UK has a simple "life+70" copyright law. All you need to know is when the author died.

That is an over-simplification. For example, translations count as original adaptations, so if the author did not write the original work in English, the translator must also be considered before the work can be classed as out-of-copyright.