After keeping us waiting for a century, Mark Twain will finally reveal all

[kennyc]

The additional issue here is that even though the author (in this case is known) the owner (presumably his estate or family) is doing the preparation, publication and registering the copyright, so even though the author is dead the publication and copyright is likely owned by someone else.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by rogue_librarian

In a (half) sane legal environment, anyway.

Let me know when you find one of those.

[rogue_librarian]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Let me know when you find one of those.

Pick any first-world country with the exception of the US and you're halfway there.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by rogue_librarian

Pick any first-world country with the exception of the US and you're halfway there.

Like the ones that are passing all of those "3 strikes" laws?

[Worldwalker]

And I certainly wouldn't think the UK's libel laws qualify it as sane.

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by rogue_librarian

Pick any first-world country with the exception of the US and you're halfway there.

so outside the US the laws are 1/4 sane?

[rogue_librarian]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Like the ones that are passing all of those "3 strikes" laws?

Three strikes as in "madatory life imprisonment without parole" or "get disconnected from the internet if you're suspected of file sharing"? The former seems to be chiefly an American specialty. As to the latter, yeah, crazy times.

I was, obviously, oversimplifying things. Even so, I was talking about the whole environment, not some single bill or law. That said the UK has worked hard in recent years to reach #2 after the US. Libel laws were mentioned already but there are other areas as well (mainly designed to make us all safer, of course.)

[BookCat]

Originally Posted by BookCat

Personally, I think it's fair to the author, descendants and readers of the future, for international copyright to be death of the author+50 whether or not the work was published during the author's lifetime.

Unattributed works should be copyright from the estimated time of authorship+70 which would more or less amount to the same time as a work of known authorship.

That's my pennyworth!

The issue of royalties for unattributed works was overlooked when I wrote this. Perhaps the royalties could go to libraries, or to fund a literary bursary or prize.

The general idea in the quote above is to simplify the issue of copyright. Right now the law is a self-contradictory mess.

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by BookCat

The issue of royalties for unattributed works was overlooked when I wrote this. Perhaps the royalties could go to libraries, or to fund a literary bursary or prize.

The general idea in the quote above is to simplify the issue of copyright. Right now the law is a self-contradictory mess.

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap3.html

(c) Anonymous Works, Pseudonymous Works, and Works Made for Hire. — In the case of an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication, or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first. If, before the end of such term, the identity of one or more of the authors of an anonymous or pseudonymous work is revealed in the records of a registration made for that work under subsections (a) or (d) of section 408, or in the records provided by this subsection, the copyright in the work endures for the term specified by subsection (a) or (b), based on the life of the author or authors whose identity has been revealed. Any person having an interest in the copyright in an anonymous or pseudonymous work may at any time record, in records to be maintained by the Copyright Office for that purpose, a statement identifying one or more authors of the work; the statement shall also identify the person filing it, the nature of that person's interest, the source of the information recorded, and the particular work affected, and shall comply in form and content with requirements that the Register of Copyrights shall prescribe by regulation.

Though if anyone can figure out in a practical way how a work by an unknown creator can be legally published.... The only loophole I see is that anonymous people probably have a really hard time filing lawsuits.

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by Iphinome

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap3.html

(c) Anonymous Works, Pseudonymous Works, and Works Made for Hire. — In the case of an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication, or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first. If, before the end of such term, the identity of one or more of the authors of an anonymous or pseudonymous work is revealed in the records of a registration made for that work under subsections (a) or (d) of section 408, or in the records provided by this subsection, the copyright in the work endures for the term specified by subsection (a) or (b), based on the life of the author or authors whose identity has been revealed. Any person having an interest in the copyright in an anonymous or pseudonymous work may at any time record, in records to be maintained by the Copyright Office for that purpose, a statement identifying one or more authors of the work; the statement shall also identify the person filing it, the nature of that person's interest, the source of the information recorded, and the particular work affected, and shall comply in form and content with requirements that the Register of Copyrights shall prescribe by regulation.

Though if anyone can figure out in a practical way how a work by an unknown creator can be legally published.... The only loophole I see is that anonymous people probably have a really hard time filing lawsuits.

But their publishers don't...

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by BookCat

The general idea in the quote above is to simplify the issue of copyright. Right now the law is a self-contradictory mess.

You think they want to simplify it? I would bet it's a self-contradictory mess on purpose. That makes it easier to pick interpretations that suit their purposes.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

You think they want to simplify it? I would bet it's a self-contradictory mess on purpose. That makes it easier to pick interpretations that suit their purposes.

True and probably true of many if not most laws....

[AprilHare]

I'm not interested in whether they're PD under US law.
Are they PD in Australia or Canada?

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by AprilHare

I'm not interested in whether they're PD under US law.
Are they PD in Australia or Canada?

As far as I can tell, Mark Twain's Autobiography (both the previously unpublished and published parts) is in the public domain in Canada. I haven't looked at Australia.