Copyright registration: 18+ months

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Are we talking about civil copyright infringement where the copyright owner is suing for punitive damages, or are we talking about criminal infringement where the government is prosecuting for punitive damages? It sounds like your examples would be criminal infringement.

I was thinking of civil cases, but admit I'm blurry enough on the legal details that I may have given examples that don't work that way.

I'm not in favor of removing punitive damages from civil cases (of any sort) as a general rule.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

I'm not in favor of removing punitive damages from civil cases (of any sort) as a general rule.

It's very rare that they're ever awarded in civil cases though (around 2% of the time).

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Does not registering the copyright also limit the government's prosecution during a criminal case? I wouldn't think so, but I don't know for sure.

Looks like it only effects civil cases, not criminal ones.

[whitearrow]

Shaggy is correct -- punitive damages are rare in general.

The idea that you can get punitive damages for behavior that is "unethical" but not otherwise compensable ("illegal") is not correct, however. Unless you can show eligibility for compensatory damages as a plaintiff, punitive damages aren't even an issue.

Copyright law also recognizes that actual damages are hard to prove and provides for statutory damages, although I don't know what they are at this point.

As for the European/American differences, the main reason that the US did away with all the formalistic requirements to *assert* copyright (using the symbol, registering, etc.) was to enact uniform standards under international trade agreements. The changes took place, mostly, in the late 90's -- it was one of the later rounds of the GATT negotiations.

[sirbruce]

Actually I meant statutory damages, not punitive ones. This is why one should not amateur lawyer over the Internets. Anyway, let me quote the following from publaw:

The second reason a copyright owner should register a copyrighted work in a timely manner is that the copyright owner will be eligible to receive "statutory damages" and "legal costs and attorneys' fees" from a copyright infringer. A timely manner means that the copyright registration was filed prior to an infringement taking place or within three months from the publication date of the work. If the infringement occurs prior to the effective date of copyright registration or after the three-month grace period then the copyright owner will not be entitled to receive statutory damages and legal costs and attorneys' fees. The effective date of copyright registration is the date when the Copyright Office receives the complete registration application that consists of the application, fee and deposit copies.

The significance of statutory damages is that it permits an award of special damages in a successful infringement lawsuit and negates the duty of the copyright owner to prove actual damages. The reasons why a copyright owner may elect to receive statutory damages rather than actual damages is that in many instances proving actual damages is very difficult or the profits of the infringer are very small. The statutory damages that will be awarded is discretionary and will depend upon how willful and harmful the infringement was * usually the more deliberate and more damaging the infringement the greater the award. Furthermore, the legal costs in any copyright infringement lawsuit, particularly attorneys' fees, are extremely expensive. By registering the work in a timely manner the court also has the discretion to award attorneys' fees and legal costs to the copyright owner.

[khalleron]

OK, that sounds all good and fair. I withdraw my objection.

[HarryT]

Can anyone explain to me WHY someone should have to go to the trouble and expense of "registering" a copyright, when the International Berne Copyright Convention, to which the US is a signatory, is supposed to guarentee their rights without them having to do anything?

[sirbruce]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Can anyone explain to me WHY someone should have to go to the trouble and expense of "registering" a copyright, when the International Berne Copyright Convention, to which the US is a signatory, is supposed to guarentee their rights without them having to do anything?

The Berne Convention only provides a minimal set of rights, which are "automatic" in the US. The Berne convention does not set a standard for appropriate legal remedies if those rights are violated. If your copyright is violated, you still retain all the rights to your work. Anything additional that happens to those violators is up to each individual signatory country.

Registration is usually not a big deal; if you're an individual self-publishing or performing on a small scale, it's unlikely your work is going to be worth anything much for people to bother stealing. If you're an professional with a money deal with a professional company in the field, they'll do the expedited registration for you.