How does Copyrighting work?

[Umbran]

In 1930s America, you had to register your Copyright. But you knew that, right?

I've been told that in the past, yes. But since you didn't mention the difference with modern copyright, you wording was very likely to be extremely misleading to someone who comes in asking, "How does it work?"

 

[darkelfo]

A few points to respond to the issues raised above:

1. Ragarding Anti-SLAPP. That stands for Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. Anti-SLAPP laws are designed to protect people who are exercising their free speech rights from the chilling effects of merit-less lawsuits. Using someone else's copyrighted works for commercial purposes may not qualify under these laws, unless perhaps its a commercial parody. As much as I am a fan of these laws, don't be fooled into thinking they are an escape to copyright infringement in all cases.

2. Trademark is different than copyright. The basic right under trademark law to prevent consumer confusion. I can say Microsoft sucks, using their trademark, till the Internet explodes, but I can't put their trademark on my own software and sell it. Referring to a company's products using their trademarks is totally legal as long as people aren't confused that you're doing that UNLESS you have agreed otherwise. I believe some of the OGL licenses include a prohibition on using people's marks, but I have not read them in like three years.

3. I'm an attorney and I can't afford my own fees and I make a ton of money. So even if you are right about your legal position, proving it in court is a whole other matter. That costs big time $$$. So get permission if you want to use people's stuff and make sure you're asking the right person/entity. Just because someone wrote the article doesn't mean they have the right to license its use.

4. Hire a lawyer! If you're involved in a commercial enterprise, legal advice in advance is always a good idea. Obviously, casual discussions like this entire thread are NOT a good source of legal advice.

 

[darkelfo]

As well as being expensive, attorneys routinely lie and/or remain purposely ignorant of the law as it actually stands. This often works - even many court of first instance judges (in US, anyway) seem to have little knowledge of the law and are happy to take some plaintiff lawyer's word for it. To get justice as a defendant in US you often have to go to the court of appeal, which, with lawyers being such expensive blood-sucking roaches, is expensive.

Disclaimer: I teach IP law to the next generation of blood-sucking roaches...

I resent the tone and content of this comment, but I'll read it in the light most favorable and asume you meant it in jest and that perhaps you are suffering from a bit of burn out. Everyone hates attorneys until they need one, then they hire the guy who's nickname is "Bulldog Killer." While the legal system in our country is imperfect (the Bush Admin has done much to damage it), I'll take the rule of law to the rule of barbarians with rage ability any day.

 

[SWBaxter]

I thought the Fair Use policy stated in the copyright law is pretty clear.

The number of lawyers focusing on intellectual property law probably represents evidence against that opinion. Lawyers make very little money arguing over clearly written laws.

 

[Pielorinho]

Moderator's Notes:
It's getting a little heated in here, guys, and mentioning current politics ain't helping. I think this thread has a lot of useful information in it, but please remember to keep everything civil (like the copyright-infringement lawsuits--ha ha--get it? never mind) and apolitical.

Much thanks!
Daniel

 

[trancejeremy]

Actually the Deities and Demigods situation was sillier than that - Chaosium gave permission to use both the Cthulhu Mythos and Melnibone sections, after telling TSR 'ummm, we hold those licenses...', so the next two printings have the permission printed - but not the sections... The kept Lankhmar by the way, they were the ones that held the RPG license, it was Melnibone that they had to remove, or at least get permission to use.

Some of TSR's decisions are a little odd...

The Auld Grump

There's actually a bit more to the story than that. TSR actually got verbal permission from the author of the Melnibone stuff, but he apparently forgot about his Chaosium deal. TSR also believed that the HPL stuff was in the public domain (which is probably is, though Chaosium & Arkham House claim differently). And so there was a 1st printing/edition without the persmission from Chaosium.

Anywhoo, they actually made a deal with Chaoisum - TSR could use those stuff in the DD&G book, while Chaosium could use AD&D and D&D stats for some of their products, most notably Thieves' World. And so there was a 2nd printing/edition with Chaosium's permission

Eventually, though, TSR changed their mind (this was when the Blumes started to run the place, I think), and so removed the stuff. (But not the permission bit)

However, the urban legend about the book persists. As does the high prices, even though the book actually isn't that rare (at any given moment there's probably 10 or so on ebay for sale)

 

[trancejeremy]

Anyway, realistically, if someone uses a bit of copyrighted art or makes a derivative work based on someone elses IP (aka, a fan-site), at worst they are going to get a letter saying knock it off. Many companies simply don't care, as long as you aren't actually pirating their stuff or doing something commercial with it. (Some do, like Palladium, for RPGs, and Fox, for TV shows/movies)

At any rate, you'll get a legal warning first. If they do care. Basically a letter saying "Take it down or be sued".

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Not so fast, S'mon.

As I recall...at 1:56AM (meaning, take your grain of salt now- I could be thinking of the normative, not actual state of things):

Most of the international copyright treaties are retroactive... meaning that something that was copyrightable but had no application for copyright made for it MAY or MAY NOT be in the public domain- depending on the country of the would-be holder's country of origin, etc.

Certain foreign works originally published without notice had their copyrights restored under the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). Request Circular 38b and see the "Notice of Copyright" section of this publication for further information.

also:

Works Originally Created before January 1, 1978, But Not Published or Registered by That Date

These works have been automatically brought under the statute and are now given federal copyright protection. The duration of copyright in these works will generally be computed in the same way as for works created on or after January 1, 1978: the life-plus-70 or 95/120-year terms will apply to them as well. The law provides that in no case will the term of copyright for works in this category expire before December 31, 2002, and for works published on or before December 31, 2002, the term of copyright will not expire before December 31, 2047

Public Domain

As for the Uraguay Rounds Agreement Act (1994):

United States law to prevail in conflict. - No provision of any of the Uruguay Round Agreements, nor the application of any such provision to any person or circumstance, that is inconsistent with any law of the United States shall have effect.

But, if you really just want a quick update:

Copyright Questions

In short...DON'T ASSUME SOMETHING IS PUBLIC DOMAIN.

 

[S'mon]

While the legal system in our country is imperfect (the Bush Admin has done much to damage it), I'll take the rule of law to the rule of barbarians with rage ability any day.

I too prefer the rule of law(yers) to the rule of barbarians. And I have a lot of respect for the integrity of the US appeals courts.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

What about Lawyer Barbarians?

"By the Power of Judge Grey, HABEAS CORPUS!"

"What is best, Gary Spence?" "To crush your enemies, have them driven before you, and hear their lamentations on Larry King Live."