[Foundation-l] copyright issues

[Robin McCain]

On 8/16/2011 12:51 PM, wjhonson at aol.com wrote:
> I don't believe your claim that you can take something which is PD, make an exact image of it, slap it up in a new work of your own (enjoying copyright protection automatically) and then claim copyright over that PD image in your work.
>
> Copyright applies to the presentation of your work, showing creativity.  An image that you reproduce faithfully shows no creativity and can enjoy no new copyright, no matter how hard you push your view.  That's it.  Period.
>
> So I can freely copy any PD image, from any source, and not need to worry about copyright violation.  PD doesn't change simply because a PD item is republished.  The presentation of the item is copyright, not the item itself.
I personally agree with that. However, it often costs more to prove your 
right to use something in court than to knuckle under if an aggressive 
rights owner comes after you. This is especially true when you are 
planning to distribute your own work worldwide - just getting a letter 
from the publisher telling you that they either give you the right to 
use an image or have no rights over that image is necessary before your 
work will be accepted by a publisher or distributor.
>
> An additional minor quibble.  At least in the US a person does*not*  need to reapply for copyright each time they revise an item.  Copyright is an automatic process, merely by the fact of presenting something in a fixed media.  You*can*  file a copyright.  You do not*need*  to file a copyright, in order to enjoy copyright protection under the law.
I also agree with you - except that the registered version has an 
ironclad protection you can protect in court while revised versions 
afterwards may not be so easy to protect unless they are also 
registered.  It becomes a kind of "chain of custody" issue. If I were to 
create something original and show it to no one else for 50 years until 
I published it and died 5 years later, which would apply to the 
copyright expiration date  - date of author's death, date of creation or 
date of publication?

  In the real world there are many examples of published books and 
screenplays that could clearly be seen as derivative - even plagiarized 
works from one or more unpublished sources.  This is a big deal within 
the Writer's Guild and the reason for their online system of protecting 
manuscripts by registering before a work is shown to others.

One of the most (in)famous books in American Religion is "The Book of 
Mormon", parts of the first edition of which were (alleged to be) 
plagiarized from the "Manuscript Story" and arguably violated the 1790 
Copyright Act. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_Spalding The work 
has been revised at least nine times (not counting translations) to make 
it "fit" the theology of the modern day church. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon