0
Copyright Law  Ronald W. Staudt Class 15 March 11, 2008
Why they lie Is it desperation? Panic? Hubris? Recklessness? Stupidity?  Literary larceny is now an easy act to follow chi...
PARAMOUNT MAKING MOVIE CLIPS AVAILABLE AS FACEBOOK MESSAGES BNA's Internet Law News - 3/11/08 <ul><li>Paramount Pictures w...
Class overview –  <ul><li>Recap: Collective works </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Tasini </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Overview of Duration...
Duration – simplified overview <ul><li>1909 act- © arises when author publishes a work with proper copyright notice.  </li...
Transition issues:  Categories of works on 1/1/1978 <ul><li>1/1/1978 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Works previously published w/o ...
Duration under the 1976 Act & CTEA <ul><li>Works created after 1977 or unpublished before 1978 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Secti...
Sonny Bono & Con Law <ul><li>Chaffee & Macaulay and incentives </li></ul><ul><li>House Report on life + 50 years </li></ul...
Eldred <ul><li>Questions Presented </li></ul><ul><li>Did the D.C. Circuit err in holding that Congress has the power under...
Eldred Majority Opinion <ul><li>“ limited times…” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Language clear </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>History ...
Eldred Majority Opinion (cont.) <ul><li>1 st  Amendment attack </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Framers saw © as “engine of free expr...
Eldred – J. Stevens opinion <ul><li>1790 Legislation irrelevant and framers’ presumption not available for 1831 act. </li>...
Eldred – J. Breyer’s opinion <ul><li>CTEA makes © virtually perpetual, benefits heirs, estates and corporate successors an...
Eldred – J. Breyer’s opinion <ul><li>This statute will cause serious expression-related harm.  </li></ul><ul><li>It will l...
Duration under the 1976 Act & CTEA <ul><li>Works created after 1977 or unpublished before 1978 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Secti...
Duration under the 1976 Act <ul><ul><li>Works first published under the 1909 Act </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>28 + 28 Re...
Renewal Issues <ul><li>Purpose  </li></ul><ul><li>Reversion plus statutory designation </li></ul><ul><li>Assignment of ren...
<ul><ul><li>Works in Public Domain prior to 1978 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>TRIPs compliance -Sect 104A  </li></ul></u...
Duration under the 1976 Act & CTEA <ul><li>Works created after 1977 or unpublished before 1978 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Secti...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Copyright Law

478

Published on

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
478
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Transcript of "Copyright Law"

    1. 1. Copyright Law Ronald W. Staudt Class 15 March 11, 2008
    2. 2. Why they lie Is it desperation? Panic? Hubris? Recklessness? Stupidity? Literary larceny is now an easy act to follow chicagotribune.com March 10, 2008 Julia Keller <ul><li>In a way, it's a weird crime. You can almost count on being caught. These days, with Google and other search engines at the fingertips of every sedentary Sherlock Holmes, with industrious bloggers beavering away in their basements, getting by with literary larceny is unlikely. So why do they do it? Why, once again, are we enmeshed in a mini-epidemic of wholesale borrowings and half-baked autobiographies that are more fantasy than fact? Why, when the Internet has made fact-checking into a sporting event -- you can play along at home, folks! -- do some writers continue to cheat, to filch, to fake, to steal, to swipe, to lie? It is far too easy -- and far from accurate -- to say, &quot;Duh. They do it for the money.&quot; Tim Goeglein, the White House adviser caught plagiarizing parts of the dozens of columns he contributed to a Ft. Wayne, Ind., newspaper, wasn't paid a penny for his ramblings. Is it desperation? Panic? Hubris? Stupidity? Shortsightedness? An honest misunderstanding of the rules of the game? After all, hip-hop artists often sample other musical works in their songs; film directors regularly reproduce the scenes of directors whose works they admire. But when writers do it, it is called something else: thievery. And it cripples careers, shreds reputations and periodically forces the publishing industry to wince, squirm, sigh deeply and re-examine its relationship with writers who don't know -- or blithely ignore -- the difference between right and wrong. </li></ul>
    3. 3. PARAMOUNT MAKING MOVIE CLIPS AVAILABLE AS FACEBOOK MESSAGES BNA's Internet Law News - 3/11/08 <ul><li>Paramount Pictures will become the first major studio to make clips from thousands of its movies available for use on the Internet, teaming with developer FanRocket to launch the VooZoo application on Facebook. The service gives Facebook users access to footage from thousands of movies, ranging from &quot;The Ten Commandments&quot; to &quot;Forrest Gump,&quot; to send to others on the popular social networking site. [SiliconValley.com] </li></ul>
    4. 4. Class overview – <ul><li>Recap: Collective works </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Tasini </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Overview of Duration & Renewal </li></ul><ul><li>Duration and Constitutional limits on Congressional power to extend © </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Eldred </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Renewal Issues </li></ul><ul><li>Restored Works </li></ul>
    5. 5. Duration – simplified overview <ul><li>1909 act- © arises when author publishes a work with proper copyright notice. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>© lasts for 28 years from publication </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>© can be renewed for a new 28 year term in 27 th year of the first term </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>From creation to publication, State C/L protects author’s right of first publication. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>1976 act (1/1/1978) – © arises when author fixes work in tangible medium of expression </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Unitary term of life + 50, now life plus 70 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No renewal, but termination possible after 35 years of transfer </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>State C/L copyright preempted </li></ul></ul>
    6. 6. Transition issues: Categories of works on 1/1/1978 <ul><li>1/1/1978 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Works previously published w/o notice </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Works published w/notice prior to 1923 (1978- 56 years) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Works published w/notice in 1923 & after </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>All about renewal! </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Works created but not published </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>All about compensation for losing perpetual State C/L copyright </li></ul></ul></ul>
    7. 7. Duration under the 1976 Act & CTEA <ul><li>Works created after 1977 or unpublished before 1978 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Section 302- life + 70, joint authors-survivor + 70, works for hire - shorter of 95 or 120 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Section 303- pre 1978 works lose c/l © & get 302 or 2002+ if published by 2002 at least 2047. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Works first published under the 1909 Act </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Section 304- 28 + Renewal </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Renewal is a new estate </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Author if living, then spouse or children, executor, next of kin </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1976 renewal extended to 47 years </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1992 automatic renewals </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1998 Sonny Bono Act- renewal 67 years </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Works in Public Domain prior to 1978 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1994 - Sect 104A --NAFTA + Uruguay Round--restores © in some foreign works, reliance parties protected </li></ul></ul><ul><li>P. 360 & Professor Gassaway’s table & Circular 15a Cornell LII Public Domain Table special points to remember </li></ul>
    8. 8. Sonny Bono & Con Law <ul><li>Chaffee & Macaulay and incentives </li></ul><ul><li>House Report on life + 50 years </li></ul><ul><ul><li>56 years too short to be fair – authors compete with themselves </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Media growth adds commercial value to great works </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Short term helps publishers, not authors or public </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Life + 50 simple, clear computation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Renewal is lawyer’s dream w/ too many mistakes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Life + 50 compensates for loss of perpetual C/L © </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>On the road to Berne – international conformity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Fair use softens public & scholars’ loss of stuff not usually renewed. </li></ul></ul>
    9. 9. Eldred <ul><li>Questions Presented </li></ul><ul><li>Did the D.C. Circuit err in holding that Congress has the power under the Copyright Clause to extend retrospectively the term of existing copyrights? </li></ul><ul><li>Is a law that extends the term of existing and future copy-rights “categorically immune from challenge[] under the First Amendment”? </li></ul>
    10. 10. Eldred Majority Opinion <ul><li>“ limited times…” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Language clear </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>History speaks without dissent </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1790 Act and 1831 and 1909 and 1976 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Each term indeterminate at grant </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Patents similarly extended- see fn 8 p. 397 academic sparring </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Policy of retroactive fairness </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Rational exercise of Copyright power? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>EU harmonization </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Demography and technology </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Novel arguments-- </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Effectively perpetual- present value calculations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Originality, “promote the progress” and quid pro quo </li></ul></ul>
    11. 11. Eldred Majority Opinion (cont.) <ul><li>1 st Amendment attack </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Framers saw © as “engine of free expression” </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>102(b) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>107 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>CTEA extensions of 108(h) and 110(5)(b) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Ultimately, this is not our job! </li></ul>
    12. 12. Eldred – J. Stevens opinion <ul><li>1790 Legislation irrelevant and framers’ presumption not available for 1831 act. </li></ul><ul><li>Fairness argument for retroactivity fails to account for public loss </li></ul><ul><li>It is our job! </li></ul>
    13. 13. Eldred – J. Breyer’s opinion <ul><li>CTEA makes © virtually perpetual, benefits heirs, estates and corporate successors and inhibits the progress of Science. </li></ul><ul><li>Not unwise, unconstitutional </li></ul><ul><ul><li>20 years means $billions paid by the public </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Millions of works will require new permissions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Author incentive is a NPV illusion & same as unlimited </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Harmonization is an illusion and no basis for old works </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Restoration, life span, exports inadequate support for another 20… </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>No public benefit and serious public harm </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Author’s questions for her mother?? p. 412 </li></ul>
    14. 14. Eldred – J. Breyer’s opinion <ul><li>This statute will cause serious expression-related harm. </li></ul><ul><li>It will likely restrict traditional dissemination of copyrighted works. </li></ul><ul><li>It will likely inhibit new forms of dissemination through the use of new technology. </li></ul><ul><li>It threatens to interfere with efforts to preserve our Nation's historical and cultural heritage and efforts to use that heritage, say, to educate our Nation's children. </li></ul><ul><li>It is easy to understand how the statute might benefit the private financial interests of corporations or heirs who own existing copyrights. But I cannot find any constitutionally legitimate, copyright-related way in which the statute will benefit the public. Indeed, in respect to existing works, the serious public harm and the virtually nonexistent public benefit could not be more clear. … the statute cannot be understood rationally to advance a constitutionally legitimate interest. The statute falls outside the scope of legislative power that the Copyright  Clause, read in light of the First Amendment, grants to Congress. I would hold the statute unconstitutional. </li></ul>
    15. 15. Duration under the 1976 Act & CTEA <ul><li>Works created after 1977 or unpublished before 1978 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Section 302- life + 70, joint authors-survivor + 70, works for hire - shorter of 95 or 120 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Section 303- pre 1978 works lose c/l © & get 302 or 2002+ if published by 2002 at least 2047. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Works first published under the 1909 Act </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Section 304- 28 + Renewal </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Renewal is a new estate </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Author if living, then spouse or children, executor, next of kin </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1976 renewal extended to 47 years </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1992 automatic renewals </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1998 Sonny Bono Act- renewal 67 years </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Works in Public Domain prior to 1978 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1994 - Sect 104A --NAFTA + Uruguay Round--restores © in some foreign works, reliance parties protected </li></ul></ul><ul><li>P. 360 & Professor Gassaway’s table & Circular 15a Cornell LII Public Domain Table special points to remember </li></ul>
    16. 16. Duration under the 1976 Act <ul><ul><li>Works first published under the 1909 Act </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>28 + 28 Renewal </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Renewal period is a new estate </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Author if living, </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>then spouse or children, </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>then executor, </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>then next of kin </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1976 renewal extended to 47 years </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1992 automatic renewals (works published 1964- 1977) </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1998 Sonny Bono Act- renewal 67 years </li></ul></ul></ul></ul>
    17. 17. Renewal Issues <ul><li>Purpose </li></ul><ul><li>Reversion plus statutory designation </li></ul><ul><li>Assignment of renewal period by author </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Effective? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How executed? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Estranged children v. will bequest to charity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Remarried widows and illegitimate children </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Split between “widow… or children of author” </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Roger Miller’s seventh child </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>P. 423 hypo </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Works for hire and posthumous works </li></ul><ul><li>Automatic Renewal- 1992 act </li></ul>
    18. 18. <ul><ul><li>Works in Public Domain prior to 1978 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>TRIPs compliance -Sect 104A </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>restores © in some foreign works, </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>reliance parties protected </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Luck’s Music Library Inc. v. Gonzales </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Does Congress have the power to reanimate dead copyrights? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Golan v. Gonzales </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Are reliance parties deprived of substantive due process? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Troll cases-what is a reliance party? </li></ul></ul>Restored Works
    19. 19. Duration under the 1976 Act & CTEA <ul><li>Works created after 1977 or unpublished before 1978 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Section 302- life + 70, joint authors-survivor + 70, works for hire - shorter of 95 or 120 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Section 303- pre 1978 works lose c/l © & get 302 or 2002+ if published by 2002 at least 2047. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Works first published under the 1909 Act </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Section 304- 28 + Renewal </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Renewal is a new estate </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Author if living, then spouse or children, executor, next of kin </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1976 renewal extended to 47 years </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1992 automatic renewals </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>1998 Sonny Bono Act- renewal 67 years </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Works in Public Domain prior to 1978 </li></ul><ul><ul><li>1994 - Sect 104A --NAFTA + Uruguay Round--restores © in some foreign works, reliance parties protected </li></ul></ul><ul><li>P. 360 & Professor Gassaway’s table & Circular 15a Cornell LII Public Domain Table special points to remember </li></ul>
    1. A particular slide catching your eye?

      Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

    ×