Copyright

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
1 of 16
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright
Copyright
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Copyright is a legal right created by the law of a country that grants the creator of an original work
exclusive rights for its use and distribution. This is usually only for a limited time. The exclusive rights are
not absolute but limited by limitations and exceptions to copyright law, including fair use. A major
limitation on copyright is that copyright protects only the original expression of ideas, and not the
underlying ideas themselves.[1]
Copyright is a form of intellectual property, applicable to certain forms of creative work. Under US
copyright law, legal protection attaches only to fixed representations in a tangible medium. The Berne
Convention allows member countries to decide whether creative works must be "fixed" to enjoy copyright.
Article 2, Section 2 of the Berne Convention states: "It shall be a matter for legislation in the countries of the
Union to prescribe that works in general or any specified categories of works shall not be protected unless
they have been fixed in some material form." Some countries do not require that a work be produced in a
particular form to obtain copyright protection. For instance, Spain, France, and Australia do not require
fixation for copyright protection. The United States and Canada, on the other hand, require that most works
must be "fixed in a tangible medium of expression" to obtain copyright protection.[2] U.S. law requires that
the fixation be stable and permanent enough to be "perceived, reproduced or communicated for a period of
more than transitory duration." Similarly, Canadian courts consider fixation to require that the work be
"expressed to some extent at least in some material form, capable of identification and having a more or less
permanent endurance."[2] It is often shared among multiple authors, each of whom holds a set of rights to
use or license the work, and who are commonly referred to as rightsholders.[3] These rights frequently
include reproduction, control over derivative works, distribution, public performance, and "moral rights"
such as attribution.[4]
Copyrights are considered territorial rights, which means that they do not extend beyond the territory of a
specific jurisdiction. While many aspects of national copyright laws have been standardized through
international copyright agreements, copyright laws vary by country.[5]
Typically, the duration of a copyright spans the author's life plus 50 to 100 years (that is, copyright typically
expires 50 to 100 years after the author dies, depending on the jurisdiction). Some countries require certain
copyright formalities to establishing copyright, but most recognize copyright in any completed work,
without formal registration. Generally, copyright is enforced as a civil matter, though some jurisdictions do
apply criminal sanctions.
Most jurisdictions recognize copyright limitations, allowing "fair" exceptions to the creator's exclusivity of
copyright and giving users certain rights. The development of digital media and computer network
technologies have prompted reinterpretation of these exceptions, introduced new difficulties in enforcing
copyright, and inspired additional challenges to copyright law's philosophic basis. Simultaneously,
businesses with great economic dependence upon copyright, such as those in the music business, have
advocated the extension and expansion of copyright and sought additional legal and technological
enforcement.
Contents
1 History
22-06-2016 00:51
2 of 16
2 Scope
3 Exceptions to copyright
4 Obtaining and enforcing copyright
4.1 Cost of enforcing copyright
4.2 Copyright notices in the United States
4.3 "Poor man's copyright"
5 Exclusive rights
5.1 Useful articles
6 Limitations and exceptions to copyright
6.1 Ideaexpression dichotomy and the merger doctrine
6.2 The first-sale doctrine and exhaustion of rights
6.3 Fair use and fair dealing
6.4 Accessible copies
7 Transfer and licensing, and assignment
7.1 Free licences
8 Duration
8.1 Copyright term
8.2 Public domain
9 Copyright infringement
10 See also
10.1 Treaties and international agreements
10.2 Alternate views
11 References
12 Further reading
13 External links
History
Copyright came about with the invention of the printing press and with wider literacy. As a legal concept, its
origins in Britain were from a reaction to printers' monopolies at the beginning of the 18th century. Charles
II of England was concerned by the unregulated copying of books and passed the Licensing of the Press Act
1662 by Act of Parliament,[6] which established a register of licensed books and required a copy to be
deposited with the Stationers' Company, essentially continuing the licensing of material that had long been
in effect.
The British Statute of Anne (also known as the Copyright Act 1709) further alluded to individual rights of
the artist. It began, "Whereas Printers, Booksellers, and other Persons, have of late frequently taken the
Liberty of Printing... Books, and other Writings, without the Consent of the Authors... to their very great
Detriment, and too often to the Ruin of them and their Families:".[7] A right to benefit financially from the
work is articulated, and court rulings and legislation have recognized a right to control the work, such as
ensuring that the integrity of it is preserved. An irrevocable right to be recognized as the work's creator
appears in some countries' copyright laws.
Copyright laws allow products of creative human activities, such as literary and artistic production, to be
preferentially exploited and thus incentivized. Different cultural attitudes, social organizations, economic
models and legal frameworks are seen to account for why copyright emerged in Europe and not, for
example, in Asia. In the Middle Ages in Europe, there was generally a lack of any concept of literary
property due to the general relations of production, the specific organization of literary production and the
role of culture in society. The latter refers to the tendency of oral societies, such as that of Europe in the
medieval period, to view knowledge as the product and expression of the collective, rather than to see it as
22-06-2016 00:51
3 of 16
individual property. However, with copyright laws, intellectual

production comes to be seen as a product of an individual, with
attendant rights. The most significant point is that patent and
copyright laws support the expansion of the range of creative human
activities that can be commodified. This parallels the ways in which
capitalism led to the commodification of many aspects of social life
that earlier had no monetary or economic value per se.[8]
The Statute of Anne was the first real copyright act, and gave the
publishers rights for a fixed period, after which the copyright
expired.[9] Copyright has grown from a legal concept regulating
copying rights in the publishing of books and maps to one with a
significant effect on nearly every modern industry, covering such
items as sound recordings, films, photographs, software, and
architectural works.
Prior to the passage of the United States Constitution, several states
passed their own copyright laws between 1783 and 1787, the first
being Connecticut.[10] Contemporary scholars and patriots such as
Noah Webster, John Trumbull (poet), and Joel Barlow were
instrumental in securing the passage of these statutes.[10]
The Copyright Clause of the
United States Constitution
(1787) authorized copyright
legislation: "To promote the
Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to
Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective
Writings and Discoveries." That is, by guaranteeing them a period of
time in which they alone could profit from their works, they would
be enabled and encouraged to invest the time required to create
them, and this would be good for society as a whole. A right to profit
from the work has been the philosophical underpinning for much
legislation extending the duration of copyright, to the life of the
creator and beyond, to their heirs.
The Statute of Anne (the Copyright
Act 1709) came into force in 1710.
The original length of copyright in the United States was 14 years,

and it had to be explicitly applied for. If the author wished, they
could apply for a second 14year monopoly grant, but after that the
work entered the public domain, so it could be used and built upon
by others.
Thomas Jefferson, who strongly advocated the ability of the public
to share and build upon the works of others, proposed as part of the
Bill of Rights that a short timespan be protected:
The Copyright Act of 1790 in the

Columbian Centinel.
Art. 9. Monopolies may be allowed to persons for their own productions in literature and their own
inventions in the arts for a term not exceeding years but for no longer term and no other purpose.[11]
Copyright law was enacted rather late in German states, and the historian Eckhard Hffner argues that the
absence of copyright laws in the early 19th century encouraged publishing, was profitable for authors, led to
a proliferation of books, enhanced knowledge, and was ultimately an important factor in the ascendency of
Germany as a power during that century.[12]
22-06-2016 00:51
4 of 16
The 1886 Berne Convention first established recognition

of copyrights among sovereign nations, rather than
merely bilaterally. Under the Berne Convention,
copyrights for creative works do not have to be asserted
or declared, as they are automatically in force at
creation: an author need not "register" or "apply for" a
copyright in countries adhering to the Berne
Convention.[13] As soon as a work is "fixed", that is,
written or recorded on some physical medium, its author
is automatically entitled to all copyrights in the work,
and to any derivative works unless and until the author
explicitly disclaims them, or until the copyright expires.
The Berne Convention also resulted in foreign authors
being treated equivalently to domestic authors, in any
country signed onto the Convention. The UK signed the
Berne Convention in 1887 but did not implement large
parts of it until 100 years later with the passage of the
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988. The United
States did not sign the Berne Convention until 1989.[14]
The Pirate PublisherAn International Burlesque

that has the Longest Run on Record, from Puck,
1886, satirizes the then-existing situation where a
publisher could profit by simply stealing newly
published works from one country, and publishing
them in another, and vice versa.
The United States and most Latin American countries instead entered into the Buenos Aires Convention in
1910, which required a copyright notice on the work (such as all rights reserved), and permitted signatory
nations to limit the duration of copyrights to shorter and renewable terms.[15][16][17] The Universal
Copyright Convention was drafted in 1952 as another less demanding alternative to the Berne Convention,
and ratified by nations such as the Soviet Union and developing nations.
The regulations of the Berne Convention are incorporated into the World Trade Organization's TRIPS
agreement (1995), thus giving the Berne Convention effectively near-global application.[18] The 2002 WIPO
Copyright Treaty enacted greater restrictions on the use of technology to copy works in the nations that
ratified it.
Scope
Copyright may apply to a wide range of creative, intellectual, or artistic forms, or "works". Specifics vary by
jurisdiction, but these can include poems, theses, plays and other literary works, motion pictures,
choreography, musical compositions, sound recordings, paintings, drawings, sculptures, photographs,
computer software, radio and television broadcasts, and industrial designs. Graphic designs and industrial
designs may have separate or overlapping laws applied to them in some jurisdictions.[19][20]
Copyright does not cover ideas and information themselves, only the form or manner in which they are
expressed.[21] For example, the copyright to a Mickey Mouse cartoon restricts others from making copies of
the cartoon or creating derivative works based on Disney's particular anthropomorphic mouse, but does not
prohibit the creation of other works about anthropomorphic mice in general, so long as they are different
enough to not be judged copies of Disney's.[21] Note additionally that Mickey Mouse is not copyrighted
because characters cannot be copyrighted; rather, Steamboat Willie is copyrighted and Mickey Mouse, as a
character in that copyrighted work, is afforded protection.
In many jurisdictions, copyright law makes exceptions to these restrictions when the work is copied for the
purpose of commentary or other related uses (See fair use, fair dealing). It should be noted that US copyright
does NOT cover names, title, short phrases or Listings (such as ingredients, recipes, labels, or formulas).[22]
However, there are protections available for those areas copyright does not cover such as trademarks and
patents.
22-06-2016 00:51
5 of 16
Copyright laws are standardized somewhat through international conventions such as the Berne Convention
and Universal Copyright Convention. These multilateral treaties have been ratified by nearly all countries,
and international organizations such as the European Union or World Trade Organization require their
member states to comply with them.
Exceptions to copyright
There are some exceptions to what copyright will protect. Copyright will not protect:
Names of products
Names of businesses, organizations, or groups
Pseudonyms of individuals
Titles of works
Catchwords, catchphrases, mottoes, slogans, or short advertising expressions
Listings of ingredients in recipes, labels, and formulas, though the directions can be copyrighted
Obtaining and enforcing copyright

Typically, a work must meet minimal standards of originality in
order to qualify for copyright, and the copyright expires after a set
period of time (some jurisdictions may allow this to be extended).
Different countries impose different tests, although generally the
requirements are low; in the United Kingdom there has to be some
"skill, labour, and judgment" that has gone into it.[23] In Australia
and the United Kingdom it has been held that a single word is
insufficient to comprise a copyright work. However, single words or
a short string of words can sometimes be registered as a trademark
instead.
Copyright law recognizes the right of an author based on whether the
work actually is an original creation, rather than based on whether it
is unique; two authors may own copyright on two substantially
identical works, if it is determined that the duplication was
coincidental, and neither was copied from the other.
In all countries where the Berne Convention standards apply,
copyright is automatic, and need not be obtained through official
registration with any government office. Once an idea has been
reduced to tangible form, for example by securing it in a fixed
medium (such as a drawing, sheet music, photograph, a videotape, or
a computer file), the copyright holder is entitled to enforce his or her
[13]
exclusive rights.
However, while registration isn't needed to exercise copyright, in jurisdictions where the
laws provide for registration, it serves as prima facie evidence of a valid copyright and enables the copyright
holder to seek statutory damages and attorney's fees.[24] (In the USA, registering after an infringement only
enables one to receive actual damages and lost profits.)
A copyright certificate for proof of
the Fermat theorem, issued by the
State Department of Intellectual
Property of Ukraine.
The original holder of the copyright may be the employer of the author rather than the author himself, if the
work is a "work for hire".[25] For example, in English law the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
provides that if a copyrighted work is made by an employee in the course of that employment, the copyright
is automatically owned by the employer which would be a "Work for Hire."
Copyrights are generally enforced by the holder in a civil law court, but there are also criminal infringement
22-06-2016 00:51
6 of 16
statutes in some jurisdictions. While central registries are kept in some countries which aid in proving
claims of ownership, registering does not necessarily prove ownership, nor does the fact of copying (even
without permission) necessarily prove that copyright was infringed. Criminal sanctions are generally aimed
at serious counterfeiting activity, but are now becoming more commonplace as copyright collectives such as
the RIAA are increasingly targeting the file sharing home Internet user. Thus far, however, most such cases
against file sharers have been settled out of court. (See: Legal aspects of file sharing)
Cost of enforcing copyright

In most jurisdictions the copyright holder must bear the cost of enforcing copyright. This will usually
involve engaging legal representation, administrative and or court costs. In light of this, many copyright
disputes are settled by a direct approach to the infringing party in order to settle the dispute out of court.
Copyright notices in the United States

Before 1989, the use of a copyright notice consisting of the copyright
symbol (, the letter C inside a circle), the abbreviation "Copr.", or the word
"Copyright", followed by the year of the first publication of the work and the
name of the copyright holder was part of U. S. statutory requirements.
[26][27] Several years may be noted if the work has gone through substantial
revisions. The proper copyright notice for sound recordings of musical or
other audio works is a sound recording copyright symbol ( , the letter P
inside a circle), which indicates a sound recording copyright, with the
letter P indicating a "phonorecord". In addition, the phrase All rights
reserved was once required to assert copyright, but that phrase is now legally
obsolete.
A copyright symbol used in

copyright notice.
In 1989 the United States enacted the Berne Convention Implementation

Act, amending the 1976 Copyright Act to conform to most of the provisions of the Berne Convention. As a
result, the use of copyright notices has become optional to claim copyright, because the Berne Convention
makes copyright automatic.[28] However, the lack of notice of copyright using these marks may have
consequences in terms of reduced damages in an infringement lawsuit using notices of this form may
reduce the likelihood of a defense of "innocent infringement" being successful.[29]
"Poor man's copyright"

A widely circulated strategy to avoid the cost of copyright registration is referred to as the "poor man's
copyright". It proposes that the creator send the work to himself in a sealed envelope by registered mail,
using the postmark to establish the date. This technique has not been recognized in any published opinions
of the United States courts. The United States Copyright Office makes it clear that the technique is no
substitute for actual registration.[30] The United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office discusses the
technique and notes that the technique (as well as commercial registries) does not constitute dispositive
proof that the work is original nor who the creator of the work is.[31][32]
Exclusive rights
Several exclusive rights typically attach to the holder of a copyright:
to produce copies or reproductions of the work and to sell those copies (including, typically, electronic
copies)
to import or export the work
22-06-2016 00:51
7 of 16
to create derivative works (works that adapt the original work)

to perform or display the work publicly
to sell or cede these rights to others
to transmit or display by radio or video.[33]
The phrase "exclusive right" means that only the copyright holder is free to exercise those rights, and others
are prohibited from using the work without the holder's permission. Copyright is sometimes called a
"negative right", as it serves to prohibit certain people (e.g., readers, viewers, or listeners, and primarily
publishers and would be publishers) from doing something they would otherwise be able to do, rather than
permitting people (e.g., authors) to do something they would otherwise be unable to do. In this way it is
similar to the unregistered design right in English law and European law. The rights of the copyright holder
also permit him/her to not use or exploit their copyright, for some or all of the term. There is, however, a
critique which rejects this assertion as being based on a philosophical interpretation of copyright law that is
not universally shared. There is also debate on whether copyright should be considered a property right or a
moral right.[34]
Useful articles
If a pictorial, graphic or sculptural work is a useful article, it is copyrighted only if its aesthetic features are
separable from its utilitarian features. A useful article is an article having an intrinsic utilitarian function that
is not merely to portray the appearance of the article or to convey information. They must be separable from
the functional aspect to be copyrighted.[35]
Limitations and exceptions to copyright

Ideaexpression dichotomy and the merger doctrine
The ideaexpression divide differentiates between ideas and expression, and states that copyright protects
only the original expression of ideas, and not the ideas themselves. This principle, first clarified in the 1879
case of Baker v. Selden, has since been codified by the Copyright Act of 1976 at 17 U.S.C. 102(b).
The first-sale doctrine and exhaustion of rights

Copyright law does not restrict the owner of a copy from reselling legitimately obtained copies of
copyrighted works, provided that those copies were originally produced by or with the permission of the
copyright holder. It is therefore legal, for example, to resell a copyrighted book or CD. In the United States
this is known as the first-sale doctrine, and was established by the courts to clarify the legality of reselling
books in second-hand bookstores.
Some countries may have parallel importation restrictions that allow the copyright holder to control the
aftermarket. This may mean for example that a copy of a book that does not infringe copyright in the
country where it was printed does infringe copyright in a country into which it is imported for retailing. The
first-sale doctrine is known as exhaustion of rights in other countries and is a principle which also applies,
though somewhat differently, to patent and trademark rights. It is important to note that the first-sale
doctrine permits the transfer of the particular legitimate copy involved. It does not permit making or
distributing additional copies.
In Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,[36] in 2013, the United States Supreme Court held in a 6-3 decision
that the first-sale doctrine applies to goods manufactured abroad with the copyright owner's permission and
then imported into the US without such permission. The case involved a plaintiff who imported Asian
editions of textbooks that had been manufactured abroad with the publisher-plaintiff's permission. The
defendant, without permission from the publisher, imported the textbooks and resold on eBay. The Supreme
22-06-2016 00:51
8 of 16
Court's holding severely limits the ability of copyright holders to prevent such importation.
In addition, copyright, in most cases, does not prohibit one from acts such as modifying, defacing, or
destroying his or her own legitimately obtained copy of a copyrighted work, so long as duplication is not
involved. However, in countries that implement moral rights, a copyright holder can in some cases
successfully prevent the mutilation or destruction of a work that is publicly visible.
Fair use and fair dealing

Copyright does not prohibit all copying or replication. In the United States, the fair use doctrine, codified by
the Copyright Act of 1976 as 17 U.S.C. Section 107, permits some copying and distribution without
permission of the copyright holder or payment to same. The statute does not clearly define fair use, but
instead gives four non-exclusive factors to consider in a fair use analysis. Those factors are:
1. the purpose and character of one's use
2. the nature of the copyrighted work
3. what amount and proportion of the whole work was taken, and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.[37]
In the United Kingdom and many other Commonwealth countries, a similar notion of fair dealing was
established by the courts or through legislation. The concept is sometimes not well defined; however in
Canada, private copying for personal use has been expressly permitted by statute since 1999. In Alberta
(Education) v. Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency (Access Copyright), 2012 SCC 37, the Supreme Court
of Canada concluded that limited copying for educational purposes could also be justified under the fair
dealing exemption. In Australia, the fair dealing exceptions under the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) are a limited
set of circumstances under which copyrighted material can be legally copied or adapted without the
copyright holder's consent. Fair dealing uses are research and study; review and critique; news reportage and
the giving of professional advice (i.e. legal advice). Under current Australian law, although it is still a breach
of copyright to copy, reproduce or adapt copyright material for personal or private use without permission
from the copyright owner, owners of a legitimate copy are permitted to format shift that work from one
medium to another for personal, private use, or to time shift a broadcast work for later, once and only
once, viewing or listening. Other technical exemptions from infringement may also apply, such as the
temporary reproduction of a work in machine readable form for a computer.
In the United States the AHRA (Audio Home Recording Act Codified in Section 10, 1992) prohibits action
against consumers making noncommercial recordings of music, in return for royalties on both media and
devices plus mandatory copy-control mechanisms on recorders.
Section 1008. Prohibition on certain infringement actions
No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the
manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio
recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the
noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings
or analog musical recordings.
Later acts amended US Copyright law so that for certain purposes making 10 copies or more is construed to
be commercial, but there is no general rule permitting such copying. Indeed, making one complete copy of a
work, or in many cases using a portion of it, for commercial purposes will not be considered fair use. The
Digital Millennium Copyright Act prohibits the manufacture, importation, or distribution of devices whose
intended use, or only significant commercial use, is to bypass an access or copy control put in place by a
copyright owner.[19] An appellate court has held that fair use is not a defense to engaging in such
distribution.
22-06-2016 00:51
9 of 16
The copyright directive allows EU member states to implement a set of exceptions to copyright. Examples
of those exceptions are:
photographic reproductions on paper or any similar medium of works (excluding sheet music)
provided that the rightholders receives fair compensation,
reproduction made by libraries, educational establishments, museums or archives, which are
non-commercial
archival reproductions of broadcasts,
uses for the benefit of people with a disability,
for demonstration or repair of equipment,
for non-commercial research or private study
when used in parody
Accessible copies
It is legal in several countries including the United Kingdom and the United States to produce alternative
versions (for example, in large print or braille) of a copyrighted work to provide improved access to a work
for blind and visually impaired persons without permission from the copyright holder.[38][39]
Transfer and licensing, and assignment

A copyright, or aspects of it, may be assigned or
transferred from one party to another.[40] For example, a
musician who records an album will often sign an
agreement with a record company in which the musician
agrees to transfer all copyright in the recordings in
exchange for royalties and other considerations. The
creator (and original copyright holder) benefits, or
expects to, from production and marketing capabilities
far beyond those of the author. In the digital age of
music, music may be copied and distributed at minimal
DVD: All Rights Reserved.
cost through the Internet; however, the record industry
attempts to provide promotion and marketing for the
artist and his or her work so it can reach a much larger audience. A copyright holder need not transfer all
rights completely, though many publishers will insist. Some of the rights may be transferred, or else the
copyright holder may grant another party a non-exclusive license to copy and/or distribute the work in a
particular region or for a specified period of time.
A transfer or licence may have to meet particular formal requirements in order to be effective,[41] for
example under the Australian Copyright Act 1968 the copyright itself must be expressly transferred in
writing. Under the U.S. Copyright Act, a transfer of ownership in copyright must be memorialized in a
writing signed by the transferor. For that purpose, ownership in copyright includes exclusive licenses of
rights. Thus exclusive licenses, to be effective, must be granted in a written instrument signed by the grantor.
No special form of transfer or grant is required. A simple document that identifies the work involved and the
rights being granted is sufficient. Non-exclusive grants (often called non-exclusive licenses) need not be in
writing under U.S. law. They can be oral or even implied by the behavior of the parties. Transfers of
copyright ownership, including exclusive licenses, may and should be recorded in the U.S. Copyright
Office. (Information on recording transfers is available on the Office's web site.) While recording is not
required to make the grant effective, it offers important benefits, much like those obtained by recording a
deed in a real estate transaction.
Copyright may also be licensed.[40] Some jurisdictions may provide that certain classes of copyrighted
22-06-2016 00:51
10 of 16
works be made available under a prescribed statutory license (e.g. musical works in the United States used
for radio broadcast or performance). This is also called a compulsory license, because under this scheme,
anyone who wishes to copy a covered work does not need the permission of the copyright holder, but
instead merely files the proper notice and pays a set fee established by statute (or by an agency decision
under statutory guidance) for every copy made.[42] Failure to follow the proper procedures would place the
copier at risk of an infringement suit. Because of the difficulty of following every individual work,
copyright collectives or collecting societies and performing rights organizations (such as ASCAP, BMI, and
SESAC) have been formed to collect royalties for hundreds (thousands and more) works at once. Though
this market solution bypasses the statutory license, the availability of the statutory fee still helps dictate the
price per work collective rights organizations charge, driving it down to what avoidance of procedural hassle
would justify.
Free licences
There are a large number of free licenses, where users are granted several rights; for example, those
mentioned in the Free Software Definition, Open Source Definition, Debian Free Software Guidelines or
Definition of Free Cultural Works. Examples of free licences are the GNU General Public License, BSD
license and some Creative Commons licenses.
Founded in 2001 by James Boyle, Lawrence Lessig, and Hal Abelson, the Creative Commons (CC) is a
non-profit organization[43] which aims to facilitate the legal sharing of creative works. To this end, the
organization provides a number of copyright license options to the public, free of charge. These licenses
allow copyright holders to define conditions under which others may use a work and to specify what types
of use are acceptable.[43]
Terms of use have traditionally been negotiated on an individual basis between copyright holder and
potential licensee. Therefore, a general CC license outlining which rights the copyright holder is willing to
waive enables the general public to use such works more freely. Six general types of CC licenses are
available. These are based upon copyright holder stipulations such as whether he or she is willing to allow
modifications to the work, whether he or she permits the creation of derivative works and whether he or she
is willing to permit commercial use of the work.[44] As of 2009 approximately 130 million individuals had
received such licenses.[44]
Duration
Copyright term
Copyright subsists for a variety of lengths in different
jurisdictions. The length of the term can depend on
several factors, including the type of work (e.g. musical
composition, novel), whether the work has been
published, and whether the work was created by an
individual or a corporation. In most of the world, the
default length of copyright is the life of the author plus
either 50 or 70 years. In the United States, the term for
most existing works is a fixed number of years after the
date of creation or publication. Under most countries'
laws (for example, the United States[45] and the United
Kingdom[46]), copyrights expire at the end of the
calendar year in question.
Expansion of U.S. copyright law (currently based

on the date of creation or publication).
22-06-2016 00:51
11 of 16
The length and requirements for copyright duration are subject to change by legislation, and since the early
20th century there have been a number of adjustments made in various countries, which can make
determining the duration of a given copyright somewhat difficult. For example, the United States used to
require copyrights to be renewed after 28 years to stay in force, and formerly required a copyright notice
upon first publication to gain coverage. In Italy and France, there were post-wartime extensions that could
increase the term by approximately 6 years in Italy and up to about 14 in France. Many countries have
extended the length of their copyright terms (sometimes retroactively). International treaties establish
minimum terms for copyrights, but individual countries may enforce longer terms than those.[47]
In the United States, all books and other works published before 1923 have expired copyrights and are in the
public domain.[48] In addition, works published before 1964 that did not have their copyrights renewed 28
years after first publication year also are in the public domain. Hirtle points out that the great majority of
these works (including 93% of the books) were not renewed after 28 years and are in the public domain.[49]
Books originally published outside the US by non-Americans are exempt from this renewal requirement, if
they are still under copyright in their home country.
But if the intended exploitation of the work includes publication (or distribution of derivative work, such as
a film based on a book protected by copyright) outside the U.S., the terms of copyright around the world
must be considered. If the author has been dead more than 70 years, the work is in the public domain in
most, but not all, countries.
In 1998, the length of a copyright in the United States was increased by 20 years under the Copyright Term
Extension Act. This legislation was strongly promoted by corporations which had valuable copyrights which
otherwise would have expired, and has been the subject of substantial criticism on this point.[50]
As a curiosity, the famous work Peter Pan, or The Boy Who Wouldn't Grow Up has a complex and
disputed story of copyright expiry.[51]
Public domain
Copyright, like other intellectual property rights, is subject to a statutorily determined term. Once the term of
a copyright has expired, the formerly copyrighted work enters the public domain and may be freely used or
exploited by anyone. Courts in common law countries, such as the United States and the United Kingdom,
have rejected the doctrine of a common law copyright. Public domain works should not be confused with
works that are publicly available. Works posted in the internet, for example, are publicly available, but are
not generally in the public domain. Copying such works may therefore violate the author's copyright.
Copyright infringement
For a work to be considered to infringe upon copyright, its use must have occurred in a nation that has
domestic copyright laws and/or adheres to a bilateral treaty or established international convention such as
the Berne Convention or WIPO Copyright Treaty. Improper use of materials outside of legislation is deemed
"unauthorized edition", not copyright infringement.[52]
Copyright infringement most often occurs to software, film and music. However, infringement upon books
and other text works remains common, especially for educational reasons. Statistics regarding the effects of
copyright infringement are difficult to determine. Studies have attempted to determine whether there is a
monetary loss for industries affected by copyright infringement by predicting what portion of pirated works
would have been formally purchased if they had not been freely available.[53] Other reports indicate that
copyright infringement does not have an adverse effect on the entertainment industry, and can have a
positive effect.[54] In particular, a 2014 university study concluded that free music content, accessed on
YouTube, does not necessarily hurt sales, instead has the potential to increase sales.[55]
22-06-2016 00:51
12 of 16
See also
Adelphi Charter
Artificial scarcity
Conflict of laws
Copyright Alliance
Copyright in architecture in the United States
Copyright on the content of patents and in the
context of patent prosecution
Copyright for Creativity
Copyright infringement of software
Copyright on religious works
Creative Barcode
Digital rights management
Digital watermarking
Entertainment law
Freedom of panorama
History of copyright law
Intellectual property education
Intellectual property protection of typefaces

List of Copyright Acts
List of copyright case law
List of parties to international copyright
agreements
Model release
Paracopyright
Photography and the law
Pirate Party
Private copying levy
Production music
Rent-seeking
Reproduction fees
RiP!: A Remix Manifesto
Samizdat
Software copyright
Threshold pledge system
Treaties and international agreements

Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works of 1886
Rome Convention for the Protection of Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting
Organizations of 1961
Trans-Pacific Partnership
Trans-Pacific Partnership Intellectual Property Provisions
Universal Copyright Convention of 1952
World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty of 1996
WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty of 1996
The World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
(TRIPS), of 1994
Alternate views
Alternative compensation system
Anti-copyright
Copyleft
Copynorms
Copyright aspects of downloading and
streaming
Copyright aspects of hyperlinking and framing
Creative Commons
Creative Commons jurisdiction ports
Creative Commons license

Crypto-anarchism
Database right
Digital rights
Free Culture, a 2004 book by Lawrence
Lessig
Good Copy Bad Copy (documentary)
Permission culture neologism by Lawrence
Lessig
References
1. See Ideas (http://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/unprotected.html#ideas) in B
,W
U
C
L ; Chapter 1: An Overview of Copyright (http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise9.html),
22-06-2016 00:51
13 of 16
Section II.E. Ideas Versus Expression.

2. See Harvard Law School, Module 3: The Scope of Copyright Law (http://cyber.law.harvard.edu
/copyrightforlibrarians/Module_3:_The_Scope_of_Copyright_Law#Fixation). See also Tyler T. Ochoa,
Copyright, Derivative Works and Fixation: Is Galoob a Mirage, or Does the Form(GEN) of the Alleged
Derivative Work Matter? (http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/chtlj/vol20/iss4/5), 20 S
C
H
T
.
L.J. 991, 9991002 (2003) ("Thus, both the text of the Act and its legislative history demonstrate that Congress
intended that a derivative work does not need to be fixed in order to infringe."). The legislative history of the
1976 Copyright Act says this difference was intended to address transitory works such as ballets, pantomimes,
improvised performances, dumb shows, mime performances, and dancing.
3. Copyright, University of California, 2014, retrieved 2014-12-15
4. 17 U.S.C. 106, United States of America, 2011, retrieved 2014-12-15
5. "International Copyright Law Survey". Mincov Law Corporation.
6. Copyright in Historical Perspective, p. 136-137, Patterson, 1968, Vanderbilt Univ. Press
7. "Statute of Anne". Copyrighthistory.com. Retrieved 2012-06-08.
8. Bettig, Ronald V. (1996). Copyrighting Culture: The Political Economy of Intellectual Property. Westview Press.
p. 917. ISBN 0-8133-1385-6.
9. Ronan, Deazley (2006). Rethinking copyright: history, theory, language. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 13.
ISBN 978-1-84542-282-0. Archived from the original on 19 November 2011.
10. Pelanda, Brian. Declarations of Cultural Independence: The Nationalistic Imperative Behind the Passage of Early
American Copyright Laws, 17831787 (http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1941506) 58 Journal
of the Copyright Society of the U.S.A. 431 (2011).
11. Stephan Kinsella (174 Posts) (2011-12-01). "Thomas Jeffersons Proposal to Limit the Length of Patent and
Copyright in the Bill of Rights". Libertarianstandard.com. Retrieved 2012-06-08.
12. Frank Thadeusz (18 August 2010). "No Copyright Law: The Real Reason for Germany's Industrial Expansion?".
Der Spiegel. Retrieved 11 April 2015.
13. "Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works Article 5". World Intellectual Property
Organization. Retrieved 2011-11-18.
14. Garfinkle, Ann M; Fries, Janet; Lopez, Daniel; Possessky, Laura (1997). "Art conservation and the legal
obligation to preserve artistic intent". JAIC 36 (2): 165179.
15. "International Copyright Relations of the United States" (http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ38a.pdf),
U.S. Copyright Office Circular No. 38a, August 2003.
16. Parties to the Geneva Act of the Universal Copyright Convention (http://www.unesco.org/culture/copyright
/html_eng/ucc52ms.pdf) as of 2000-01-01: the dates given in the document are dates of ratification, not dates of
coming into force. The Geneva Act came into force on 16 September 1955, for the first twelve to have ratified
(which included four non-members of the Berne Union as required by Art. 9.1), or three months after ratification
for other countries. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/20080625003242/http://www.unesco.org/culture
/copyright/html_eng/ucc52ms.pdf) June 25, 2008, at the Wayback Machine.
17. 165 Parties to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works
(http://www.copyright.ht/en) as of May 2012.
18. MacQueen, Hector L; Charlotte Waelde; Graeme T Laurie (2007). Contemporary Intellectual Property: Law and
Policy. Oxford University Press. p. 39. ISBN 978-0-19-926339-4.
19. Peter K, Yu (2007). Intellectual Property and Information Wealth: Copyright and related rights. Greenwood
Publishing Group. p. 346. ISBN 978-0-275-98883-8. External link in |title= (help)
20. World Intellectual Property Organization. "Understanding Copyright and Related Rights" (PDF). WIPO. p. 8.
Retrieved August 2008.
21. Simon, Stokes (2001). Art and copyright. Hart Publishing. pp. 4849. ISBN 978-1-84113-225-9. External link in
|title= (help)
22. (2012) Copyright Protection Not Available for Names, Titles, or Short Phrases U.S. Copyright Office
(http://copyright.gov/circs/circ34.pdf)
23. Express Newspaper Plc v News (UK) Plc, F.S.R. 36 (1991)
24. "Subject Matter and Scope of Copyright" (PDF). copyright.gov. Retrieved 4 June 2015.
25. 17 U.S.C. 201(b); Cmty. for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, 490 U.S. 730 (1989)
26. Copyright Act of 1976, Pub.L. 94553 (http://legislink.org/us/pl-94-553), 90 Stat. 2541, 401(a) (19 October
1976)
27. The Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988 (BCIA), Pub.L. 100568 (http://legislink.org/us/pl-100-568),
102 Stat. 2853, 2857. One of the changes introduced by the BCIA was to section 401, which governs copyright
notices on published copies, specifying that notices "may be placed on" such copies; prior to the BCIA, the
statute read that notices "shall be placed on all" such copies. An analogous change was made in section 402,
dealing with copyright notices on phonorecords.
22-06-2016 00:51
14 of 16
28. "U.S. Copyright Office Information Circular" (PDF). Retrieved 2012-07-07.

29. 17 U.S.C. 401(d) (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/401(d))
30. Copyright in General "I've heard about a 'poor man's copyright.' What is it?" (http://www.copyright.gov
/help/faq/faq-general.html#poorman), U.S Copyright Office
31. "Copyright Registers" (http://www.ipo.gov.uk/copy/c-claim/c-register.htm), United Kingdom Intellectual
Property Office
32. "Automatic right" (http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy/c-about/c-auto.htm), United Kingdom Intellectual Property
Office
33. Peter K, Yu (2007). Intellectual Property and Information Wealth: Copyright and related rights. Greenwood
Publishing Group. p. 346. ISBN 978-0-275-98883-8.
34. Tom G. Palmer, "Are Patents and Copyrights Morally Justified?" (http://www.tomgpalmer.com/wp-content
/uploads/papers/morallyjustified.pdf) Accessed 5 February 2013.
35. "U.S Copyright Office Copyright Law: Chapter 1" (PDF). Retrieved 2012-06-27.
36. "John Wiley & Sons Inc. v. Kirtsaeng" (PDF).
37. "US CODE: Title 17,107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use". .law.cornell.edu. 2009-05-20. Retrieved
2009-06-16.
38. Copyright Law of the USA, Chapter 1 Section 121 (http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#121)
39. Copyright (Visually Impaired Persons) Act 2002 (England) (http://www.rnib.org.uk/xpedio/groups/public
/documents/publicwebsite/public_cvipsact2002.hcsp)
40. WIPO Guide on the Licensing of Copyright and Related Rights. World Intellectual Property Organization. 2004.
p. 15. ISBN 978-92-805-1271-7. External link in |title= (help)
43. "Creative Commons Website". creativecommons.org. Retrieved 24 October 2011.
44. Rubin, R. E. (2010) 'Foundations of Library and Information Science: Third Edition', Neal-Schuman Publishers,
Inc., New York, p. 341
45. 17 U.S.C. 305 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/305)
46. The Duration of Copyright and Rights in Performances Regulations 1995, part II (http://www.opsi.gov.uk
/si/si1995/Uksi_19953297_en_3.htm), Amendments of the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
47. Nimmer, David (2003). Copyright: Sacred Text, Technology, and the DMCA. Kluwer Law International. p. 63.
ISBN 978-90-411-8876-2. OCLC 50606064.
48. "Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States (http://copyright.cornell.edu/resources
/publicdomain.cfm).", Cornell University.
49. See Peter B. Hirtle, "Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States 1 January 2015" online at
footnote 8 (https://copyright.cornell.edu/resources/publicdomain.cfm)
50. Lawrence Lessig, Copyright's First Amendment, 48 UCLA L. Rev. 1057, 1065 (2001)
51. "Stanford Center for Internet and Society". Web.archive.org. Archived from the original on 2006-10-27.
Retrieved 2010-05-08.
52. Owen, L. (2001). "Piracy". Learned Publishing 14: 6770. doi:10.1087/09531510125100313.
53. Butler, S. Piracy Losses "Billboard" 199(36)
54. "Urheberrechtsverletzungen im Internet: Der bestehende rechtliche Rahmen gengt". Ejpd.admin.ch.
55. Tobias Kretschmer & Christian Peukert (2014). [Abstract PDF "Video Killed the Radio Star? Online Music
Videos and Digital Music Sales"] Check |url= value (help) (PDF). Social Science Electronic Publishing.
ISSN 2042-2695.
Further reading
Dowd, Raymond J. (2006). Copyright Litigation Handbook (1st ed.). Thomson West. ISBN 0-314-96279-4.
Ellis, Sara R. Copyrighting Couture: An Examination of Fashion Design Protection and Why the DPPA and
IDPPPA are a Step Towards the Solution to Counterfeit Chic, 78 Tenn. L. Rev. 163 (2010), available at
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1735745.
Gantz, John; Rochester, Jack B. (2005). Pirates of the Digital Millennium. Financial Times Prentice Hall.
ISBN 0-13-146315-2.
Ghosemajumder, Shuman. Advanced Peer-Based Technology Business Models (http://dspace.mit.edu/handle
/1721.1/8438). MIT Sloan School of Management, 2002.
22-06-2016 00:51
15 of 16
Lehman, Bruce: Intellectual Property and the National Information Infrastructure (Report of the Working Group
on Intellectual Property Rights, 1995)
Lindsey, Marc: Copyright Law on Campus. Washington State University Press, 2003. ISBN 978-0-87422-264-7.
Mazzone, Jason. Copyfraud. SSRN (http://ssrn.com/abstract=787244)
McDonagh, Luke. Is Creative use of Musical Works without a licence acceptable under Copyright? International
Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law (IIC) 4 (2012) 401-426, available at SSRN
(http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2521081)
Nimmer, Melville; David Nimmer (1997). Nimmer on Copyright. Matthew Bender. ISBN 0-8205-1465-9.
Patterson, Lyman Ray (1968). Copyright in Historical Perspective. Online Version. Vanderbilt University Press.
ISBN 0-8265-1373-5.
Rife, by Martine Courant. Convention, Copyright, and Digital Writing (Southern Illinois University Press; 2013)
222 pages; Examines legal, pedagogical, and other aspects of online authorship.
Rosen, Ronald (2008). Music and Copyright. Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press.
ISBN 0-19-533836-7.
Shipley, David E. Thin But Not Anorexic: Copyright Protection for Compilations and Other Fact Works
(http://ssrn.com/abstract=1076789) UGA Legal Studies Research Paper No. 08-001; Journal of Intellectual
Property Law, Vol. 15, No. 1, 2007.
Silverthorne, Sean. Music Downloads: Pirates- or Customers? (http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item.jhtml?id=4206&
t=innovation). Harvard Business School Working Knowledge, 2004.
Sorce Keller, Marcello. "Originality, Authenticity and Copyright", Sonus, VII(2007), no. 2, pp. 7785.
Steinberg, S.H.; Trevitt, John (1996). Five Hundred Years of Printing (4th ed.). London and New Castle: The
British Library and Oak Knoll Press. ISBN 1-884718-19-1.
Story, Alan; Darch, Colin; Halbert, Deborah, eds. (2006). The Copy/South Dossier: Issues in the Economics,
Politics and Ideology of Copyright in the Global South [1] (http://copysouth.org/en/documents/csdossier.pdf).
Copy/South Research Group. ISBN 978-0-9553140-1-8. External link in |title= (help)
WhyNotAskMe.org (http://whynotaskme.org/): Organization demanding democratic participation in copyright
legislation and a moratorium on secret and fast-tracked copyright negotiations
External links
Quotations related to Copyright at Wikiquote
Wikisource has the text of
Media related to Copyright at Wikimedia Commons
the 1911 Encyclopdia
Copyright (https://www.dmoz.org/Society
Britannica article
/Law/Legal_Information/Intellectual_Property/Copyrights) at
Copyright.
DMOZ
Wikisource has original
Collection of laws for electronic access (http://www.wipo.int
text related to this article:
/clea/en/) from WIPO intellectual property laws of many
Copyright law
countries
Compendium of Copyright Practices (http://purl.fdlp.gov
/GPO/gpo55676) (3rd ed.) United States Copyright Office
Copyright (http://ucblibraries.colorado.edu/govpubs/us/copyrite.htm) from UCB Libraries GovPubs
About Copyright (http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/copy.htm) at the UK Intellectual Property Office
A Bibliography on the Origins of Copyright and Droit d'Auteur (http://www.lawtech.jus.unitn.it
/index.php/copyright-history/bibliography)
6.912 Introduction to Copyright Law (http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electrical-engineeringand-computer-science/6-912-introduction-to-copyright-law-january-iap-2006/) taught by Keith
Winstein, MIT OpenCourseWare January IAP 2006
Copyright Berne Convention: Country List (http://www.wipo.int/treaties
/en/ShowResults.jsp?country_id=ALL&start_year=ANY&end_year=ANY&search_what=C&
treaty_id=15) List of the 164 members of the Berne Convention for the protection of literary and
artistic works
UK Copyright Law fact sheet (http://www.copyrightservice.co.uk/copyright/p01_uk_copyright_law)
(April 2000) a concise introduction to UK Copyright legislation
22-06-2016 00:51
16 of 16
IPR Toolkit An Overview, Key Issues and Toolkit Elements (http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo

/themes/content/contentalliance/reports/ipr.aspx) (September 2009) by Professor Charles Oppenheim
and Naomi Korn at the Strategic Content Alliance (http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/themes/content
/contentalliance.aspx)
MIT OpenCourseWare 6.912 Introduction to Copyright Law (http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/electricalengineering-and-computer-science/6-912-introduction-to-copyright-law-january-iap-2006/) Free
self-study course with video lectures as offered during the January 2006, Independent Activities
Period (IAP)
Early Copyright Records (http://www.loc.gov/rr/rarebook/coll/067.html) From the Rare Book and
Special Collections Division at the Library of Congress (http://www.loc.gov/rr/rarebook/)
Copyright Law of the United States Documents (http://copyright.gov/title17/), US Government
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Copyright&oldid=726352851"
Categories: Copyright law Data management Intellectual property law Metadata
Monopoly (economics) Public records
This page was last modified on 21 June 2016, at 16:52.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may
apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia is a registered
trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
22-06-2016 00:51

Copyright

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Copyright

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Copyright

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

individual property. However, with copyright laws, intellectual

The original length of copyright in the United States was 14 years,

The Copyright Act of 1790 in the

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The 1886 Berne Convention first established recognition

The Pirate PublisherAn International Burlesque

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Obtaining and enforcing copyright

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cost of enforcing copyright

Copyright notices in the United States

A copyright symbol used in

In 1989 the United States enacted the Berne Convention Implementation

"Poor man's copyright"

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

to create derivative works (works that adapt the original work)

Limitations and exceptions to copyright

The first-sale doctrine and exhaustion of rights

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Fair use and fair dealing

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Transfer and licensing, and assignment

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Expansion of U.S. copyright law (currently based

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Intellectual property protection of typefaces

Treaties and international agreements

Creative Commons license

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Section II.E. Ideas Versus Expression.

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

28. "U.S. Copyright Office Information Circular" (PDF). Retrieved 2012-07-07.

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Copyright - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

IPR Toolkit An Overview, Key Issues and Toolkit Elements (http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo

You might also like