Copyright
Copyright covers the expression of an idea, not the idea itself—this is called the idea-expression divide. For example, if a book is written describing a new way to organize books in library, a reader can freely use that method without being sued and even describe it to others; it is only the particular way in which the original author described that process that is protected by copyright. One might be able to obtain a patent for the method, but that is a different subject. Compilations of facts or data may be copyrighted if the facts are selected and arranged in an original manner, though protection will only apply to wholesale copying of that selection and arrangement and not to the facts themselves.
In some cases, ideas may only be capable of intelligible expression in only one or a limited number of ways. Therefore even the expression in these circumstances is unprotected, or extremely limited to verbatim copying only. In the United States this is known as the merger doctrine, because the expression is considered to be inextricably merged with the idea. Merger is often pleaded as an affirmative defense to infringement, though some believe that it should prevent the material at issue from being copyrighted in the first place.
Subject to moral rights, copyright also does not prohibit the owner of a physical copy of a work from modifying, defacing, destroying, etc. the work, so long as this does not involve duplication.
In the United States, the original owner of the copyright may be the employer of the actual author rather than the author himself if the work is a "work for hire". Again, this principle is widespread; in English Law the Copyright Designs and Patents 1988 provides that where a work in which copyright subsists is made by an employee in the course of his employment, the copyright is automatically assigned to the employer.
Copyrights are generally enforced by the owner in a civil law court,
but there are also criminal infringement statutes. Criminal sanctions are generally aimed at serious counterfeiting activity.
In Europe, Germany (in 1981) and the UK (in 1989) have passed laws making typeface designs copyrightable. The UK law is even retroactive, so designs produced before 1989 are also copyrighted, if the copyrights wouldn't have already expired (the German one is not retroactive).
Many European countries (and other countries as a result of the GATT Trade Related Intellectual Property or "TRIPs" agreement) further provide for moral rights in addition to copyrights possessed by authors, such as the right to have
their work acknowledged and not be disparaged. (Famously, the Monty Python team managed to use these rights to stop the Monty Python TV programme being shown in the US because the US TV station was putting so many adverts into the program the Monty Python team claimed that it was being ruined as a serious comedy programme.)
While copyright is normally assigned or licensed to the publisher, authors
generally retain their moral rights (although in some jurisdictions these can be excluded under contract). In most of Europe it is not possible for authors to assign their moral rights (unlike the copyright itself, which is regarded as an item of property which can be sold, licensed, lent, mortgaged or given like any other property). They can agree not to enforce them (and such terms are very common in contracts in Europe). There may also be a requirement for the author to 'assert' these moral rights before they can be enforced. In many books, for example, this is done on a page near the beginning, in amongst the British Library/Library of Congress data.
Some European countries also provide for artist resale rights, which mean
that artists are entitled to a portion of the appreciation of the value of
their work each time it is sold. These rights are granted on the background of a different tradition, which granted droits d'auteur rather than copyright also granting all creators various moral rights beyond the economic rights recognized in most copyright jurisdictions. (see also parallel importation.)
Main article: History of copyright
While governments had previously granted monopoly rights to publishers
to sell printed works, the modern concept of copyright originated in 1710
with the British Statute of Anne.
This statute first recognized that authors, rather than publishers, should be
the primary beneficiary of such laws, and it included protections for consumers
of printed work ensuring that publishers could not control their use after
sale.
It also limited the duration of such exclusive rights to 28 years, after
which all works would pass into the public domain.
The Berne Convention of 1886 first established the recognition of
copyrights between sovereign nations.
(Copyrights were also provided by the
Universal Copyright Convention of 1952, but that convention is today largely of historical interest.)
Under the Berne convention, copyright is granted automatically to creative
works; an author does not have to "register" or "apply for" a copyright.
As soon as the work is "fixed", that is, written or recorded on some
physical medium, its author is automatically granted all exclusive rights
to the work and any derivative works unless and until the author explicitly
disclaims them, or until the copyright expires.
Critiques of copyright fall broadly into two camps, those who assert that the very concept of copyright has never been of net benefit to society, and has always served simply to enrich a few at the expense of creativity, and those who feel that the current copyright system doesn't work in the new Information society.
The general problem is that the current (international) copyright system undermines its own goal (Boyle 1996, 142). The concept of public domain, needed as a pool for future creators, is far too often forgotten or repressed, due to the strong position of the concept of the romantic author, and selective blindness for the possibilities concerning copyright that the Internet and computers offer. Except for unlimited copying, it offers, as said, also new ways for marketing and, more important, the possibilities of code; much depends of course on how code is used (code can be used and is in most of the cases also used in a positive way), but in various cases it threatens not only the public domain in a serious way, but is also ignored when talking about "restoring the balance" which is said to be gravely disturbed by the so called unlimited copying possibilities the Internet creates. [1]
Others believe that irrespective of contemporary advances in technology, copyright has been and remains the fundamental way by which authors, sculptors, artists, musicians and others can fund the creation of new works. This view espouses that copyright is the only reason some valuable books and art would be created. But the ease of copying digital materials and the apparent lack of severe consequences gradually erodes the belief that copyright as presently constructed is indispensable. Open source software and projects like Wikipedia proves that even in the absence of copyright-enforced monopoly rents, quality works can be created. Some online authors, while retaining the copyright, imply that only authorship attribution right is important, by implicitly allowing the copying provided that the link to original material is created.
In the US in 2003, controversial changes implemented by the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act extending the length of copyright under U.S. copyright law by 20 years were constitutionally challenged unsuccessfully in the Supreme Court. The Court, in the case called Eldred v. Ashcroft, held inter alia that in placing existing and future copyrights in parity in the CTEA, Congress acted within its authority and did not transgress constitutional limitations.
See also: Copyright infringement of software, Permission culture
Background
Rights of copyright holder
A copyright holder typically has exclusive rights:
What is meant by the phrase "exclusive right" is that the copyright holder and only the copyright holder is allowed to do these things; everyone else is prohibited from doing them without the copyright holder's consent. Copyright is often called a "negative right", to stress that it has less to do with permitting people (e.g. authors) to do anything, and more to do with prohibiting people (e.g. readers, viewers, or listeners) from doing something: reproducing the copyrighted work. In this way it is similar to the Unregistered Design Right in English Law and European Law.Transfer of rights
Copyrights may be granted, sold, or relinquished. Very often, a copyright holder will, by contract, transfer his copyrights to a corporation. For example, a writer who writes a novel will sign a publication agreement with a company such as Random House in which the writer agrees to transfer all copyrights to Random House in exchange for royalties and other terms. One might ask why a copyright holder would ever give up his rights. The answer is that large companies such as Random House generally have production and marketing capabilities far beyond that of the author. In the digital age of music, music may be copied and distributed for a minimal cost through the Internet, but record labels attempt to provide the service of promoting and marketing the artist so that his work can reach a much larger audience. A copyright holder does not have to transfer all rights completely. 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.Idea-expression dichotomy and the Merger Doctrine
Main article: Idea-expression divideDoctrine of first sale
Note that copyright law does not restrict resale of copies of works, provided those copies were made by or with the permission of the copyright holder. Thus it is legal, for example, to resell a book or a CD that you have purchased, provided you do not keep a copy for yourself. In the US this is known as the First Sale Doctrine, and was established in the US court system to clarify the legality of reselling books in used book stores. Elsewhere it has other names; in the United Kingdom it is known as "Exhaustion of rights" and is a principle which applies to other Intellectual property rights. Fair use
Copyright also does not prohibit all forms of copying. In the United States, the fair use clause of the Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. Section 107) allows copying and distribution when done fairly. The statute does not clearly define fair use, but examples of fair use are given, and four non-exclusive factors are offered for a fair use analysis. Copyrighted works may also be available for copying through a statutory compulsory license scheme or via a copyright collective or performing rights organisation such as ASCAP or BMI.How copyrights are obtained and enforced
Typically, works must meet minimal standards of originality in order to qualify for a copyright, and the copyright expires after a set period of time.
Different countries impose different tests, although generally the test is low; in the United Kingdom there has to be some 'skill, originality and work' which has gone into it. However, even fairly trivial amounts of these qualities are sufficient.How copyrighted material is identified
In general when a piece of material such as a film (including DVDs and Videos) and/or music is registered with the appropriate country's copyright office, the material at the beginning or end may contain a copyright notice which can be a c inside a circle é, or the word "copyright", followed by the year(s) of the copyright and the copyright owner's name. However, such notice is not required in nations that have acceded to the Berne Convention. In one way or another, under nearly any copyright regime, a work is generally protected by copyright from the moment of its creation (in the United States the usual phrase is "fixed in a tangible medium of expression") whether it displays a notice or not.Year(s) of copyright
The year(s) of copyright are listed after the é symbol. If the work has been modified (ie. a new edition) and recopyrighted there will be more than one year listed.All rights reserved
The phrase, All rights reserved, is a formal notice that all rights granted under existing copyright law are retained by the copyright holder and that legal action may be taken against copyright infringement.Copyrighting fonts
In the United States, typeface designs are not copyrightable, but may be patentable if novel enough.Rights beyond copyright
History of copyright
Critique of copyright
Related topics
National copyright laws
International treaties concerning copyright
Advocates of copyright law reform
See also
Further reading
External links