Walker_ID posted:
Surge_MT posted:
Considering the specifics of this case, I don't really have a problem with it. The works in question are foreign works that are still copyrighted in their respective countries, yet they were allowed to be imported into the US public domain. This isn't a case of an expired copyright being re-copyrighted as might be implied by the headline.
the case in which the ruling came doesn't matter....what matters is the ruling itself which is broad and sweeping and doesn't apply to just the scenario you mentioned....
Actually it does, if you read the decision, and not just base your comments on the article. For example, the following was a factor in the decision on why re-copyrighting these works does not violate the current copyright laws:
"Nor had the “limited Tim[e]†already passed for the works at issue here—many of them works formerly denied any U. S. copyright protection—for a period of exclusivity must begin before it may end"
They also reference historical precedence in US law:
"Historical practice corroborates the Court’s reading of the Copyright Clause to permit the protection of previously unprotected works. In the Copyright Act of 1790, the First Congress protected works that had been freely reproducible under State copyright laws."
They also state that:
"Works that have fallen into the public domain after the expiration of a full copyright term—either in the United States or the country of origin—receive no further protection under §514."
meaning that once a copyrighted work lawfully enters the public domain, it can no longer be re-copyrighted.
-----signature-----
The scripts/links below don't work anymore...I should really change my signature:
Skill Calculator:
http://www.strikefast.net/skillcalc/
Salvage Calculator:
http://www.strikefast.net/tinkering/salvaging/
***
09-11-01
