Something is afoot with copyright this Public Domain Day; The Guardian, January 1, 2023

John Naughton, The Guardian; Something is afoot with copyright this Public Domain Day

"The issue highlighted by Public Domain Day is not that intellectual property is evil but that aspects of it – especially copyright – have been monopolised and weaponised by corporate interests and that legislators have been supine in the face of their lobbying. Authors and inventors need protection against being ripped off. It’s obviously important that clever people are rewarded for their creativity and the patent system does that quite well. But if a patent only lasts for 20 years, why on earth should copyright last for life plus 70 years for a novel? You only have to ask the question to realise that the founders of the American republic at least got that one right. Happy new year."

January 1, 2023 is Public Domain Day: Works from 1927 are open to all!; Duke Law's Center for the Study of the Public Domain, January 1, 2023

Jennifer Jenkins, Director; Duke Law's Center for the Study of the Public Domain ; January 1, 2023 is Public Domain Day: Works from 1927 are open to all!

"On January 1, 2023, copyrighted works from 1927 will enter the US public domain. 1  They will be free for all to copy, share, and build upon. These include Virginia Woolf’s To The Lighthouse and the final Sherlock Holmes stories by Arthur Conan Doyle, the German science-fiction film Metropolis and Alfred Hitchcock’s first thriller, compositions by Louis Armstrong and Fats Waller, and a novelty song about ice cream. Please note that this site is only about US law; the copyright terms in other countries are different."

You can’t copyright AI-created art, according to US officials; Engadget; February 21, 2022

K. Holt, Engadget; You can’t copyright AI-created art, according to US officials

"The US Copyright Office has once again denied an effort to copyright a work of art that was created by an artificial intelligence system. Dr. Stephen Thaler attempted to copyright a piece of art titled A Recent Entrance to Paradise, claiming in a second request for reconsideration of a 2019 ruling that the USCO's “human authorship” requirement was unconstitutional.

In its latest ruling, which was spotted by The Verge, the agency accepted that the work was created by an AI, which Thaler calls the Creativity Machine. Thaler applied to register the work as "as a work-for-hire to the owner of the Creativity Machine.”"

Ryan Reynolds taunts Disney with ‘Winnie-the-Screwed’ ad as copyright battles heat up; Fast Company, January 3, 2022

JEFF BEER, Fast Company; Ryan Reynolds taunts Disney with ‘Winnie-the-Screwed’ ad as copyright battles heat up

Mint Mobile finds a way to make the copyrights of a 1926 classic children’s tale about your cellular bill.

"The new Mint Mobile ad is typical Reynolds ad fare, quickly and creatively tapping into a broader cultural conversation for one of his brands. That cultural conversation, however, is only going to get louder, especially for Disney. While it is symbolic that the original Mickey Mouse cartoon, Steamboat Willie, is up for public domain two years from now, more pressing are the copyright issues facing key Marvel characters this year.

As reported last fall, multiple former Marvel creators and their estates are challenging Disney with ongoing copyright termination cases around characters like Thor, Spider-Man, Iron Man, and Dr. Strange. These cases, which could go as high as the Supreme Court (as it almost did back in 2014, when the company reached a settlement with the estate of Jack Kirby), stem from the Copyright Revision Act of 1976, which provided an opportunity for authors or their heirs to regain ownership of a product after a given number of years."

Our View: Copyright absurdity must come to an end; Leader-Telegram, January 4, 2022

Leader-Telegram; Our View: Copyright absurdity must come to an end

"It’s far easier to argue that today’s copyright laws are largely beneficial to corporations who don’t want the money from the merchandising spigot turned off. Those companies are the true beneficiaries of 95-year coverage.

Protecting authors and creators is one thing. Ad infinitum extensions for wealthy corporate interests are quite another. It’s time to end this nonsense. We’re not advocating a rollback of the current terms, but we do oppose further extensions.

Absurd laws create contempt for all laws, and the absurdity of the current copyright approach is clear. It should not be compounded."

Column: ‘Winnie-the-Pooh’ (born 1926) is finally in the public domain, a reminder that our copyright system is absurd; Los Angeles Times, January 3, 2022

MICHAEL HILTZIK, Los Angeles Times; Column: ‘Winnie-the-Pooh’ (born 1926) is finally in the public domain, a reminder that our copyright system is absurd

"As it happens, however, this massive release isn’t something entirely worth celebrating. Instead, it’s a pointer to the sheer absurdity of American copyright law, which long ago came under the thumb of the entertainment industry and distant heirs of artists determined to preserve what is essentially a windfall."

Ryan Reynolds Takes Advantage of Winnie-the-Pooh's Public Domain Status for Mint Mobile Ad; CBR.com, January 3, 2021

Kellie Lacey, CBR.com; Ryan Reynolds Takes Advantage of Winnie-the-Pooh's Public Domain Status for Mint Mobile Ad

With A.A. Milne's Winnie-the-Pooh now in the public domain, Deadpool's Ryan Reynolds wastes no time making his own version to promote Mint Mobile.

"In a short video, Reynolds introduces the tale of "Winnie-the-Screwed" and his big wireless bill...

United States copyright laws typically come with a 95-year shelf life on published works, and as of Jan. 1, both Winnie-the-Pooh by A.A. Milne and Felix Saten's Bambi, a Life in the Woods became public domain. This is why Reynolds' video can adhere so closely to the original without fear of legal action."

January 1, 2019 is (finally) Public Domain Day: Works from 1923 are open to all!; Center for the Study of the Public Domain, January 2019

Center for the Study of the Public Domain;

January 1, 2019 is (finally) Public Domain Day: Works from 1923 are open to all!

"For the first time in over 20 years, on January 1, 2019, published works will enter the US public domain.1 Works from 1923 will be free for all to use and build upon, without permission or fee. They include dramatic films such as The Ten Commandments, and comedies featuring Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, and Harold Lloyd. There are literary works by Robert Frost, Aldous Huxley, and Edith Wharton, the “Charleston” song, and more. And remember, this has not happened for over 20 years. Why? Works from 1923 were set to go into the public domain in 1999, after a 75-year copyright term. But in 1998 Congress hit a two-decade pause button and extended their copyright term for 20 years, giving works published between 1923 and 1977 an expanded term of 95 years.2
But now the drought is over. How will people celebrate this trove of cultural material? Google Books will offer the full text of books from that year, instead of showing only snippet views or authorized previews. The Internet Archive will add books, movies, music, and more to its online library.

HathiTrust has made over 50,000 titles from 1923 available in its digital library. Community theaters are planning screenings of the films. Students will be free to adapt and publicly perform the music. Because these works are in the public domain, anyone can make them available, where you can rediscover and enjoy them. (Empirical studies have shown that public domain books are less expensive, available in more editions and formats, and more likely to be in print—see here, here, and here.) In addition, the expiration of copyright means that you’re free to use these materials, for education, for research, or for creative endeavors—whether it’s translating the books, making your own versions of the films, or building new music based on old classics.

Here are some of the works that will be entering the public domain in 2019. A fuller (but still partial) listing of over a thousand works that we have researched can be found here. (You can click on some of the titles below to get the newly public domain works.)"

Why Mickey Mouse’s 1998 copyright extension probably won’t happen again; Ars Technica, January 8, 2018

Timothy B. Lee, Ars Technica; Why Mickey Mouse’s 1998 copyright extension probably won’t happen again

"Most of the public considered copyright to be a boring subject with little relevance to their daily lives, so there was little grassroots interest in the issue. Karjala hoped that professional associations of librarians and historians—which had traditionally been important advocates for the public interest on copyright issues—would help stop the bill. But the legislation had so much momentum that these groups decided to settle for minor changes to the legislation. So the bill wound up passing without a significant fight.

The rise of the Internet has totally changed the political landscape on copyright issues. The Electronic Frontier Foundation is much larger than it was in 1998. Other groups, including Public Knowledge, didn't even exist 20 years ago. Internet companies—especially Google—have become powerful opponents of expanding copyright protections."

New Life for Old Classics, as Their Copyrights Run Out; The New York Times, December 29, 2018

Alexandra Alter, The New York Times; New Life for Old Classics, as Their Copyrights Run Out

"This coming year marks the first time in two decades that a large body of copyrighted works will lose their protected status — a shift that will have profound consequences for publishers and literary estates, which stand to lose both money and creative control.

But it will also be a boon for readers, who will have more editions to choose from, and for writers and other artists who can create new works based on classic stories without getting hit with an intellectual property lawsuit...

 

Still, many scholars and legal experts argue that American copyright law, which is mind-numbingly complex, has skewed toward enriching companies and the heirs of writers and artists at the expense of the public. When the first Copyright Act was passed in the United States in 1790, the maximum term was 28 years. Over the decades, lawmakers repeatedly prolonged the terms, which now stretch to over a century for many works. “It’s worse than the tax code,” said Rebecca Tushnet, an intellectual property expert at Harvard Law School. “The copyright term is way too long now.”"

For the First Time in More Than 20 Years, Copyrighted Works Will Enter the Public Domain; Smithsonian Magazine, January 2019

Glenn Fleishman, Smithsonian Magazine;

For the First Time in More Than 20 Years, Copyrighted Works Will Enter the Public Domain

 

"At midnight on New Year’s Eve, all works first published in the United States in 1923 will enter the public domain. It has been 21 years since the last mass expiration of copyright in the U.S."

Podcaster Sued for Copyright Infringement for Using Music without Permission - Remember ASCAP, BMI and SESAC Licenses Don’t Cover All the Rights Needed for Podcasting; Lexology, November 29, 2018

Wilkinson Barker Knauer LLP - David Oxenford, Lexology; Podcaster Sued for Copyright Infringement for Using Music without Permission - Remember ASCAP, BMI and SESAC Licenses Don’t Cover All the Rights Needed for Podcasting 

"The bottom line – don’t use music in podcasts without getting permission."

Copyright in the United States; Lexology, October 29, 2018

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP - Jeff C. Dodd, Jonathan D. Reichman and Susanna P. Lichter, Lexology; Copyright in the United States

[Kip Currier: This is a very useful and informative overview of U.S. Copyright law.]

"Can copyrightable works be protected by other IP rights (eg, trademarks and designs)?

Where applicable, copyrightable works can be protected under trademark rights, patent rights and trade secrets. 
For example, software can be protected by both patents and copyrights. The copyright would protect the artistic expression of the idea (eg, the software code itself), while the patent would protect the functional expression of the idea (eg, using a single click to purchase something online).  An additional example would be a logo for a brand. The logo serves as a trademark indicating that products affixed with the logo are from the same source. The creative and artistic aspects of the logo may also be protected by a copyright. "

Trump’s NAFTA Revision Could Further Extend Copyright Term (Or Not); Comic Book Resources, August 27, 2018

Eirik Gumeny, Comic Book Resources; Trump’s NAFTA Revision Could Further Extend Copyright Term (Or Not)

"An ambiguous press release from the United States government relating to the North American Free Trade Agreement is causing unexpected confusion for authors and copyright lawyers, as one specific document seems to state that the copyright term may be extended to 75 years. The wording, however, is unclear.

Per The Hollywood Reporter, a fact sheet released today by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative indicated that the “copyright term” — the length of time the creator of a particular work is entitled to certain protective rights — would “extend” to 75 years. Currently, the copyright term is set for the life of the author, plus 70 years."

Copyright transfer, assignment and licensing in the United States; Lexology, June 25, 2018

Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP - Jeff C. Dodd, Jonathan D. Reichman and Susanna P. Lichter,

Lexology; Copyright transfer, assignment and licensing in the United States

  

Legal Counsel: Can you copyright a tweet?; The Oklahoman, August 19, 2018

Terry L. Watt, PhD, The Oklahoman; Legal Counsel: Can you copyright a tweet?

"Although there is no clear rule concerning the ability to copyright tweets, it is likely that in most cases they are not eligible. Still, when in doubt, getting permission from the author is always advised."

How copyright law hides work like Zora Neale Hurston’s new book from the public; The Washington Post, May 7, 2018

Ted Genoways, The Washington Post; How copyright law hides work like Zora Neale Hurston’s new book from the public

"Now, according to the Vulture introduction, the Zora Neale Hurston Trust has new representation, interested in getting unpublished works into print and monetizing those archives. That’s great, from a reader’s perspective, but it also reveals a larger problem where scholarship of literature between World War I and II is concerned. It’s mostly due to the Walt Disney Co.’s efforts to protect ownership of a certain cartoon mouse. Over the years, the company has successfully worked to extend copyright restrictions far beyond the limits ever intended by the original authors of America’s intellectual property laws. Under the original Copyright Act of 1790, a work could be protected for 14 years, renewable for another 14-year term if the work’s author was still alive. In time, the maximum copyright grew from 28 years to 56 years and then to 75 years. In 1998, Sonny Bono championed an extension that would protect works created after 1978 for 70 years after the death of the author and the copyright of works created after 1922 to as long as 120 years.


This worked out great for Disney — which, not coincidentally, was founded in 1923 — but less so for the reputations of authors who produced important work between the 1920s and 1950s. Because copyright law became such a tangle, many of these works have truly languished. Here, Hurston is the rule rather than the exception. I have a file that I’ve kept over the years of significant unpublished works by well-known writers from the era: William Faulkner, Langston Hughes, William Carlos Williams, Hart Crane, Sherwood Anderson and Weldon Kees, among others. The works aren’t really “lost,” of course, but they are tied up in a legal limbo. Because of the literary reputations of those writers, their unpublished works will eventually see the light of day — whenever their heirs decide that the royalties are spreading a little too thin and there’s money to be made from new works. But other important writers who are little-known or unknown will remain so because they don’t have easily identifiable heirs — or, worse, because self-interested, or even uninterested executors, control their estates."

Libraries, Orphan Works, and the Future of Copyright; Information Today, 10/4/16

Nancy K. Herther, Information Today; Libraries, Orphan Works, and the Future of Copyright:

"Harvard Library recently released a comprehensive literature review on orphan works and copyright in “an attempt to solve the legal complexities of the orphan works problem by identifying no-risk or low-risk ways to digitize and distribute orphan works under U.S. copyright law. The project’s goal is to help clear the way for U.S. universities, libraries, archives, museums, and other cultural institutions to digitize their orphan works and make the digital copies open access.”

The review, “Digitizing Orphan Works: Legal Strategies to Reduce Risks for Open Access to Copyrighted Orphan Works,” was written by David Hansen, clinical assistant professor of law and faculty research librarian at the UNC (University of North Carolina) School of Law. Its goal is to “change the face of the orphan-works problem in the United States.”"

Ashley Madison, a Dating Website, Says Hackers May Have Data on Millions; New York Times, 7/20/15

Dino Grandoni, New York Times; Ashley Madison, a Dating Website, Says Hackers May Have Data on Millions:

"Under American copyright law, Ashley Madison has the power to scrub away private user information leaked in the breach and posted to other websites. On Monday, the company said that it had been doing just that to protect the identities of those who have used Ashley Madison.

But that may be a race that it cannot win. Paul Ferguson, senior adviser for Trend Micro, a security software provider, said that information on Ashley Madison, deleted in one online forum, is beginning to bubble up in others.

“Once something is published on the Internet,” he said, “it’s there forever.”"

Taking Back 'Funkytown': Songwriters Prepare For A Custody Battle; NPR's All Things Considered, 9/12/13

Joel Rose; NPR's All Things Considered Taking Back 'Funkytown': Songwriters Prepare For A Custody Battle: "When Congress revised U.S. copyright law in the 1970s, it granted "termination rights" to musicians and other creators, which allow them to regain control of their works after 35 years. (The law only applies to sound recordings released in 1978 or after.) Abdo says reclaiming ownership of "Funkytown" would allow his client to earn more in licensing fees and other revenues — exactly as Congress intended. "If you have a big hit or several big hits, then all of a sudden the deal that you made early in your career doesn't seem quite fair because it was very lopsided," Abdo says. "It gives the author a chance to get a second bite at the apple."... [O]ne big hurdle artists face is the question of whether a sound recording is a "work for hire." Since the 1970s, many labels have insisted on contract language that seems to define artists as employees of the label, Slotnick says."