Fotenotes
1 This chart was first published in
published in Peter B. Hirtle, "Recent Changes To The Copyright Law:
Copyright Term Extension," Archival Outlook, January/February
1999. This version is current as of 6 July 2004. The most recent
version is found at http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/training/Hirtle_Public_Domain.htm.
The chart is based in part on Laura N. Gasaway's chart, "When Works
Pass Into the Public Domain," at <http://www.unc.edu/~unclng/public-d.htm>,
and similar charts found in Marie C. Malaro, A Legal Primer On Managing
Museum Collections (Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution Press,
1998): 155-156. A useful copyright duration chart by Mary Minow,
organized by year, is found at <http://www.librarylaw.com/DigitizationTable.htm>.
A "flow chart" for copyright duration is found at <http://www.bromsun.com/practice/copyrights/copyright_durations.html>.
See also Library of Congress Copyright Office. Circular 15a, Duration
of Copyright: Provisions of the Law Dealing with the Length of Copyright
Protection (Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, 2004) <http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ15a.pdf>.
2 All terms of copyright run through
the end of the calendar year in which they would otherwise expire, so a
work enters the public domain on the first of the year following the
expiration of its copyright term. For example, a book published on
15 March 1923 will enter the public domain on 1 January 2019, not 16 March
2018 (1923+95=2018).
3 Unpublished works when the death
date of the author is not known may still be copyrighted, but
certification from the Copyright Office that it has no record to indicate
whether the person is living or died less than 70 years before is a
complete defense to any action for infringement. See 17 U.S.C. §
302(e).
4 Presumption as to the author's
death requires a certified report from the Copyright Office that its
records disclose nothing to indicate that the author of the work is living
or died less than seventy years before.
5 "Publication" was not
explicitly defined in the Copyright Law before 1976, but the 1909 Act
indirectly indicated that publication was when copies of the first
authorized edition were placed on sale, sold, or publicly distributed by
the proprietor of the copyright or under his authority.”
6 Not all published
works are copyrighted. Works prepared by an officer or employee of
the United States Government as part of that person's official duties
receive no copyright protection in the US. For much of the twentieth
century, certain formalities had to followed to secure copyright
protection. For example, some books had to be printed in the United
States to receive copyright protection, and failure to deposit copies of
works with the Register of Copyright could result in the loss of
copyright. The requirements that copies include a formal notice of
copyright and that the copyright be renewed after twenty eight years were
the most common conditions, and are specified in the chart.
7 A 1961 Copyright Office
study found that fewer than 15% of all registered copyrights were renewed.
For books, the figure was even lower: 7%. See Barbara Ringer, "Study
No. 31: Renewal of Copyright" (1960), reprinted in Library of Congress
Copyright Office. Copyright law revision: Studies prepared for the
Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on
the Judiciary, United States Senate, Eighty-sixth Congress, first
[-second] session. (Washington: U. S. Govt. Print. Off, 1961), p.
220. A good guide to investigating the copyright and renewal status
of published work is Samuel Demas and Jennie L. Brogdon, "Determining
Copyright Status for Preservation and Access: Defining Reasonable Effort,"
Library Resources and Technical Services 41:4 (October, 1997):
323-334. See also Library of Congress Copyright Office, How to investigate the
copyright status of a work. Circular 22. [Washington, D.C.: Library of
Congress, Copyright Office, 2004]. The Online Books Page FAQ,
especially "How Can I Tell
Whether a Book Can Go Online?" and "How Can I Tell
Whether a Copyright Was Renewed?", is also very helpful.
8 The following section on
foreign publications draws extensively on Stephen Fishman, The Public
Domain: How to Find Copyright-free Writings, Music, Art & More.
(Berkeley: Nolo.com, 2004). It applies to works first published
abroad and not subsequently published in the US within 30 days of the
original foreign publication. Works that were simultaneously
published abroad and in the US are treated as if they are American
publications.
9 Foreign works published
after 1923 are likely to be still under copyright in the US because of the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) modifying the General Agreement on
Tariffs and Trade (GATT). The URAA restored copyright in foreign
works that as of 1 January 1996 had fallen into the public domain in the
US because of a failure to comply with US formalities. One of the
authors of the work had to be a non-US citizen or resident, the work could
not have been published in the US within 30 days after its publication
abroad, and the work needed to still be in copyright in the country of
publication. Such works have a copyright term equivalent to that of
an American work that had followed all of the formalities. For more
information, see Library of Congress Copyright Office, Highlights of Copyright
Amendments Contained in the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA). Circular
38b.
[Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, Copyright Office, 2004].
10 US formalities include
the requirement that a formal notice of copyright be included in the work;
registration, renewal, and deposit of copies in the Copyright Office; and
the manufacture of the work in the US.
11 The differing dates is a product
of the question of controversial Twin
Books v. Walt Disney Co. decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
in 1996. The question at issue is the copyright status of a work
only published in a foreign language outside of the United States and
without a copyright notice. It had long been assumed that
failure to comply with US formalities placed these works in the public
domain in the US and, as such, were subject to copyright restoration under
URAA (see note 9).
The court in Twin Books, however, concluded "publication without a
copyright notice in a foreign country did not put the work in the public
domain in the United States." According to the court, these foreign
publications were in effect "unpublished" in the US, and hence have the
same copyright term as unpublished works. The decision has been
harshly criticized in Nimmer on Copyright, the leading treatise on
copyright, as being incompatible with previous decisions and the intent of
Congress when it restored foreign copyrights. The Copyright Office
as well ignores the Twin Books decision in its circular on restored
copyrights. Nevertheless, the decision is currently applicable in
all of the 9th Judicial Circuit (Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii,
Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and Guam and the Northern
Mariana Islands), and it may apply in the rest of the country.
12 See Library of Congress Copyright
Office, International
Copyright Relations of the United States. Circular 38a. [Washington,
D.C.: Library of Congress, Copyright Office, 2004].
13 See 63 Fed. Reg.19,287 (1998),
Library of Congress Copyright Office, Copyright
Restoration of Works in Accordance With the Uruguay Round Agreements
Act; List Identifying Copyrights Restored Under the Uruguay Round
Agreements Act for Which Notices of Intent To Enforce Restored Copyrights
Were Filed in the Copyright Office. |