Re: Asimov Site

["Kelli Halliburton" <kelli217@crosswinds.not>]

"Sandra Warnken" <warnken@mother.com> wrote in message
Pine.LNX.3.96.1000829144619.13591A-100000@step.mother.com">news:Pine.LNX.3.96.1000829144619.13591A-100000@step.mother.com...

> I have copied the following from http://www.loc.gov/copyright
> You do have to file for copyright.  The latest fees are increased to $30
> up depending on what you are doing.
>
> Sandy
>
>    U.S. Copyright Office, Copyright Basics (Circular 1) (p15 of 50)
> NOTICE OF COPYRIGHT
>
>      The use of a copyright notice is no longer required under U. S.
>      law, although it is often beneficial. Because prior law did contain
>      such a requirement, however, the use of notice is still relevant to
>      the copyright status of older works.

Interesting, this paragraph seems to indicate that the use of a copyright
NOTICE is no longer required under US law. This would tend to leave open the
question of when copyright actually takes effect.

>      Notice was required under the 1976 Copyright Act. This requirement
>      was eliminated when the United States adhered to the Berne
>      Convention, effective March 1, 1989. Although works published
>      without notice before that date could have entered the public
>      domain in the United States, the Uruguay Round Agreements Act
>      (URAA) restores copyright in certain foreign works originally
>      published without notice. For further information about copyright
>      amendments in the URAA, request [56]Circular 38b.

This also deals with the question as to whether notice is required in order
for protection to ensue.

>      The Copyright Office does not take a position on whether copies of
>      works first published with notice before March 1, 1989, which are
>      distributed on or after March 1, 1989, must bear the copyright
>      notice.
>
>        U.S. Copyright Office, Copyright Basics (Circular 1) (p9 of 50)
>
>      Copyright protects "original works of authorship" that are fixed in
>      a tangible form of expression. The fixation need not be directly
>      perceptible so long as it may be communicated with the aid of a
>      machine or device. Copyrightable works include the following
>      categories:
>      * (1) literary works;
>      * (2) musical works, including any accompanying words
>      * (3) dramatic works, including any accompanying music
>      * (4) pantomimes and choreographic works
>      * (5) pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works
>      * (6) motion pictures and other audiovisual works
>      * (7) sound recordings
>      * (8) architectural works
>
>      These categories should be viewed broadly. For example, computer
>      programs and most "compilations" may be registered as "literary
>      works"; maps and architectural plans may be registered as
>      "pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works."

Again, none of the quoted information is relevant to the question of when a
copyright actually takes effect.

Basically, all this post quotes is a section of a pamphlet by the US
Copyright Office that deals with whether or not you can claim copyright
protection without a notice such as "Copyright (c) 2000 Kelli Halliburton.
All rights reserved." being included with the work in question. What this
quotation says, basically, is 'yes.'

The second quoted section only deals with what can be copyrighted, not when
the work is considered to be copyrighted.

As it turns out, the Copyright Act of 1976 states that all original works
are copyrighted from the moment the work exists in a fixed, tangible medium.
The process of "filing for copyright" is actually only a matter of
*registering* a copyright that already exists, for the purpose of better
establishing documentation in the event of infringement. Copyright cases
have been fought, and won, by the copyright holder even in cases where the
work in question was not registered with the Copyright Office.