larry@harvard.UUCP (Larry Denenberg) (04/07/84)
> > . . . If you ever write something > you wish to be published, put a copyright notice on the material, make > a copy, then mail the copy (making sure you get a post office date stamp > on it) to yourself or anyone else you wan [sic] to hold it. Then send the > other copy to the publisher. According to copyright law, this is sufficient > to protect your rights. It is done all the time by authors to protect > themselves from unscrupulous publishers. You can then apply for an > official copyright from the government. Copyrights are good for 54 > years and are renewable for 17 year periods thereafter. Very few > authors take advantage of the renewing process. But, beware of trying > to republish anything Mark Twain did, the family has been renewing his > copyrights right along. There is very little of Twain's that is not > still protected under copyright. > > T. C. Wheeler Fertilizer. The copyright in an original work is the property of the authors from the moment the work is created, and lasts until fifty years after all the authors are dead (other rules apply to anonymous and pseudonymous works). Copyright protection cannot be lost as a result of unauthorized publication without notice of copyright. Even if you publish yourself and omit the copyright notice you have not forfeited protection, unless you fail to take steps to rectify the problem. The Copyright Office of the Library of Congress only registers copyrights; no such registration is required. There is no renewal of copyright, not even if you manage to live until fifty years after your death. Before 1978, copyrights endured for 28 years with the option of renewal (once!) for an additional 28 years. Various laws govern the duration of copyright for works created before 1978, but in general (assuming correct renewal of copyright) works published before 1978 are protected until 75 years after publication or 100 years after creation, whichever is less. With a few exceptions (e.g. special laws were passed to extend the copyright of @i[Science and Health] by Mary Baker Eddy) the copyright of any work published or copyrighted before January 1, 1909, has permanently expired. Mark Twain died on April 21, 1910. Only a small amount of his work* -- published posthumously -- is not in the public domain. His as-yet-unpublished works are protected until December 31, 2002, unless published before then. *The best of this group is @i[Letters from the Earth], one of the funniest books ever written. See especially "Something about Repentance," "Cooper's Prose Style," and "Letter to the Earth." These formalities dispensed with, here comes the flame: Did you ever wonder how much of the factual information placed on the net is true, how much honest mistake, how much deliberately distorted truth, how much outright lies? Undoubtedly the submission quoted above falls into the second category. But for the uninformed and inquiring reader all of the latter three groups are the same; honest mistakes can be just as wrong as outright lies, and can do as much damage. See, for example, @i[There He Goes Again: Ronald Reagan's Reign of Error] -- recommended reading for anyone voting in November -- about the "facts" upon which decisions are presumably based in the current Administration. Of course, these problems are not new. In fact [sicc], the only reason I am allowed to discuss these matters without people jumping on me for restating the obvious is that this is net.flame, where everyone can agonize about his personal torture. So let me restate the obvious: When you submit to the net, many people read your words. Try to be sure that they are reliable. Take an extra moment to check, if you can, or qualify where you might be mistaken. Watch: "I am not an expert on copyright law, nor a lawyer of any sort. There might be special laws extending copyright on Mark Twain's works, as there are on Mary Baker Eddy's, which would invalidate the conclusions I draw about their copyright status. I have checked the facts presented above; please call my attention to anything I have missed." I would especially caution those submitting to net.consumers. Example: Midas Muffler will, I hope, suffer as a result of discussion in that group. Imagine the impact upon a business that such a newsgroup can have. There could well be lawsuits, eventually. But remember that truth is an absolute defense (I have been told) against slander and libel actions. Sounds preachy, doesn't it. Well, we all have our neuroses. Mine is that I like to know things. And I like the things I know to be accurate. It pains me to find out that something I believed is a rumor or a "popular misconception," especially if I've disseminated it myself. But we can't check everything. I would like to trust the people on the net to help me as much as they can. There is enough falsehood out there. By the way, nothing in this dreary submission should be construed as a personal attack on T. C. Wheeler, or a suggestion that her/his articles are generally nonfactual. Two final words: There is a book out called @i[Rumor!] that considers dozens of rumors, reporting which are true, which false, which probably false, and so forth. It even explains how the false ones arose, where possible. You can learn a lot. Finally, at one point in this article I misspelled the Latin word for "thus." Have you ever wondered how to quote such a sentence, pointing out that the mistake is not yours? I certainly have. ("In fact [sicc [sic]], ..." ?)