woody@tybalt.caltech.edu (William Edward Woody) (02/29/88)
In article <366@sas.UUCP> bts@sas.UUCP (Brian T. Schellenberger) writes: >1. I am not sure whether (c) is really a valid substitute for C-in-a-circle, > so this may be a good reason to use ``Copyright (c) 1988 . . .'' No, (c) [open-paren, lower-case 'c', close-paren] is not a suitable substitute for (c) [lower-case 'c' in a circle]. The reason why in the U.S. that you can get away with 'Copyright (c) 1987 FooBar Inc.' [where (c) is open-paren 'c' close-paren] is because of the keyword 'Copyright'. I don't believe that this is good overseas. >2. Since there is no penalty for not sending in the copies (unless, as the > quote says later, specifically asked to by the Registar of Copyrights), > there is no real reason to bother. Perhaps a lawyer could tell use why > they bother making something ``illegal'' but giving it no penalty. Because unless you register it with the Registrar of Copyrights, it is d*mned near impossible to enforce your copyright. The registrar simply time-stamps and stores a copy of your written work so when you go to court claiming I stole your work, you can hold up an official document from the registrar saying "see, I did indeed do this in May of 1987, but you claim to have done yours in December. Gotcha!" You _can_ alternatly mail yourself a copy of your written work, and store the _unopened_ envelope in a safe place, but this is not quite prefered as it's easy to fake an appropriately timestamped envelope. (Steam open, alter work, steam close). Of course, I'm not a lawyer, but I got all sorts of 'Lawyer jokes' out of my SS classes (where I slept through all this material ;-). - William Edward Woody woody@tybalt.caltech.edu (Mac>][n&&/|\)&&(MacII>AT) Disclamer: I haven't the foggiest idea what I'm talking about...
papa@pollux.usc.edu (Marco Papa) (02/29/88)
In article <366@sas.UUCP> bts@sas.UUCP (Brian T. Schellenberger) writes: >Just in case you want to know the definitive story: > [portion omitted] > ``For any work published with a notice of copyright the law requires ^^^^^^^^ > the copyright holder to send two copies to the Copyright Office . . . FALSE. The Copyright act of 1980 makes it clear that NO registration with the Copyright Office is REQUIRED. Having registered is useful later when one sues somebody else for copyright infringment. Registration allows the holder to be able to recover "statutory" damages and attorney fees, instead of just "actual" damages. Basically registration gives you the "right to sue". > The deposit is to made within three months of publication, and no fee ^^^^^^ > is required. Failure to make the required deposit does not forfeit > rights under the law . . .'' FALSE AGAIN. Form TX, the one that must be used to register "literary works" (and programs are treated as such), REQUIRES to enclose a check or money order for $10 payable to the Register of Copyrights. >1. I am not sure whether (c) is really a valid substitute for C-in-a-circle, > so this may be a good reason to use ``Copyright (c) 1988 . . .'' Maybe As somebody else has already pointed out, IT IS NOT. See Copyright Law, 17 USC, Section 401(b). No foreign country recognizes (c) as a valid copyright symbol. >2. Since there is no penalty for not sending in the copies (unless, as the ^^^^^^^^^^ > quote says later, specifically asked to by the Registar of Copyrights), > there is no real reason to bother. Perhaps a lawyer could tell use why > they bother making something ``illegal'' but giving it no penalty. ^^^^^^^ Gee, what kind of junk were you reading? NOT REGISTERING with the copyright office is PERFECTLY LEGAL. Registration protects you, the copyright holder, not somebody else. >3. You can get extra protection in an infringement suit by registering > your work when sending copies if you want to. The two things cannot be separated. If you decide to register with the copyright office, you will be REQUIRED to make a deposit, which means sending copies of source code. Normally one can request "special relief", which means one has to deposit ONLY the first and last 25 pages of the program, instead of the whole thing. >4. Posting an item to the net or any other public forum would seem to meet > the legal definition of ``publishing,'' but again perhaps more of an > expert could fill us in. Yes, posting on a public forum like a network is equivalent to publishing. I recommend to all a good reading: "How to Copyright Software", by Attorney M.J. Salone, published by NOLO Press, 950 Parker St., Berkeley, CA 94710. It covers ALL aspect of US and International copyright law, the registation process, types of valid copyright notices, how to ask special relief so that the copyright office will accept your request and sample filled out registartion forms. I used it to register a program of mine and all went as it was supposed to. -- Marco
chan@encore.UUCP (Jerry Chan) (03/04/88)
In article <366@sas.UUCP> bts@sas.UUCP (Brian T. Schellenberger) writes: >2. Since there is no penalty for not sending in the copies (unless, as the > quote says later, specifically asked to by the Registar of Copyrights), > there is no real reason to bother. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There is definitely a reason to bother. Can you say "STATUTORY DAMAGES" :-) ? Believe it or not, I was just talking to a lawyer who specializes in patents and such about this very same question yesterday. According to him, if someone knowingly violates your copyright and you can prove that you had warned him of the consequences of doing so (not clear to me if the usual "shrinkwrap license agreement" satisfies this or if you have to deliver an additional memo of such), if you take that person to court and you had registered your copyright with the Registrar of Copyrights, you are entitled to statutory damages. What does this mean? Well, the judge can award you up statutory damages up to $50,000 per offense on top of the actual damages that you may be awarded. The purpose of the statutory damages is to set an example to the violator and others that what he had done was a NO-NO. If you want to insure that you are entitled to statutory damages, be sure to register your copyright. +----------------+ Jerry H. Chan linus--+ +--+-------------+ | Encore Computer Corp. necntc--| | | E n c o r e | | 257 Cedar Hill St. ihnp4--+-encore!chan | +-------------+--+ Marlboro MA 01752 decvax--| +----------------+ (617) 460-0500 talcott--+
rafael@proxftl.UUCP (Rafael Mayer) (05/29/88)
In article <589@amelia.nas.nasa.gov>, msf@amelia.nas.nasa.gov (Michael S. Fischbein) writes: > > However, I am worried about the effects of the Lotus and Apple lawsuits > on the small, innovative programmer. Doesn't the threat of hundreds of > thousands of dollars (or more) in legal bills tend to stifle development What worries me, is the general lack of understanding the courts in general (lawyers and judges) have for the mechanisms involved. They apply their understanding of current information storage and retrieval systems (paper, microfiche, microfilm, record imprints, magnetic recording, etc.) to cases involving `information age' storage and retrieval systems (RAM, ROM, Networks, E-Mail). In time of course, this will correct itself. `Information age' lawyers and judges will eventually become a majority in the judicial systems and this will set the stage for some intelligent court activity. Until then I am prepared to see a lot of `esoteric' decisions and conclusion come forth from lawyers, judges, and juries. Rafael Mayer UUCP: {ihnp4!codas,allegra}!novavax!proxftl!rafael Smooth ice For those who dance with expertise. Friedrich Is paradise Nietzsche