Was: linking and copyright
On 3/23/2000, Tyler Ochoa <tochoa[_at_]law.whittier.edu> wrote:
>
> I am confident that the deposit of copies in the Library of Congress
> does not constitute a "general" publication. Indeed, some works have
> been much more widely distributed but still have been found to be
> "unpublished" for purposes of copyright. Two cases come to mind:
> 158 Academy Awards (Oscars) were distributed without copyright notices
> prior to 1941, but a court held that was only a limited publication.
> And Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech was found to be
> unpublished, even though free copies were distributed to the press at
> the time the speech was delivered. [The latter holding is questionable
> but has not been overturned.]
This brings up another topic. How do works of art and other items
created in single or perhaps even multiple copies qualify as having
been "published" for the purposes of starting the copyright clock?
Here are a few scenarios:
- A photographer produces a limited edition of 10 images of the same
work. He distributes two copies to friends and exhibits another in
a museum exhibition (where it is not for sale) but from which the
photographer expects to find buyers. None are sold. Does any part
of this scenario qualify as a publication? Exhibition alone doesn't
do it. Offering it for sale doesn't do it and giving it to friends
also doesn't qualify, it seems.
- A vendor of art slides offers images of the Statue of Liberty in
his catalogue. He doesn't sell any and hasn't reproduced the image
in a catalogue. This, I gather, doesn't qualify as a publication
either.
- Same as above, but the image is acquired by numerious users. In the
bill we learn that the image is not sold; it is licensed, say, for
five years. Does the distribution of licensed copies qualify as a
publication?
- A vendor produces a thumbnail catalogue of his image wares that he
places on the Internet. Ordinarily I would think of this as a
publication; but now considering the outcome of the ditto.com case,
where the publication of a thumbnail by someone else was not
considered to be an infringement by virtue of fair use, one wonders
if presentation of one's own thumbnail image qualifies as a
publication of the image as a whole.
Robt Baron
Robert A. Baron
mailto:rabaron[_at_]pipeline.com
http://www.pipeline.com/~rabaron/
Received on Fri Mar 24 2000 - 12:31:07 GMT