Re: public domain question

On Thu, 06 Apr 2000, Tyler T. Ochoa <tochoa[_at_]law.whittier.edu> wrote:
>
> On 03/23/2000, Robert A. Baron <rabaron[_at_]pipeline.com> wrote:
> >
> > When you think of the Public Domain, do you think of a body of works
> > owned in common by everybody or do you think of a body of works owned
> > by nobody?
>
> Allow me to add another citation to bolster my view that public domain
> should mean common ownership: In Mayer v. Josiah Wedgwood & Sons, Ltd.,
> 601 F. Supp. 1523 (1985), the work fell into the public domain because
> of publication without copyright notice (back when notice was still
> required). The court said:
>
> It is elementary that once copyrightable material is published
> without the author's first securing federal copyright protection,
> the author loses his property interest in the material. The
> material becomes public property. ... In this case, Mayer no
> longer owned her design. The public did.

"The public did".

Which means what, exactly?

--
Neil Wilkof
Law Offices of Neil J. Wilkof
37 Itzhak Sadeh Street
POB 57543
Tel-Aviv 67213
Israel

Tel.: 972-3-562-5599
Fax: 972-3-562-3593
Email: wilkofnj[_at_]inter.net.il


********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and are intended solely for the use of the addressee. It may
contain privileged information that is exempt from disclosure
by law. If you are not the addressee, please note that unauthorized
dissemination, copying or accessing of this email and its contents
is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this email
in error, please inform us immediately by telephone at 972-3-562-5599
(collect if you wish).