RE: Artists, Museums & Copyright??

At 08:05 AM 9/25/02 -0400, Chris Mohr wrote:
>There is another question--namely, whether the appearance of a
>reproduction of the painting in the museum catalog before 1978
rendered >the work PD.

Tyler T. Ochoa
Professor and Co-Director
Center for Intellectual Property Law
Whittier Law School
3333 Harbor Blvd.
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
(714) 444-4141, ext. 243
(714) 444-1854 (fax)
tochoa[_at_]law.whittier.edu

>>> vrkoven[_at_]world.std.com 09/26/02 04:30AM >>>
Hmmm. I don't see how publication of a reproduction would act as publication of the original, or am I missing something? <<<<<

See the definitions in the 1976 Copyright Act, Section 101:

"'Publication' is the distribution of copies [or phonorecords] of a work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending.... [An offer to distribute can suffice.] A public performance or display of a work does not itself constitute a publication."

"Copies" are defined as material objects in which the work is fixed. "The term 'copies' includes the material object .... in which the work is first fixed," i.e., the original. ["Phonorecords" are defined as material objects in which sounds are fixed.]

Hence, the definition of publication of a work is the distribution of copies [i.e., reproductions] of the original, or the sale of the original itself [which is defined to be a "copy"]. Received on Mon Sep 30 2002 - 18:40:57 GMT