Re: Copyright of laws (was: Copyright over the Internet)

From: Lemley, Mark <mlemley[_at_]msmail.law.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 94 12:58:00 CST

---

>From: cni-copyright
>To: Multiple recipients of list
>Subject: Re: Copyright of laws (was: Copyright over the Internet)
>Date: Thu, Nov 17, 1994 9:26PM
>
>Jamie Wodetski writes:
>
>I can agree that it's OK for the US Govt to decide that it won't assert
>copyright of its own laws, and I even wish other Govt's would follow their
>lead. However, if what you say is true, then the US Govt is saying to
>other Nations, we'll protect all authors from your country, but we won't
>protect the copyright of the Govt of your country. Where does the
>Whitehouse (or Congress, I should say) get off saying to another Nation,
>"we'll decide which of your copyrights we protect" ? Where is the basis
>in Berne for this?

Hang on a minute. I know far too little about Berne, but my understanding of it was that, apart from some substantive minima of protection (duration must be life + 50, protection must cover literary works & works of art, etc.), the essential principle of the Convention was national treatment. That is, the US treats UK works *in the same way it treats US works.* How is that rule being violated here? US statutes get no protection; UK statutes get no protection. If the UK wanted to copyright ideas, rather than just expression, should the US be forced to recognize idea copyrights if the come from abroad?

Mark Lemley
Assistant Professor
University of Texas School of Law
mlemley[_at_]msmail.law.utexas.edu Received on Fri Nov 18 1994 - 19:01:49 GMT