> Where the year date is more than one year later than the year in
> which publication first occurred, the work is considered to have
> been published without any notice and is governed by the provisions
> of section 405.
What if the publication is being altered every year (as the liturgical text mentioned probably was, if only marginally)? Should the copyright notice read (c) 1981-95, or can it just read (c) 1995, secure that the text common to all editions is already protected by earlier notices?
In fact, imagine you publish something in 1990, and put a proper notice on it. Then you publish the identical book in 1995, and put a 1995 copyright notice on it. Sure, the second notice is invalid, but wouldn't the first publication still be protected by its proper notice?
John Katzman John[_at_]review.comThe Princeton Review Received on Mon Oct 23 1995 - 14:19:50 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:18 GMT