On Thu, 29 May 1997, Robert A. Baron <rabaron[_at_]pipeline.com> wrote:
>
> Although our creation myths are patterned after the process of
> artistic creation, I don't remember copyright playing much of a
> role in them. Is there a statement somewhere in the accepted or
> apocryphal writings of anyone's creation story that states that
> "God made Man in His image, in which he claims copyright for 50
> years after His death?" <g>
A few ungodly rejoinders come to mind:
I suppose, though, one could make assignments to God.
2. The creation of man probably does not meet the minimal levels of creativity imposed by Feist (see "Feist of God" and Rodin's Hand of God).
3. Which god would be the author? Or do we have a bunch of co-authors? Might have to sort that one out in court, but which court? *Supreme* Court has a nice sound to it, but they don't take too many copyright cases these days.
Speaking of joint authorship, the Reid from CCNV is purported to have claimed he "was sucked in by a saint and then the Devil came out. . . . Would GOD lose HIS authorship of man despite his independent creative enterprise, through a dubious 'work for hire' clause in American copyright law?" Matthew R. Harris, Copyright, Computer Software, and Work Made for Hire, 89 Mich. L. Rev. 661 (1990) (quoting from Kastor, Whose Art Is It, Anyway?, Wash. Post, Mar. 27, 1989, at C1, col. 3).
4. "Only one thing is impossible to God, to find any sense in any copyright law on this planet." Mark Twain, Notebook 381.
5. Finally, if God does indeed hold a valid copyright in the creation of man, then I think laches should prevent Him from suing for infringement. Besides, George Burns is, sadly, dead, so who would appear in court for Him?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:25 GMT