Re: resources

Stephen Moignard <slm[_at_]crafti.com.au> wrote:
>
> Check out the CopyrightArchive:
>
> http://CopyrightArchive.com/

I don't know about anyone else, but I found this site to be extremely misleading. They claim that they provide all of the legal protection you could possibly need or want, all for 19.95 (please send us your credit card). No need to bother with all those silly law firms, etc. They (whoever they are-I couldn't find out much about the ownership) will keep your valuable copyrightable material protected from everyone in the whole world!

An exerpt:

> US Congress Copyright Registration
>
> U.S. copyright law (Title 17, U.S.C) provides for formal registration
> and lodgement of works with the Library of Congress (LOC).
>
> Registered works are given special statutory protection for U.S.
> citizens (and citizens of other countries under the provisions of the
> Berne Convention) in that special damages and costs awards are
> available in an infringement action. You MUST register your work with
> the LOC if you wish to instigate infringment action in the United
> States.

So far so good, but....

> You can do this after detecting an infringement, but you will
> lose some of the statutory benefits of registration.

How about the most important benefits, such as statutory damages (especially useful with things like web pages where actual damages are hard to prove) and attorney fees.

> However, LOC registration is a two edged sword. Registration costs
> $20.00 US

My, my! A whole $0.05 US more than their fee of $19.95! What is that in Australian dollars?

> and requires a complete printed copy (small portions can be
> blanked out) of the work to be submitted.

Wrong! Computer software can be significantly redacted in order to protect trade secrets. Although a full deposit is preferred, the rules allow you to deposit (that's American English for lodgment) the first 25 and last 25 pages of the source code with redaction or the first 10 and last 10 pages without redaction. They leave it up to you to decide what is first and last in terms of ordering code in multiple compilation units. The rule for redaction is that significantly more must be visible than the amount hidden, which most commentors have taken to mean less than 50% redacted. There are similar deposit requirements for other bulky works such as motion pictures.

> Your protection is reduced by the amount you choose to blank out.

Absolutely false.

> It also means that your works is in the public record. It is
> available for public inspection

True enough, but that's why you can redact.

> and copying (see form TX Privacy Act Advisory Statement), it will
> be included in publicly accessible indexes and catalogues (some
> commercial) and can be included by the LOC in search reports.

Absolutely false. Copying of any portion of a deposit is strictly forbidden by the rules with three, limited exceptions: (1) with the WRITTEN permission of the copyright owner(s) of record (generally the author); (2) proof of anticipated or actual litigation concerning the work; or (3) an order from a judge. The folks at the deposit archives are even supposed to examine your notes on the way out to prevent you from verbatim copying.

And as for the publicly available indexes, you may only get access to information about the copyright registration, not the actual deposit through any online service I know of, including Telneting over to the LOC records.

> Your complete work can still be submitted in court as a notarised
> archive.

What courts? On whose authority?

> Furthermore, your automatic copyright message/agreement does not
> require any form of LOC registration.

At least, not until you try to enforce it in a U.S. federal court, in which case you're certainly going to have to pay $20.00 anyway for the registration fee and, since you'll probably be in a hurry, you'll need to pay the expedited processing fee ($130.00?, $310.00? I forget, although I just did one last week).

Oh,an dig this PROMINENT WARNING, found on just about every page!

> WARNING
> THIS SITE CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.
It does?? Then how come you're posting it on a freely-accessible web page without any restriction on access to the information?                           

> All information located at this site is made available to you for the
> sole purpose of facilitating the registration of copyright works on
> this database. All other uses are unauthorised. Any unauthorised
> disclosure or use (including use in any competitive enterprise,
> whether commercial or non-commercial) of the legal, artistic and
> technological resources located at this site amounts to an actionable
> breach of confidence.

It does? So, sue me! I just disclosed some of the "confidential" information found on this site and I'm almost certain I don't have authorization. Perhaps there is some subtle feature of Australian law that escapes me, but I can't imagine any U.S. court enforcing this provision.

Has anyone else looked at this site? Is it violative of Australian law?

Stephen J. Hyland
<shyland[_at_]computer-lawyer.com> Received on Tue Jul 29 1997 - 12:56:02 GMT