Re: Dracula

From: Rob Kasunic <rkasunic[_at_]kasunic.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 21:03:04 -0400

Michael Scarpitti <mscarpit[_at_]asnt.org> wrote:
>
> On 15, July 1998, Dan L. Burk <burkdanl[_at_]shu.edu> wrote:
> >
> > On 07/14/98, Michael Scarpitti <mscarpit[_at_]asnt.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > I have heard that Universal Studios has trademarked or copyrighted
> > > the word "Dracula". How can they do that?
> >
> > By accruing identification with the term in the minds of the public,
> > most likely, registering it. The trademarking, that is. Copyright is
> > pretty much out of the question.
> >
> > > I have seen editions printed recently of Dracula that carry a
> > > copyright notice, even though they are without notes or any new
> > > editorial material. The book came out in 1897. Is it possible
> > > to copyright this?
> >
> > Depends on what you mean by "this." The text of the story, no -- that
> > fell into the public domain a long time ago. There may be a "thin"
> > copyright in original aspects of the formatting in a particular
> > edition.
>
> Please explain "thin".

A "thin" copyright refers to the scope of protection. All copyrights are not created equal -- the scope of protection for certain works is broader than others. Generally, for example, fictional or imaginative works are afforded broader protection than are factual works. As was discussed in the Feist opinion, compilations of factual material may be copyrightable, but the scope of protection is thin, since the facts are not protected by the copyright, only the original selection, coordination, and arrangement of those facts. The same is sometimes true of derivative works: while the new material may meet the minimal requirement of originality, the derivative copyright does not affect or enlarge the scope of the underlying work. It may be copyrightable, but the scope of protection may be thin.

In the Dracula situation, there may be a thin copyright for some original selection, arrangement, or adaptation of the public domain work, but the copyright would likely not cover much. Certainly, anyone would be free to copy the original public domain work.

Rob Kasunic
rkasunic[_at_]kasunic.com
Adjunct, Univ. of Baltimore School of Law Received on Sat Jul 18 1998 - 01:06:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:31 GMT