Gunnar,

I do not see a difference in practice. There certainly is a lot of confusion
and wrong information out there! Wikipedia has it wrong.

Duration of protection in Australia:
In February 2004 the Australian government announced that protection in
Australia would be extended to life plus seventy years, as part of
implementation of the Australia-US Free Trade Agreement.

Here is a link with full details of the Bern Convention and what it covers:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/treaties/berne/overview.html

The convention specifies 50 years but that individual countries may lengthen
the period of coverage. I know in the US the coverage is 75 years (Thank you
Sonny Bono...you got us babe!), and I 'recall' during my discussions with
Dr. Pruitt that England extended their term of coverage to conform with the
US. Perhaps the term in Australia was not lengthened.

At this time I cannot locate documentation for my recollection that England
extended its term of protection to conform with the US. Assume I am
incorrect. life+70 is certain.

An interesting note I find on this site:

Article 18
(1) This Convention shall apply to all works which, at the moment of its
coming into force, have not yet fallen into the public domain in the country
of origin through the expiry of the term of protection.

(2) If, however, through the expiry of the term of protection which was
previously granted, a work has fallen into the public domain of the country
where protection is claimed, that work shall not be protected anew.

Some research may show that some of these works being considered have, in
fact, fallen into the Public Domain. I doubt this is the case in England,
where the law seems to have been made retroactive to a million years ago.

This starts to get beyond me. We need a lawyer! Time was, before the Bern
convention that a work in the US fell into Public Domain if copyright was
not claimed by a statement included in the work; also a work fell into
Public Domain I believe, only 25 years after publication (could be
renewed?).

Definition of Fair Use:
Exceptions on copyright laws are made for library or archival reproduction
and fair use. Fair use is defined as using the copyrighted work for the
purpose of teaching, scholarship, research, criticism, or news reporting. In
these cases, copyrighted work can be reproduced without the explicit consent
of the original author.

Special relevance with regard to England and works where the author cannot
be found:

doing something that would infringe copyright at a time where it is not
possible by reasonable inquiry to ascertain the name and address of the
copyright owner does not infringe revived copyright.
Details of these provisions can be found in statutory instrument 1995/3297
from Her Majesty's Stationery Office (HMSO). http://www.hmso.gov.uk/

More on UK Law:

1. The life + 70 term took effect Jan. 1, 1996.


2. Yes, the life + 70 is retroactive, and restored copyright in works
whose authors were dead over 50, but not over 70, years.


3. The life + 50 term was took effect July 1, 1912. This term was
applied to all works in which common law or statutory copyright
subsisted on the commencement date. This means the work in your
hypo would not have entered the public domain in 1953. It's
protected by copyright until 2017.


You can find a good overview of UK copyriht law in the treatise
International Copyright Law and Practice by Geller and Nimmer. It's
publihsed by Matthew Bender.


Take Care;
and may your life be long and happy!
Michael Olds

-----Original Message-----
From: Gunnar Gällmo [mailto:gunnargallmo@...]
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 9:12 AM
To: Pali@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Pali] Copyright



--- olbeggaols <MikeOlds@...> skrev:

> Australia is a member of the Bern convention and as
> such has
> copyright laws exactly similar to those in the US
> and England.
>
> This means: Copyright is based on the date of death
> of the author(s)
> of a work: 75 years (PTS is wrong;

> Copyright does not have to be
> claimed to be valid: simply creating a work
> copyrights it.

What you say is true about author's rights, but
strictly speaking not about copyright. We are
confusing two different concepts, belonging to
different traditions. The Bern Convention speaks about
author's rights, which have their origin in
continental Europe. Copyright has its origin in
Anglosaxon countries, and is different (that may be
the reason why the USA waited a lot of years before
signing the convention; and that's why Irving Berlin
lost copyright to "Alexander's Ragtime Band" while he
was still alive).

Also, I think the number of years is not detailed in
the convention but may vary between countries. In
Sweden, before we joined the EU, the limit was 50
years here, but 70 years in e. g. Germany; when we
joined, it was harmonized to 70 (harmonized with the
EU, not with the convention).

So are the 75 years you mention valid for all
countries, or only for Australia? And in the first
case; when was the addition done? In my country, I
haven't seen any information about this.

Gunnar




=====
gunnargallmo@...



- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[Homepage] http://www.tipitaka.net
[Send Message] pali@yahoogroups.com
Paaliga.na - a community for Pali students
Yahoo! Groups members can set their delivery options to daily digest or web
only.
Yahoo! Groups Links