• Hi Guest!
    You can help ensure that British Car Forum (BCF) continues to provide a great place to engage in the British car hobby! If you find BCF a beneficial community, please consider supporting our efforts with a subscription.
    There are some perks with a member upgrade!
    **Upgrade Now**
    (PS: Subscribers don't see this gawd-aweful banner
Tips
Tips

Car Clubs, Poems and Law Suits!

Share this page

[ QUOTE ]
Wait a minute! She wrote it in 2003 but didn't copyright it until 2005! If somebody copied it during that time, is the copyright valid?

[/ QUOTE ]

Since the new laws went into effect, yes. "Copyright" goes into effect the moment the work is created (regardless of registration or copyright warnings).
 
The internet really seems to be changing the way these things work. An article can spread around the world in hours, when it used to take months or even years. It seems the old laws aren't going to work very well in the future. How could a small, non-profit car club possibly know for sure that a funny car poem was illegal to print, especially if they weren't able to find the owner after an extensive search of the internet, which is where it came from in the first place? And especially when the title has been changed.

My wife has a newspaper clipping on our refridgerator of a Dear Abby-type thing. It contains a funny list called "Things we can learn from dogs". It is listed as anonymous, and asks for the owner to please contact her so credit can be given. If a major newspaper does it this way, then there must be something to protect the little guy from the same thing.
 
[ QUOTE ]
The internet really seems to be changing the way these things work. An article can spread around the world in hours, when it used to take months or even years. It seems the old laws aren't going to work very well in the future. How could a small, non-profit car club possibly know for sure that a funny car poem was illegal to print, especially if they weren't able to find the owner after an extensive search of the internet, which is where it came from in the first place? And especially when the title has been changed.

My wife has a newspaper clipping on our refridgerator of a Dear Abby-type thing. It contains a funny list called "Things we can learn from dogs". It is listed as anonymous, and asks for the owner to please contact her so credit can be given. If a major newspaper does it this way, then there must be something to protect the little guy from the same thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

What about protecting me from the little guy that rips my work of from my on-line portfolio. It's a two way street. The best way to avoid this is to not use something when the author can not be found. A friend of mine who is an illustrator also, did some images of KISS. He posted them on his site, not for sale mind you. He came to me one day and said, dude, you have got to listen to this. It was Gene Simmons on his answering machine asking him to remove the images. He also said he liked the work and left the number to the bands licensing agent. Then politely said, if you don't remove the images, they will have to sue him.

The poem story still seems fishy to me. I would tell your friend not to respond to the threat.
 
I don't know an exact source, so I'm probably spreading false info by having just said that. I'm not a lawyer. But I had been told that (about public domain, especially if there was not a copyright claimed) by someone else, and it made sense to me.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know an exact source, so I'm probably spreading false info by having just said that. I'm not a lawyer. But I had been told that (about public domain, especially if there was not a copyright claimed) by someone else, and it made sense to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you might be. I can't imagine any situation where a copyright would automatically run out after 7 years (except for certain government documents, which are usually PD from the get-go). Imagine writing a novel in 2006, having it published in 2008, then having it go PD (and thus losing all your royalties) in 2013.

Anyway, I can't find anything that comes remotely close to a 7-year limit (maybe they meant 70 years) or a reference to anything kicking into "PD" because it's online. If you run across it again let us know - I'd be interested to hear the reasoning behind either of those cases.
 
If I remember correctly, my book is in my office, the statute runs out 75 years after the death of the author. This also allows the copyright to be held by the family. In some cases, the family can renew it.

A copyright can also be transferred, I do that on occasion. It costs my clients more, but I always get a stipulation that I can use the work for self-promotion.
 
Since 1978 that is essentially correct (see below). There's another bill in DC that will add another spin to it all. They want to add a $1 tax to every copyright. I'm not clear on whether that means the now-standard "it's copyrighted when you make it" rule-of-thumb will be tossed for a new scheme that will require registration and the $1 tax, or whether it's another twist to the registration process. The idea is to create a cheap paper-trail to make enforcement easier. Sounds good unless I have to send DC a buck everytime I shoot an image, or expect everything I do to fall into PD. We'll see.


From copyright.gov:
The term of copyright for a particular work depends on several factors, including whether it has been published, and, if so, the date of first publication. As a general rule, for works created after January 1, 1978, copyright protection lasts for the life of the author plus an additional 70 years. For an anonymous work, a pseudonymous work, or a work made for hire, the copyright endures for a term of 95 years from the year of its first publication or a term of 120 years from the year of its creation, whichever expires first. For works first published prior to 1978, the term will vary depending on several factors. To determine the length of copyright protection for a particular work, consult chapter 3 of the Copyright Act (title 17 of the United States Code). More information on the term of copyright can be found in Circular 15a, Duration of Copyright, and Circular 1, Copyright Basics.
 
Very intresting thread. Our club got that letter (through the mail, not via email) and we had quite the discussion about what to do. Several offers from members to share the fine, some that reccomended us to do nothing, some that reccomended seeking legal council.
I don't know how it has turned out, but I'll ask, and let you know.
From the copy of the letter I saw, if it's a scam it's a darn convincing one.
It's my belief that it's a legit deal, just in extremely poor taste, by an individual(or said individuals representative) who saw a potential gold mine by dealing a low blow.
Protecting your work is one thing. Send out a warning letter, or a request for credit.These clubs did not intend to make money or steal credit from anyone.
This person isen't looking for credit, just money.
It's more like a setup scam. and unfortunatly, it's currently legal.
 
[ QUOTE ]

This person isen't looking for credit, just money.
It's more like a setup scam. and unfortunatly, it's currently legal.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, this is why I would recommend not doing anything. They probably won't spend the money seeking a lawsuit, they just want you do send in the money. That way, they collect nice and easy. Let them come and get it.
 
Back
Top