Justices allow copyrights on foreign works

[Mitchell, Michael]

Thanks Robert. That is quite a comprehensive table!


Michael Mitchell
Technical Services Librarian
Brazosport College
Lake Jackson, TX
Michael.mitchell at brazosport.edu



From: Web technologies in libraries [mailto:WEB4LIB at LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Robert Balliot
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 4:30 PM
To: WEB4LIB at LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [WEB4LIB] Justices allow copyrights on foreign works

I think you can look at the current practical differences by comparing the US to Non-US copyright restrictions in works provided by Wikimedia Commons<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page>.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_tags

R. Balliot
http://oceanstatelibrarian.com/contact.htm


On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Kerry Keck <keckker at rice.edu<mailto:keckker at rice.edu>> wrote:
Before the U.S. became a signatory to the 1994 international treaty that harmonized intellectual property laws, patents granted abroad were subject to the U.S. terms (which, in some cases, provided more limited terms of coverage).   Certain works copyrighted abroad had expired under these conditions, and were in the public domain in the U.S. but were "recovered" when the '94 international treaty came into effect here.

And, yes, the concern relates to this extension of copyright restrictions, versus the enlarged use and creativity afforded when a work releases into the public domain.
_________________________________
Kerry A. Keck
Asst. University Librarian, Collections
Fondren Library, Rice University
6100 Main St., Houston, TX  77005
keckker at rice.edu<mailto:keckker at rice.edu>



On Jan 18, 2012, at 1:33 PM, Mitchell, Michael wrote:

Washington (CNN) -- The Supreme Court gave its blessing Wednesday to a federal law giving copyright protection to millions of international books, music and other artistic creations that had once been in the free-access "public domain."

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/18/justice/scotus-copyrights-foreign-works/index..html?eref=rss_latest&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_latest+%28RSS%3A+Most+Recent%29<http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/18/justice/scotus-copyrights-foreign-works/index.html?eref=rss_latest&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_latest+%28RSS%3A+Most+Recent%29>

I don't exactly understand the background of this case. Anyone know why these works were in the public domain here in the first place? Are they copyrighted overseas and the copyrights weren't being honored here? Anyone know? Seems to be another bad ruling for digital access.

Michael Mitchell
Technical Services Librarian
Brazosport College
Lake Jackson, TX
Michael.mitchell at brazosport.edu<http://brazosport.edu/>


============================

To unsubscribe: http://bit.ly/web4lib

Web4Lib Web Site: http://web4lib.org/

2012-01-19
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.nd.edu/pipermail/web4lib/attachments/20120119/a23dc648/attachment.htm>