Copyright Act of 1976

Last updated

Copyright Act of 1976
Great Seal of the United States (obverse).svg
Long titleAn Act for the general revision of the Copyright Law, title 17 of the United States Code, and for other purposes
Enacted bythe 94th United States Congress
EffectiveJanuary 1, 1978
Citations
Public law Pub. L. Tooltip Public Law (United States)  94–553
Statutes at Large 90  Stat.   2541
Codification
Acts amended Copyright Act of 1909
Titles amended17 (Copyright)
U.S.C. sections created17 U.S.C. §§ 101-810
U.S.C. sections amended44 U.S.C. §§ 505, 2113; 18 U.S.C. § 2318
Legislative history
Major amendments

The Copyright Act of 1976 is a United States copyright law and remains the primary basis of copyright law in the United States, as amended by several later enacted copyright provisions.[ citation needed ] The Act spells out the basic rights of copyright holders, codified the doctrine of "fair use", and for most new copyrights adopted a unitary term based on the date of the author's death rather than the prior scheme of fixed initial and renewal terms. It became Public Law number 94-553 on October 19, 1976 and went into effect on January 1, 1978. [1]

Contents

US Register of Copyrights Barbara Ringer took an active role in drafting the statute. [2]

History and purpose

Before the 1976 Act, the last major revision to statutory copyright law in the United States occurred in 1909. [3] In deliberating the Act, Congress noted that extensive technological advances had occurred since the adoption of the 1909 Act. Television, motion pictures, sound recordings, and radio were cited as examples. The Act was designed in part to address intellectual property questions raised by these new forms of communication. [4] Barbara Ringer, who later became US Register of Copyrights in 1973, began taking an active role in advocating for and drafting a new copyright act, particularly to protect the rights of authors with the advent of new technologies. [2] [5]

Aside from advances in technology, the other main impetus behind the adoption of the 1976 Act was the development of and the United States' participation in the Universal Copyright Convention (UCC) (and its anticipated participation in the Berne Convention). While the U.S. became a party to the UCC in 1955, Congress passed Public Law 743 in order to modify copyright law to conform to the Convention's standards. [6]

In the years following the United States' adoption of the UCC, Congress commissioned multiple studies on a general revision of copyright law, culminating in a published report in 1961. [7] A draft of the bill was introduced in both the House and Senate in 1964, but the original version of the Act was revised multiple times between 1964 and 1976 (see House report number 94-1476). The bill was passed as S. 22 of the 94th Congress by a vote of 97–0 in the Senate on February 19, 1976. S. 22 was passed by a vote of 316–7 in the House of Representatives on September 22, 1976. [8] The final version was adopted into law as title 17 of the United States Code on October 19, 1976 when Gerald Ford signed it. The law went into effect on January 1, 1978. At the time, the law was considered to be a fair compromise between publishers' and authors' rights.[ citation needed ]

Barbara Ringer called the new law "a balanced compromise that comes down on the authors' and creators' side in almost every instance." The law was almost exclusively discussed in publishers' and librarians' journals, with little discussion in the mainstream press. The claimed advantage of the law's extension of the term of subsisting copyrights was that "royalties will be paid to widows and heirs for an extra 19 years for such about-to-expire copyrights as those on Sherwood Anderson's Winesburg, Ohio ". The other intent of the extension was to protect authors' rights "for life plus 50 years—the most common term internationally and the one Twain fought for in his lifetime". Further extensions of both term and scope had been desired by some, as outlined in a Time article. [9]

Significant portions of the Act

Expansion of U.S. copyright law (assuming authors create their works at age 35 and die at age 70). Extended Tom Bell's graph showing extension of U.S. copyright term over time.svg
Expansion of U.S. copyright law (assuming authors create their works at age 35 and die at age 70).

The 1976 Act, through its terms, displaces all previous copyright laws in the United States insofar as those laws conflict with the Act.[ citation needed ] Those include prior federal legislation, such as the Copyright Act of 1909, and extend to all relevant common law and state copyright laws.[ citation needed ]

Under section 102 of the Act, copyright protection extends to "original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device". The Act defines "works of authorship" as any of the following:

  1. literary works,
  2. musical works, including any accompanying words,
  3. dramatic works, including any accompanying music,
  4. pantomimes and choreographic works,
  5. pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works,
  6. motion pictures and other audiovisual works, and
  7. sound recordings. [10]

An eighth category, architectural works, was added in 1990.

The wording of section 102 is significant mainly because it effectuated a major change in the mode of United States copyright protection. Under the last major statutory revision to U.S. copyright law, the Copyright Act of 1909, federal statutory copyright protection attached to original works only when those works were 1) published and 2) had a notice of copyright affixed. State copyright law governed protection for unpublished works before the adoption of the 1976 Act, but published works, whether containing a notice of copyright or not, were governed exclusively by federal law. If no notice of copyright was affixed to a work and the work was, in fact, "published" in a legal sense, the 1909 Act provided no copyright protection and the work became part of the public domain. Under the 1976 Act, however, section 102 says that copyright protection extends to original works that are fixed in a tangible medium of expression. Thus, the 1976 Act broadened the scope of federal statutory copyright protection from "published" works to works that are "fixed".[ citation needed ]

Section 102(b) excludes several categories from copyright protection, partly codifying the concept of idea–expression distinction from Baker v. Selden . It requires that "in no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work." [10]

Music

There are separate copyright protections for musical compositions and sound recordings. Composition copyright includes lyrics and unless self-published, is usually transferred under the terms of a publishing contract. Many record companies will also require that sound recording copyright be transferred to them as part of the terms of an album release, however the owner of the composition copyright is not always the same as the owner of the sound recording copyright. [11]

Exclusive rights

Section 106 granted five exclusive rights to copyright holders, all of which are subject to the remaining sections in chapter 1 (currently, sections 107–122):

  1. the right to reproduce (copy) the work into copies and phonorecords,
  2. the right to create derivative works of the original work,
  3. the right to distribute copies and phonorecords of the work to the public by sale, lease, or rental,
  4. the right to perform the work publicly (if the work is a literary, musical, dramatic, choreographic, pantomime, motion picture, or other audiovisual work), and
  5. the right to display the work publicly (if the work is a literary, musical, dramatic, choreographic, pantomime, pictorial, graphic, sculptural, motion picture, or other audiovisual work). [12]

A sixth exclusive right was later included in 1995 by the Digital Performance Right in Sound Recordings Act: the right to perform a sound recording by means of digital audio.

Fair use

Additionally, the fair use defense to copyright infringement was codified for the first time in section 107 of the 1976 Act. Fair use was not a novel proposition in 1976, however, as federal courts had been using a common law form of the doctrine since the 1840s (an English version of fair use appeared much earlier). The Act codified this common law doctrine with little modification. Under section 107, the fair use of a copyrighted work is not copyright infringement, even if such use technically violates section 106. While fair use explicitly applies to use of copyrighted work for criticism, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research purposes, the defense is not limited to these areas. The Act gives four factors to be considered to determine whether a particular use is a fair use:

  1. the purpose and character of the use (commercial or educational, trans-formative or reproductive, political);
  2. the nature of the copyrighted work (fictional or factual, the degree of creativity);
  3. the amount and substantiality of the portion of the original work used; and
  4. the effect of the use upon the market (or potential market) for the original work. [13]

The Act was later amended to extend the fair use defense to unpublished works. [14]

Term of protection

Previous copyright law set the duration of copyright protection at 28 years with a possibility of a 28 year extension, for a total maximum term of 56 years. The 1976 Act, however, substantially increased the term of protection. Section 302 of the Act extended protection to "a term consisting of the life of the author and fifty years after the author's death". [15] In addition, the Act created a static 75-year term (dated from the date of publication) for anonymous works, pseudonymous works, and works made for hire. The extension term for works copyrighted before 1978 that had not already entered the public domain was increased from 28 years to 47 years, giving a total term of 75 years. In 1998 the Copyright Term Extension Act further extended copyright protection to the duration of the author's life plus 70 years for general copyrights and to 95 years from date of publication or 120 years from date of creation, whichever comes first, for works made for hire. Works copyrighted before 1978 have a duration of protection that depends on a variety of factors.[ citation needed ]

Section 204 of the Act governs the transfer of ownership of copyrights. The section requires a copyright holder to sign a written instrument of conveyance that expressly transfers ownership of the copyright to the intended recipient for a transfer to be effective. [16] Prior case law on this issue was conflicting, with some cases espousing a rule similar to section 204 and others reaching a quite different conclusion.[ citation needed ] In the 1942 New York case Pushman v. New York Graphic Society , [17] for example, the court held that although a copyright in a work is distinct from a property right in a copy of the work, where the only existing copy of the work is transferred, the copyright is transferred along with the copy, unless expressly withheld by the author. Section 202 of the 1976 Act retains the property right/copyright distinction, but section 204 eliminates the inconsistent common law by assuming that the copyright is withheld by the author unless it is expressly transferred.

Registration and deposit

According to section 408 of the Act, registration of a work with the Copyright Office is not a prerequisite for copyright protection. [18] The Act does, however, allow for registration, and gives the Copyright Office the power to promulgate the necessary forms. Aside from Copyright Office paperwork, the Act requires only that one copy, or two copies if the work has been published, be deposited with the Office to accomplish registration. Though registration is not required for copyright protection to attach to a work, section 411 of the Act does require registration before a copyright infringement action by the creator of the work can proceed. [19] Even if registration is denied, however, an infringement action can continue if the creator of the work joins the Copyright Office as a defendant, requiring the court to determine the copyrightability of the work before addressing the issue of infringement.[ citation needed ]

Termination rights

The Act also codified the ability for writers and other artists that license their work to others to act on termination rights 35 years after the publication of the work. [20] This was intended to allow these people to renegotiate licenses at the later period if the value of the original work was not apparent at the time or creation. This protection only applies to works made after 1978, and does not apply to works made for hire. The law requires the creator to issue notice of termination at least 2 years prior to the 35-year date giving the rights holder time to prepare. [21]

Impact on innovation

One of the functions of the Copyright Royalty Judges defined by the Copyright Act is to "minimize any disruptive impact on the structure of the industries involved and on generally prevailing industry practices". Critics of the law have questioned this aspect of it, as it discourages innovation and perpetuates older businesses. [22]

Legacy

Impact on internet radio

Streaming music on a portable device is mainstream today, but digital radio and music streaming websites such as Pandora are fighting an uphill battle when it comes to copyright protection. 17 USC 801(b)(1)(D) of the Copyright Act states that Copyright Royalty Judges should "minimize any disruptive impact on the structure of the industries involved and on generally prevailing industry practices". [22] "Much of the initial drafting of the '76 Act was by the Copyright Office, which chaired a series of meetings with prominent industry copyright lawyers throughout the 1960s". [23] Some believe[ who? ] that Section 106 was designed with the intent to maximize litigation to the benefit of the legal industry, and gives too much power and protection to the copyright holder while weakening fair use.[ citation needed ]

Critics of the Copyright Act say that Pandora will never be profitable if something does not change because "services like Pandora already pay over 60 percent of their revenue in licensing fees while others pay far less for delivering the same service. As a result, services like Pandora have been unable to see profitability and sustainability is already in question." An increase in subscription fees would likely be an end to Pandora's business. [24]

Impacts of termination rights

The termination right clause only started taking effect in 2013, with notably Victor Willis terminating rights on the songs he had written for The Village People. A lawsuit resulted from this action Scorpio Music, et al. v. Willis in 2012 (after Willis had filed notice of termination to Scorpio Music, the music distributor, and which the court upheld Willis' termination rights). Subsequently, other songwriters began seeking termination rights. [21] This has also become an issue in the film industry, as the rights to many iconic 1980s film franchises are being terminated by their original writers, such as by the family of Roderick Thorp whose novel Nothing Lasts Forever was adapted into Die Hard . [25]

See also

Proposed legislation

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright</span> Legal concept regulating rights of a creative work

A copyright is a type of intellectual property that gives the creator of an original work, or another right holder, the exclusive and legally secured right to copy, distribute, adapt, display, and perform a creative work, usually for a limited time. The creative work may be in a literary, artistic, educational, or musical form. Copyright is intended to protect the original expression of an idea in the form of a creative work, but not the idea itself. A copyright is subject to limitations based on public interest considerations, such as the fair use doctrine in the United States.

A work made for hire, in copyright law in the United States, is a work that is subject to copyright and is created by employees as part of their job or some limited types of works for which all parties agree in writing to the WFH designation. Work for hire is a statutorily defined term and so a work for hire is not created merely because parties to an agreement state that the work is a work for hire. It is an exception to the general rule that the person who actually creates a work is the legally-recognized author of that work. In the United States and certain other copyright jurisdictions, if a work is "made for hire," the employer, not the employee, is considered the legal author. In some countries, this is known as corporate authorship. The entity serving as an employer may be a corporation or other legal entity, an organization, or an individual.

Software copyright is the application of copyright in law to machine-readable software. While many of the legal principles and policy debates concerning software copyright have close parallels in other domains of copyright law, there are a number of distinctive issues that arise with software. This article primarily focuses on topics particular to software.

A work of the United States government is defined by the United States copyright law, as "a work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person's official duties". Under section 105 of the Copyright Act of 1976, such works are not entitled to domestic copyright protection under U.S. law and are therefore in the public domain.

Anti-circumvention refers to laws which prohibit the circumvention of technological barriers for using a digital good in certain ways which the rightsholders do not wish to allow. The requirement for anti-circumvention laws was globalized in 1996 with the creation of the World Intellectual Property Organization's Copyright Treaty.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright Act of 1909</span>

The Copyright Act of 1909 was a landmark statute in United States statutory copyright law. It went into effect on July 1, 1909. The 1909 Act was repealed and superseded by the Copyright Act of 1976, which went into effect on January 1, 1978; but some of 1909 Act's provisions continue to apply to copyrighted works created before 1978. It allowed for works to be copyrighted for a period of 28 years from the date of publication and extended the renewal term from 14 years to 28 years, for a maximum of 56 years.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988</span> United Kingdom law

The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, also known as the CDPA, is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that received royal assent on 15 November 1988. It reformulates almost completely the statutory basis of copyright law in the United Kingdom, which had, until then, been governed by the Copyright Act 1956 (c. 74). It also creates an unregistered design right, and contains a number of modifications to the law of the United Kingdom on Registered Designs and patents.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright notice</span> Notice to inform consumers of claimed copyright ownership

In United States copyright law, a copyright notice is a notice of statutorily prescribed form that informs users of the underlying claim to copyright ownership in a published work.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Related rights</span> Intellectual property rights of a creative work not connected with the works actual author

In copyright law, related rights are the rights of a creative work not connected with the work's actual author. It is used in opposition to the term "authors' rights". Neighbouring rights is a more literal translation of the original French droits voisins. Both authors' rights and related rights are copyrights in the sense of English or U.S. law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright Term Extension Act</span> United States copyright law

The Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act – also known as the Copyright Term Extension Act, Sonny Bono Act, or (derisively) the Mickey Mouse Protection Act – extended copyright terms in the United States in 1998. It is one of several acts extending the terms of copyright.

Under the law of the United Kingdom, a copyright is an intangible property right subsisting in certain qualifying subject matter. Copyright law is governed by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, as amended from time to time. As a result of increasing legal integration and harmonisation throughout the European Union a complete picture of the law can only be acquired through recourse to EU jurisprudence, although this is likely to change by the expiration of the Brexit transition period on 31 December 2020, the UK has left the EU on 31 January 2020. On 12 September 2018, the European Parliament approved new copyright rules to help secure the rights of writers and musicians.

The copyright law of the United States grants monopoly protection for "original works of authorship". With the stated purpose to promote art and culture, copyright law assigns a set of exclusive rights to authors: to make and sell copies of their works, to create derivative works, and to perform or display their works publicly. These exclusive rights are subject to a time and generally expire 70 years after the author's death or 95 years after publication. In the United States, works published before January 1, 1929, are in the public domain.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Integrated circuit layout design protection</span> IP protections for computer hardware

Layout designs (topographies) of integrated circuits are a field in the protection of intellectual property.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Semiconductor Chip Protection Act of 1984</span> United States intellectual property law

The Semiconductor Chip Protection Act of 1984 is an act of the US Congress that makes the layouts of integrated circuits legally protected upon registration, and hence illegal to copy without permission. It is an integrated circuit layout design protection law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fairness in Music Licensing Act of 1998</span> United States federal law

The Fairness in Music Licensing Act increased the number of bars and restaurants that were exempted from needing a public performance license to play music or television during business hours. The bill was companion legislation passed along with the Copyright Term Extension Act in 1998.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Public domain in the United States</span>

Works are in the public domain if they are not covered by the intellectual property right known as copyright, or if the intellectual property rights to the works have expired. Works automatically enter the public domain when their copyright has expired. The United States Copyright Office is a federal agency tasked with maintaining copyright records.

Criminal copyright laws prohibit the unacknowledged use of another's intellectual property for the purpose of financial gain. Violation of these laws can lead to fines and jail time. Criminal copyright laws have been a part of U.S. laws since 1897, which added a misdemeanor penalty for unlawful performances if "willful and for profit". Criminal penalties were greatly expanded in the latter half of the twentieth century, and those found guilty of criminal copyright infringement may now be imprisoned for decades and fined hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The copyright law of the United States has a long and complicated history, dating back to colonial times. It was established as federal law with the Copyright Act of 1790. This act was updated many times, including a major revision in 1976.

Remedies for copyright infringement in the United States can be either civil or criminal in nature. Criminal remedies for copyright infringement prevent the unauthorized use of copyrighted works by defining certain violations of copyright to be criminal wrongs which are liable to be prosecuted and punished by the state. Unlike civil remedies, which are obtained through private civil actions initiated by the owner of the copyright, criminal remedies are secured by the state which prosecutes the infringing individual or organisation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Collective work (US)</span>

A collective work in the copyright law of the United States is a work that contains the works of several authors assembled and published into a collective whole. The owner of the work has the property rights in the collective work, but the authors of the individual works may retain rights in their contributions. Electronic reproduction of the whole work is allowed, but electronic reproduction of the individual works on their own, outside the context of the work as a whole, may constitute an infringement of copyright.

References

  1. ↑ Decisions of the United States Courts Involving Copyright. U.S. Government Printing Office. 1985. pp. 311–.
  2. 1 2 "Barbara A. Ringer '49". Archived from the original on June 2, 2014. Retrieved June 4, 2014.
  3. ↑ "General Guide to the Copyright Act of 1976" (PDF). September 1977.
  4. ↑ See House report number 94-1476.
  5. ↑ Schudel, Matt (April 26, 2009). "Force Behind New Copyright Law". The Washington Post. ISSN   0190-8286 . Retrieved October 12, 2023.
  6. ↑ Sherman, Paul J. (1955). "The Universal Copyright Convention: Its Effect on United States Law". Columbia Law Review. 55 (8): 1137–1175. doi:10.2307/1119637. ISSN   0010-1958. JSTOR   1119637.
  7. ↑ Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law (PDF) (Report). U.S. Government Printing Office. 1961.
  8. ↑ "Actions - S.22 - 94th Congress (1975-1976): An Act for the general revision of the Copyright Law, title 17 of the United States Code, and for other purposes". Congress.gov . Library of Congress.
  9. ↑ "Righting Copyright", Time, November 1, 1976, p. 92.
  10. 1 2 17 U.S.C. 102
  11. ↑ Demers, Joanna (2006). Steal This Music: How Intellectual Property Law Affects Musical Creativity . The University of Georgia Press. p.  22.
  12. ↑ 17 U.S.C. 106
  13. ↑ 17 U.S.C. 107
  14. ↑ Public Law 102-492  – via Wikisource.
  15. ↑ "U.S. Copyright Act of 1976" (PDF). United States House of Representatives. p. 90 STAT. 2572.
  16. ↑ 17 U.S.C. 204
  17. ↑ Pushman v. New York Graphic Society, 39 N.E.2d 249 (N.Y. 1942)
  18. ↑ 17 U.S.C. 408
  19. ↑ 17 U.S.C. 411
  20. ↑ 17 U.S.C. 203
  21. 1 2 Caplan, Brian (August 2012). "Navigating US Copyright Termination Rights". WIPO Magazine . Retrieved October 2, 2019.
  22. 1 2 Masnick, Mike (September 17, 2012). "The Copyright Act Explicitly Says Disruptive Innovation Should Be Blocked". techdirt.com. Mike Masnick. Retrieved December 21, 2014.
  23. ↑ Weber, Peter (July 10, 2014). "Death to Pandora? A guide to the looming music copyright war". The Week . Retrieved December 21, 2014.
  24. ↑ Versace, Chris (June 23, 2014). "The Future of Streaming Music Rest with Congress". Fox Business . Archived from the original on November 27, 2014. Retrieved December 21, 2014.
  25. ↑ Gardner, Eriq (October 2, 2019). "Real-Life 'Terminator': Major Studios Face Sweeping Loss of Iconic '80s Film Franchise Rights". The Hollywood Reporter . Retrieved October 2, 2019.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.