Copyright registration

Last updated
The pre-1978 indices to the copyright records are available for public inspection at the Library of Congress. Copyright Card Catalog Files.jpg
The pre-1978 indices to the copyright records are available for public inspection at the Library of Congress.

The purpose of copyright registration is to place on record a verifiable account of the date and content of the work in question, so that in the event of a legal claim, or case of infringement or plagiarism, the copyright owner can produce a copy of the work from an official government source.

Contents

Before 1978, in the United States, federal copyright was generally secured by the act of publication with notice of copyright or by registration of an unpublished work. [1] This has now been largely superseded by international conventions, principally the Berne Convention, which provide rights harmonized at an international level without a requirement for national registration. However, the U.S. still provides legal advantages for registering works of U.S. origin. For example, a registration, or a refusal of registration, [2] is required before an infringement suit may be filed in a US court and registration is required for claiming statutory damages in most cases.

Requirement of registration

It is a common misconception to confuse copyright registration with the granting of copyright. Copyright in most countries today is automatic on "fixation" – it applies as soon as the work is fixed in some tangible medium. This standard is established internationally by the Berne Convention (1886), which most countries have signed onto since. Registration may be required by countries before joining Berne. For instance, the US required registration of copyrighted works before it signed onto the Berne Convention in 1989; at that point, registration was no longer required for works to be copyrighted in the US.

The observation that registration is not required in the United States, however, has been described as misleading. [3] : 86–87  This is partly because registration remains a prerequisite to filing an infringement suit, [3] : 87  and also because important remedies depend on prompt registration—such as attorneys fees and statutory damages. [3] : 90  At least one commentator has questioned whether the conditioning of legal recourse on registration is inconsistent with the United States' obligations under the Berne Convention regarding "formalities". [3] : 90 n.11 

Scholarship on reinstating registration requirements

Some scholars and policy advocates (such as law professor and activist Lawrence Lessig and U.S. Representative Zoe Lofgren) have called for returning to a system of registration requirements and possibly other formalities such as copyright notice. The system of automatic copyright on fixation has been cited as one of the factors behind the growth of so-called "orphan works" in, for instance, the U.S. Copyright Office's 2006 report on orphan works. [4] UC Berkeley's Law School held a conference in 2013 on the question of "Reform(aliz)ing Copyright for the Internet Age?", noting that

"Formalities, which in the past three decades have largely disappeared from American copyright law, may be about to stage a comeback. ... [R]ecent research on formalities suggests that we can get many of the benefits that formalities promise for a more efficient and focused copyright law, without the problems that led us to do away with them in the first place." [5]

Registering agencies

All United States copyright registrations and renewals registered since 1978 have been published online at the Copyright Office website. Registrations and renewals prior to 1978 [10] were published in semi-annual softcover Copyright Catalogs. For films from 1894 to 1969, inclusive, Library of Congress published hardcover Cumulative Copyright Catalogs, each covering ten or more years.

Please see the Copyright Catalog article for links to download digital copies of these pre-1978 US catalogs.

Requirements by country

Copyright Registration by Country
CountryRegistration Agency (if any)Copyright registration requirements
Albania Albanian Author’s Right Office Voluntary. [11] Registration is acceptable in court as evidence of author's right. [12]
Antigua and Barbuda NoneNot required. No voluntary procedure available. [13]
Argentina Ministry of Justice, Security, and Human Rights Voluntary. Registration serves as presumption of authorship and date of creation. [14]
Australia NoneNot required. No voluntary procedure available. [15]
Belarus National Center of Intellectual Property Voluntary. May establish evidence of date of creation and a presumption of ownership.[ citation needed ]
Brazil Various, depending on subject matter [16] Voluntary. Registration may help to provide evidence of authorship and which may aid in certifying precedence in the case of two similar works. [17]
Canada Canadian Intellectual Property Office Voluntary. Registration is evidence of ownership in an infringement case. [18]
China National Copyright Administration Voluntary. Recommended, especially for software. [19]
Denmark NoneNot required. No voluntary procedure available. [20]
Egypt NoneNot required. No voluntary procedure available. [21]
Finland NoneNot required. No voluntary procedure available. [22]
France Institut National de la Propriété IntellectuelleVoluntary, may establish evidence of date of creation and a presumption of ownership. [23] [24]
Germany NoneNot required. No voluntary procedure available. [25]
India Copyright Office Voluntary, establishes prima facie evidence of the facts contained on the registration certificate and may be used in court as proof of those facts. [26]
Israel NoneNot required. No voluntary procedure available. [27]
Italy NoneNot required. No voluntary procedure available. [28]
Jamaica None - The Intellectual Property Services Centre is a non-profit organization that provides private registration services and is recommended by the Jamaican Intellectual Property Office for that purpose [29] Not officially available, though voluntary registration through the Intellectual Property Services Centre provides rebuttable evidence of authorship and/or ownership. The Jamaican Intellectual Property Office officially recommends the practice of "poor man's copyright" to provide evidence of ownership and creation date. [29]
Japan Agency for Cultural Affairs Voluntary, establishes presumption of facts contained in registration for use in court. [30]
Kenya Kenya Copyright BoardVoluntary, establishes prima facie evidence of the facts contained on the registration certificate and may be used in court as proof of those facts
Lithuania NoneNot required. No voluntary procedure available. [31]
Malaysia Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia (MyIPO)Voluntary Notifications is to assist in providing prima facie evidence of ownership and evidence of date of creation. This may aid the copyright owner since the voluntary notification can be used in court as proof of the facts made. [32]
Mexico Instituto Nacional del Derecho de Autor Voluntary, establishes prima facie evidence of ownership. [33]
Portugal Inspeção Geral das Atividades Culturais Voluntary, offers refutable presumption of copyright and ownership. [34]
Russian Federation Rospatent Voluntary registration available for computer programs and databases. [35]
South Africa Companies and Intellectual Property Commission (CIPC) Voluntary registration available for cinematograph films. Establishes prima facie evidence of the facts contained on the registration certificate and may be used in court as proof of those facts. [36]
Spain Ministry of Culture Voluntary, offers refutable presumption of copyright and ownership, but not required to file suit for infringement. [37]
Sweden NoneNot required. No voluntary procedure available. [38]
Turkey Ministry of Culture Required for cinematographic works and phonograms, voluntary for all other works. Registration may be used as evidence. [39]
Ukraine National Office of Intellectual PropertyVoluntary. [40]
United Kingdom NoneNot required. No voluntary procedure available. From 1842 to 1883, many products carried a Registration lozenge. [41] [42]
United States United States Copyright Office Not required to obtain copyright protection, but required for domestic copyright owners to bring a suit for copyright infringement in federal court. Not required for a federal court's subject-matter jurisdiction, however, as established through the Supreme Court decision in Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick . [43] [44] Registration establishes prima facie evidence of facts contained in registration certificate if made within five years of first publication. Copyright owners are precluded from collecting statutory damages and/or attorney's fees for any infringement occurring before registration. [45] Foreign copyright owners are not required to register before suing for copyright infringement, but at least one court has held that they are subject to the same preclusion of statutory damages as domestic authors. [46]

See also

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.

<i>Itar-Tass Russian News Agency v. Russian Kurier, Inc.</i>

Itar-Tass Russian News Agency v. Russian Kurier, Inc., 153 F.3d 82, was a copyright case about the Russian language weekly Russian Kurier in New York City that had copied and published various materials from Russian newspapers and news agency reports of Itar-TASS. The case was ultimately decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The decision was widely commented upon and the case is considered a landmark case because the court defined rules applicable in the U.S. on the extent to which the copyright laws of the country of origin or those of the U.S. apply in international disputes over copyright. The court held that to determine whether a claimant actually held the copyright on a work, the laws of the country of origin usually applied, but that to decide whether a copyright infringement had occurred and for possible remedies, the laws of the country where the infringement was claimed applied.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">All rights reserved</span> Copyright notice

"All rights reserved" is a phrase that originated in copyright law as part of copyright notices. It indicates that the copyright holder reserves, or holds for their own use, all the rights provided by copyright law, such as distribution, performance, and creation of derivative works; that is, they have not waived any such right. Copyright law in most countries no longer requires such notices, but the phrase persists. The original understanding of the phrase as relating specifically to copyright may have been supplanted by common usage of the phrase to refer to any legal right, although it is probably understood to refer at least to copyright.

Intellectual property rights (IPRs) have been acknowledged and protected in China since 1980. China has acceded to the major international conventions on protection of rights to intellectual property. Domestically, protection of intellectual property law has also been established by government legislation, administrative regulations, and decrees in the areas of trademark, copyright, and patent.

Copyright in the Netherlands is governed by the Dutch Copyright Law, copyright is the exclusive right of the author of a work of literature or artistic work to publish and copy such work.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Uruguay Round Agreements Act</span> US free trade law with implications for intellectual property

The Uruguay Round Agreements Act is an Act of Congress in the United States that implemented in U.S. law the Marrakesh Agreement of 1994. The Marrakesh Agreement was part of the Uruguay Round of negotiations which transformed the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) into the World Trade Organization (WTO). One of its effects is to give United States copyright protection to foreign works that had previously been in the public domain in the United States.

The copyright symbol, or copyright sign, ©, is the symbol used in copyright notices for works other than sound recordings. The use of the symbol is described by the Universal Copyright Convention. The symbol is widely recognized but, under the Berne Convention, is no longer required in most nations to assert a new copyright.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988</span> United States law

The Berne Convention Implementation Act of 1988 is a copyright act that came into force in the United States on March 1, 1989, making it a party to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works.

The rule of the shorter term, also called the comparison of terms, is a provision in international copyright treaties. The provision allows that signatory countries can limit the duration of copyright they grant to foreign works under national treatment to no more than the copyright term granted in the country of origin of the work.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Outline of intellectual property</span> Overview of and topical guide to intellectual property

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to intellectual property:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright law of Turkey</span>

Turkish copyright law is documented in the law number 5846 on Intellectual and Artistic Works.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Berne Convention</span> 1886 international assembly and treaty

The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, usually known as the Berne Convention, was an international assembly held in 1886 in the Swiss city of Bern by ten European countries with the goal of agreeing on a set of legal principles for the protection of original work. They drafted and adopted a multi-party contract containing agreements for a uniform, border-crossing system that became known under the same name. Its rules have been updated many times since then. The treaty provides authors, musicians, poets, painters, and other creators with the means to control how their works are used, by whom, and on what terms. In some jurisdictions these type of rights are referred to as copyright; on the European continent they are generally referred to as author' rights or makerright.

As in most developing countries, intellectual property law in Senegal is weak. Copyright infringement is not regarded as a crime, and it is widely accepted by consumers. Senegal's criminal law provisions do not provide for criminal procedures in case of trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a commercial scale. In addition, because of budget constraints, Senegal's Copyright Office has had difficulty enforcing sanctions against individuals who infringe copyrights in the course of business, including hackers and distributors of infringed copies. Nonetheless, the Copyright Office has begun vigorous attempts against counterfeit media, seizing items as well as putting stickers on legal merchandise. It is currently continuing these enforcement efforts. Microsoft began an anti-piracy campaign in Senegal in early 2004 and reports some success in converting users of pirated Microsoft products through the sale of deeply discounted Microsoft licenses.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright Act 1911</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Copyright Act 1911, also known as the Imperial Copyright Act 1911, was an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom (UK) which received royal assent on 16 December 1911. The act established copyright law in the UK and the British Empire. The act amended existing UK copyright law, as recommended by a royal commission in 1878 and repealed all previous copyright legislation that had been in force in the UK. The act also implemented changes arising from the first revision of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works in 1908.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intellectual property in Iran</span>

Iran is a member of the WIPO since 2001 and has acceded to several WIPO intellectual property treaties. Iran joined the Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property in 1959. In December 2003 Iran became a party to the Madrid Agreement and the Madrid Protocol for the International Registration of Marks. In 2005 Iran joined the Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations of Origin and their International Registration, which ensures the protection of geographical names associated with products. As at February 2008 Iran had yet to accede to The Hague Agreement for the Protection of Industrial Designs.

Copyright formalities are legal requirements needed to obtain a copyright in a particular jurisdiction. Common copyright formalities include copyright registration, copyright renewal, copyright notice, and copyright deposit.

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.

Moberg v. 33T LLC was a 2009 case, where the verdict was that a photo posted on a foreign internet site is not a US work.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright law of Moldova</span>

The copyright law of Moldova regulates the copyright laws of Moldova. The first official decree related to copyrights in the country was made on 25 November 1991, shortly after its independence on 27 August of the same year. On 25 May 1991, the State Agency on the Protection of Industrial Property (AGEPI) was created, making it the second copyright agency in the country together with the State Agency for Copyright (ADA). In 1993, Moldova signed an agreement on cooperation in the protection of copyright and the related rights between it and other countries, all members of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), which only came into force in 1999. By that time, Moldova had already created its official copyright law: Law No. 293-XIII, from 1994 but applied since 1995.

References

  1. ↑ Copyright Basics (Circular 1) p.3.
  2. ↑ "17 U.S. Code § 411 - Registration and civil infringement actions". Legal Information Institute.
  3. 1 2 3 4 Thomas, Roger E.; Schechter, John R. (2003). Intellectual Property: The Law of Copyrights, Patents, and Trademarks. St. Paul, MN: Thomson/West. ISBN   0-314-06599-7.
  4. ↑ United States Copyright Office, Copyright Office's Report on Orphan Works (2006).
  5. ↑ "Reform(aliz)ing Copyright for the Internet Age?" Archived 2013-05-02 at the Wayback Machine , Berkeley School of Law, April 18–19, 2013, Claremont Hotel, Berkeley CA.
  6. ↑ "A Guide to Copyright" . Retrieved 21 December 2013.
  7. ↑ Copyright Basics (Circular 1) p.7.
  8. ↑ Copyright and the Public Domain page 11-10; Stephen Fishman - Law Journal Press (2008); ISBN   978-1-58852-151-4
  9. ↑ On Copyright and other rights related with it, Law No.9380 of 28.04.2005 (Albania) .docx icon.svg DOC
  10. ↑ On Creation and Working of Albanian Author's Right Office, Decision No. 232 of 19.04.2006 (Albania) .docx icon.svg DOC
  11. ↑ "Copyright Act, 2003 (Antigua and Barbuda)" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2008-11-20. Retrieved 2010-02-06.
  12. ↑ "Argentina - Benefits of Registration (Spanish)". Archived from the original on August 24, 2007.
  13. ↑ How You Get Copyright Archived 2010-08-25 at the Wayback Machine , Australian Copyright Council
  14. ↑ "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2010-03-04. Retrieved 2010-02-05.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  15. ↑ Azevedo, Rodrigo. "Chap. 6: Brazil". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  16. ↑ Government of Canada, Innovation (January 10, 2023). "A guide to copyright". ised-isde.canada.ca.
  17. ↑ Ganea, Peter. "Chap. 8: People's Republic of China". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  18. ↑ "WIPO Lex". www.wipo.int.
  19. ↑ Makeen, Makeen. "Chap. 14: Egypt". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  20. ↑ "Tekijänoikeus".
  21. ↑ Sirinelli, Pierre. "Chap. 15: France". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  22. ↑ "Le droit d'auteur". INPI.fr. July 28, 2015.
  23. ↑ Thum, Dorothy. "Chap. 16: Germany". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  24. ↑ Anand, Pravin; Reddy, Prashant. "Chap. 19: India". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  25. ↑ Greenman, Tony. "Chap. 20: Israel". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  26. ↑ Auteri, Paolo. "Diritto di autore". In Giappichelli (ed.). Diritto industriale. Proprietà intellettuale e concorrenza (September 2016 ed.).
  27. 1 2 JIPO - Copyright and Related Rights Archived 2010-02-03 at the Wayback Machine
  28. ↑ Ueno, Tatsuhiro. "Chap. 22: Japan". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  29. ↑ Mizaras, Vytautas. "Chap. 24: Lithuania". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  30. ↑ "Copyright Voluntary Notification – The Official Portal of Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia". The Official Portal of Intellectual Property Corporation of Malaysia – (MyIPO). 2017-07-20. Retrieved 2019-12-09.
  31. ↑ Schmidt, Luis. "Chap. 25: Mexico". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  32. ↑ Leitão, Luís. "Chap. 14: Portugal". In Almedina (ed.). Direito de Autor (2011 ed.).
  33. ↑ Savelieva, Irina. "Chap. 30: Russian Federation". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  34. ↑ "CIPC :: Registration Procedure". www.cipc.co.za. Retrieved 2019-12-05.
  35. ↑ Xalabarder, Raquel. "Chap. 35: Spain". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  36. ↑ Cederlund, Karin; Axhamn, Johan. "Chap. 36: Sweden". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  37. ↑ Nal, Temel. "Chap. 39: Turkey". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  38. ↑ "Про авторське право і суміжні права". Офіційний вебпортал парламенту України.
  39. ↑ "Registration lozenge: Sampson Mordan & Co Ltd". Antiques in Oxford. Retrieved 2020-10-05.
  40. ↑ Best, Hubert. "Chap. 40: United Kingdom". In Silke von Lewinski (ed.). Copyright Throughout the World (December 2009 ed.).
  41. ↑ "REED ELSEVIER, INC. v. MUCHNICK".
  42. ↑ "Trying to Curb "Drive-By Jurisdictional Rulings": Supreme Court Clarifies Purpose of Registration Requirement in Copyright Cases" Archived 2011-07-16 at the Wayback Machine by Moses Heyward
  43. ↑ 17 U.S.C. § 412
  44. ↑ Football Association Premier League Ltd. v. YouTube Inc. , No. 07 Civ. 3582, (S.D.N.Y. July 3, 2009)

Further reading

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.