Copyright term

Last updated

The copyright term is the length of time copyright subsists in a work before it passes into the public domain. In most of the world, this length of time is the life of the author plus either 50 or 70 years.

Contents

Copyright subsists for a variety of lengths in different jurisdictions. The length of the term can depend on several factors, including the type of work (e.g. musical composition or novel), whether the work has been published or not, and whether the work was created by an individual or a corporation. In most of the world, the default length of copyright is the life of the author plus either 50 or 70 years. In the United States, the term for most existing works is a fixed number of years after the date of creation or publication. In most countries (for example, the United States [1] and the United Kingdom [2] ) copyright expires at the end of the calendar year in question.

The length and requirements for copyright duration are subject to change by legislation, and since the early 20th century there have been a number of adjustments made in various countries, which can make determining the copyright duration in a given country difficult. For example, the United States used to require copyrights to be renewed after 28 years to stay in force, and formerly required a copyright notice upon first publication to gain coverage. In Italy and France, there were post-wartime extensions that could increase the term by approximately six years in Italy and up to about 14 in France. Many countries have extended the length of their copyright terms (sometimes retroactively). International treaties, like the Berne Convention, establish minimum terms for copyrights, but these only apply to the signatory countries, and individual countries may grant longer terms than those set out in a treaty. [3]

Implications

The extension of copyright term imposes tangible restrictions on the public domain. For instance, scholar Neil Netanel argued that Copyright Term Extension Act 1998 prevented the entering of works central to cultural heritage of the US into the public domain. He argued, culturally important dissemination, recasting, or incorporation into new expression is prevented due "to the copyright holder's veto". As examples he gave the adaption of the plot from novels such as The Great Gatsby and Peter Pan , the refashion of characters like Mickey Mouse, or the use of Tin Pan Alley songs like "Let's Do It (Let's Fall in Love)" for documentaries about the Great Depression. [4]

For the millions of older copyrighted works of less enduring popularity, it is difficult, or impossible, to trace the copyright ownership and determine who holds the particular rights that would have to be licensed for the use of the work. The problem of such orphan works stems from the extension of copyright term and the lack of requirement for the copyright owner to renew or register their copyright. [4] In order to tackle this perceived problem some jurisdictions have revised their copyright laws to allow use of orphaned works, after diligent searches. [5]

Reception and discussion

Discussions about the optimal length of the copyright term (e.g. regarding the copyright's incentive for creative production [6] ) is a significant part of public and scientific discourse and reception. [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]

One of the earlier and often cited positions is from the British politician Thomas Babington Macaulay who argued in an 1841 speech in the House of Commons that copyright is a monopoly and as such has generally negative effects on society. [13] [14] Although Macaulay's speech is widely reported, the reaction to it in the House of Commons is hard to find – Ricketson reports that following Macaulay's claims that the heirs of certain authors would block publication of their works:

At this point, the debate in the House of Commons fell into farce because there were claims by other speakers that they had no doubts (based on their own personal knowledge) that Richardson and Boswell's descendants would still have done the right thing and allowed reprinting, however much they abhorred their ancestors' works! [15]

It is also worth noting that Macaulay is arguing here against term extension, he is not arguing against copyright. This point is well made by Macaulay himself:

The advantages arising from a system of copyright are obvious. It is desirable that we should have a supply of good books: we cannot have such a supply unless men of letters are liberally remunerated; and the least objectionable way of remunerating them is by means of copyright. [16]

Liebowitz describes use of the term monopoly in relation to copyright as misleading, but "rhetorically effective"; [17] while Towse writes that a more appropriate term is 'monopolistic competition'. [18]

In 2009, a paper by Rufus Pollock of University of Cambridge scientifically quantified the optimal copyright term length at 15 years, significantly shorter than any currently existing copyright term, via an economical model with empirically-estimable parameters. [10] [19] [20]

In 2013 scholar Petra Moser concluded in a paper on the impact of the copyright extension on the British Copyright Act of 1814 that "longer copyrights raise the costs of accessing intellectual assets for consumers and other firms, which may discourage the diffusion of knowledge and decelerate the pace of cumulative innovation and learning-by-doing." [6]

In 2014 a Rock, Paper, Shotgun article about the existence of orphaned classic video games and the suggestion of letting them enter the public domain after 20 years raised a controversial public debate about copyright terms and the public domain [21] [22] [23] between game industry veterans John Walker, George Broussard, and Steve Gaynor. [24] [25]

A paper published in March 2015 in the Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation analysed with a simulated model the relationship of scientific knowledge creation to copyright term length and concluded a decreased knowledge production on copyright term increases for the analysed context. [7]

As a curiosity, the work Peter Pan, or The Boy Who Wouldn't Grow Up is subject in the UK to a special clause in the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 [26] that granted Great Ormond Street Hospital a right to royalty in perpetuity. J. M. Barrie had gifted the copyright to the work to the hospital in 1929. The different copyright terms in the various jurisdictions has led to some disputes involving derivative works created and/or sold elsewhere in the world. [27]

Charts

Several charts have been made to help decipher the various copyright terms in the United States, such as:

See also

Related Research Articles

A copyright is a type of intellectual property that gives its owner the exclusive 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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Intellectual property</span> Ownership of creative expressions and processes

Intellectual property (IP) is a category of property that includes intangible creations of the human intellect. There are many types of intellectual property, and some countries recognize more than others. The best-known types are patents, copyrights, trademarks, and trade secrets. The modern concept of intellectual property developed in England in the 17th and 18th centuries. The term "intellectual property" began to be used in the 19th century, though it was not until the late 20th century that intellectual property became commonplace in most of the world's legal systems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Statute of Anne</span> 1710 legislation in Great Britain regulating copyright

The Statute of Anne, also known as the Copyright Act 1709 or the Copyright Act 1710, was an act of the Parliament of Great Britain passed in 1710, which was the first statute to provide for copyright regulated by the government and courts, rather than by private parties.

Eldred v. Ashcroft, 537 U.S. 186 (2003), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States upholding the constitutionality of the 1998 Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA). The practical result of this was to prevent a number of works from entering the public domain in 1998 and following years, as would have occurred under the Copyright Act of 1976. Materials which the plaintiffs had worked with and were ready to republish were now unavailable due to copyright restrictions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Thomas Babington Macaulay</span> British historian and politician (1800–1859)

Thomas Babington Macaulay, 1st Baron Macaulay, was a British historian and Whig politician, who served as the Secretary at War between 1839 and 1841, and as the Paymaster General between 1846 and 1848.

Libertarians have differing opinions on the validity of intellectual property.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright law of Canada</span> Canadian statutes controlling copyright

The copyright law of Canada governs the legally enforceable rights to creative and artistic works under the laws of Canada. Canada passed its first colonial copyright statute in 1832 but was subject to imperial copyright law established by Britain until 1921. Current copyright law was established by the Copyright Act of Canada which was first passed in 1921 and substantially amended in 1988, 1997, and 2012. All powers to legislate copyright law are in the jurisdiction of the Parliament of Canada by virtue of section 91(23) of the Constitution Act, 1867.

Perpetual copyright, also known as indefinite copyright, is copyright that lasts indefinitely. Perpetual copyright arises either when a copyright has no finite term from outset, or when a copyright's original finite term is perpetually extended. The first of these two scenarios is highly uncommon, as the current laws of all countries with copyright statutes set a standard limit on the duration, based either on the date of creation/publication, or on the date of the creator's death. Exceptions have sometimes been made, however, for unpublished works. Usually, special legislation is required, granting a perpetual copyright to a specific work.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Public Domain Day</span> Observance of when copyrights expire and works enter into the public domain

Public Domain Day (PDD) is an observance of when copyrights expire and works enter into the public domain. This legal transition of copyright works into the public domain usually happens every year on January 1 based on the individual copyright laws of each country.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Public-domain software</span> Software in the public domain

Public-domain software is software that has been placed in the public domain, in other words, software for which there is absolutely no ownership such as copyright, trademark, or patent. Software in the public domain can be modified, distributed, or sold even without any attribution by anyone; this is unlike the common case of software under exclusive copyright, where licenses grant limited usage rights.

<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.

Crown copyright is a type of copyright protection. It subsists in works of the governments of some Commonwealth realms and provides special copyright rules for the Crown, i.e. government departments and (generally) state entities. Each Commonwealth realm has its own Crown copyright regulations. There are therefore no common regulations that apply to all or a number of those countries. There are some considerations being made in Canada, UK, Australia and New Zealand regarding the "reuse of Crown-copyrighted material, through new licences".

The philosophy of copyright considers philosophical issues linked to copyright policy, and other jurisprudential problems that arise in legal systems' interpretation and application of copyright law.

The public domain (PD) consists of all the creative work to which no exclusive intellectual property rights apply. Those rights may have expired, been forfeited, expressly waived, or may be inapplicable. Because no one holds the exclusive rights, anyone can legally use or reference those works without permission.

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.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright Act of 1976</span> United States law

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. 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.

<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 intellectual property rights at all, or if the intellectual property rights to the works have expired.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rufus Pollock</span> British economist, activist and social entrepreneur

Rufus Pollock is a British economist, activist and social entrepreneur. He has been a leading figure in the global open knowledge and open data movements, starting with his founding in 2004 of the non-profit Open Knowledge Foundation which he led until 2015. From 2007-2010 he was the Mead Fellow in Economics at Emmanuel College, Cambridge and from 2010-2013 he was a Shuttleworth Foundation fellow. In 2012 was appointed an Ashoka Fellow and remains an Associate of the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law at the University of Cambridge and continues to serve on the board of Open Knowledge International. Since leaving Open Knowledge International, his work has moved to focus more on broader issues of social transformation and in 2016 he co-founded a new non-profit "Life Itself". However, he has continued to work actively on the economics and politics of the information age, including publishing "The Open Revolution: Rewriting the Rules of the Information Age" in 2018.

Copyright renewal is a copyright formality through which an initial term of copyright protection for a work can be extended for a second term. Once the term of copyright protection has ended, the copyrighted work enters the public domain, and can be freely reproduced and incorporated into new works.

When a work's copyright expires, it enters the public domain. The following is a list of works that entered the public domain in 2020. Since laws vary globally, the copyright status of some works is not uniform.

References

  1. ↑ 17 U.S.C.   § 305
  2. ↑ "Amendments of the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988". The Duration of Copyright and Rights in Performances Regulations. 1995.
  3. ↑ Nimmer, David (2003). Copyright: Sacred Text, Technology, and the DMCA. Kluwer Law International. p. 63. ISBN   978-90-411-8876-2. OCLC   50606064.
  4. 1 2 Netanel, Neil (2008). Copyright's paradox. Oxford University Press US. p. 200. ISBN   9780195137620.
  5. ↑ Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988, s44B
  6. 1 2 Li, Xing; MacGarvie, Megan; Moser, Petra (February 9, 2018). "Dead poets' property: how does copyright influence price?" (PDF). RAND Journal of Economics. 49 (1): 181–205. doi: 10.1111/1756-2171.12223 .
  7. 1 2 Haydari, Shahram; Smead, Rory (March 31, 2015). "Does Longer Copyright Protection Help or Hurt Scientific Knowledge Creation?". Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation . 18 (2): 23. doi: 10.18564/jasss.2720 . The prevailing trend in most simulations was that increasing the copyright term resulted decreased knowledge production.
  8. ↑ "Copyright and wrong: Why the rules on copyright need to return to their roots". The Economist . April 8, 2010. The notion that lengthening copyright increases creativity is questionable, however. Authors and artists do not generally consult the statute books before deciding whether or not to pick up pen or paintbrush. And overlong copyrights often limit, rather than encourage, a work's dissemination, impact and influence.
  9. ↑ Posner, Richard (September 30, 2012). "Do patent and copyright law restrict competition and creativity excessively?". The Becker-Posner Blog. University of Chicago Law School. I am concerned that both patent and copyright protection, though particularly the former, may be excessive.
  10. 1 2 Watt, Richard (September 26, 2014). Handbook on the Economics of Copyright: A Guide for Students and Teachers. Edward Elgar Publishing. ISBN   9781849808538 . Retrieved January 11, 2015.
  11. ↑ Masnick, Mike (February 13, 2013). "New Research: Extending Copyright Massively Increases Prices, Limits Dissemination Of Knowledge". TechDirt.
  12. ↑ Matt Asay (February 18, 2013). "John Lennon's lesson for public-domain innovation - IP protection hurting, not helping, US and UK". The Register . Retrieved January 2, 2017. TechDirt highlights research showing that extending copyrights increases prices and limits dissemination of knowledge, while also pointing out that people who believe patents cause innovation are simply confusing correlation with causation. If anything, patents inhibit innovation.
  13. ↑ "Opposing Copyright Extension" Archived December 24, 2016, at the Wayback Machine . Extract from Macaulay, Thomas Babington (1967). Young, G. M. (ed.). Prose and Poetry. Harvard University Press.
  14. ↑ Boyle, James (July 24, 2014). "Macaulay on Copyright" (blog). The Public Domain.
  15. ↑ Ricketson, Sam (1992). "The copyright term". International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law. Springer (753): 767.
  16. ↑ Macaulay, Thomas Babington (1860). Speeches of Lord Macaulay. Longman, Green, Longman and Roberts. p. 232.
  17. ↑ Liebowitz, Stan (2015). "A critique of copyright criticism". George Mason Law Review. 22:4:943: 958.
  18. ↑ Towse, Ruth (1999). "Copyright, risk and the artist: an economic approach to policy for artists". International Journal of Cultural Policy. 6:1:91: 105 (note 9).
  19. ↑ Pollock, Rufus (October 1, 2007). "Optimal Copyright over Time: Technological Change and the Stock of Works" (PDF). University of Cambridge. Archived from the original (PDF) on February 21, 2013. Retrieved January 11, 2015. The optimal level for copyright has been a matter for extensive debate over the last decade. Using a parsimonious theoretical model this paper contributes several new results of relevance to this debate. In particular we demonstrate that (a) optimal copyright is likely to fall as the production costs of 'originals' decline (for example as a result of digitization) (b) technological change which reduces costs of production may imply a decrease or a decrease in optimal levels of protection (this contrasts with a large number of commentators, particularly in the copyright industries, who have argued that such change necessitates increases in protection) (c) the optimal level of copyright will, in general, fall over time as the stock of work increases.
  20. ↑ Pollock, Rufus (June 15, 2009). "Forever minus a day? Calculating optimal copyright term" (PDF). University of Cambridge. Archived from the original (PDF) on January 12, 2013. Retrieved January 11, 2015. The optimal term of copyright has been a matter for extensive debate over the last decade. Based on a novel approach we derive an explicit formula which characterises the optimal term as a function of a few key and, most importantly, empirically-estimable parameters. Using existing data on recordings and books we obtain a point estimate of around 15 years for optimal copyright term with a 99% confidence interval extending up to 38 years. This is substantially shorter than any current copyright term and implies that existing terms are too long.
  21. ↑ Walker, John (January 29, 2014). "GOG's Time Machine Sale Lets You CONTROL TIME ITSELF". Rock, Paper, Shotgun . Retrieved January 30, 2016. As someone who desperately pines for the PD model that drove creativity before the copyright industry malevolently took over the planet, it saddens my heart that a game two decades old isn't released into the world.
  22. ↑ Walker, John (February 3, 2014). "Editorial: Why Games Should Enter The Public Domain". Rock, Paper, Shotgun . Retrieved January 30, 2016. ... games more than a couple of decades old aren't entering the public domain. Twenty years was a fairly arbitrary number, one that seems to make sense in the context of games' lives, but it could be twenty-five, thirty.
  23. ↑ Robotron23 (February 4, 2014). "Why Games Should Be In the Public Domain". Slashdot .
  24. ↑ Broussard, George [@georgeb3dr] (January 29, 2014). "@wickerwaka The whole thing, really. But especially that. Whoever allowed that to be printed should be fired" (Tweet). Retrieved January 7, 2019– via Twitter. (referring to the Rock, Paper, Shotgun article, particularly its first sentence)
  25. ↑ Gaynor, Steve (February 3, 2014). "Copyright, trademark & money in a creative industry". Gamasutra . There is some argument going on about for how long a copyright holder should be able to charge exclusively for their own work, before it enters the public domain. John Walker argues that perhaps a good cutoff would be 20 years before an 'idea' enters the public domain.
  26. ↑ "Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988: Section 301: Schedule 6", legislation.gov.uk , The National Archives, 1988 c. 48 (s. 301)(sch.6)
  27. ↑ "Emily Somma v. GOSH [Peter Pan case] Case Page". Stanford Center for Internet and Society. Archived from the original on October 27, 2006. Retrieved May 8, 2010.
  28. ↑ Bell, Tom W. (July 23, 2008). "Copyright Term Chart: Trend of Maximum U.S. General Copyright Term". TomWBell.com.
  29. ↑ Clorox (diskussion) & Bell, Tom. W. (November 27, 2008). Vectorization of Tom Bell's graph, which shows expansion of U.S. copyright law.
  30. ↑ Hirtle, Peter B. (January 1, 2015). "Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States". Cornell.edu. Archived from the original on February 26, 2015.
  31. ↑ Sunstein, Kann, Murphy & Timbers LLP (2014). "Copyright Flowchart: Flowchart for determining when U.S. copyrights in fixed works expire". WINNING INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY®.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
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.