By Ian Jay Kaufman[*]
Patents / Introductory Materials / Copyright Fundamentals |
|
Copyright Fundamentals By Ian Jay Kaufman[*]
Copyright is fundamental area of intellectual property law that is vitally important, not only with respect to works authored by individuals, but for the myriad types of works produced by companies of all sizes. It is also an area, like trademark law, with a long tradition and an evolving present that reflects the global trends toward harmonization of territorial laws as well as the continuing need to apply and adapt copyright principles to new technology. Although it is beyond the scope of this very brief note to deal with copyright law in much detail, selected aspects of this body of law are considered here, which make clear the complexity as well as the usefulness of copyright law. Indeed, trademark, patent and copyright constitute interrelated, yet distinct, approaches meant to foster and protect intellectual property in its various forms. England’s
Statute of Anne, enacted in 1710, is often cited as the beginning of copyright
law as we know it today although the idea of protecting written expression,
either from the vantage point of the author/creator and/or a from the
perspective of the publisher/company predates even that and the importance of
copyright law has grown tremendously over the years.
Like
trademark law, copyright is largely territorial in nature. There is no complete
“international” law of copyright. Each country sets forth its own
substantive and procedural rules with respect to the protection and use of
works in their respective jurisdictions. Thus, it has often been the case in
the past that works would be protected in one jurisdiction, but not in another.
The United States, for example, “pirated” numerous British works in
the 17th and 18th centuries
when British copyright was not recognized in the U.S.
[2]
Similarly, there were no copyright relations to speak of between the U.S. and
the former Soviet Union for many years, and works of one country were
unprotected in the other country.
However,
reflecting the growing desire and awareness to protect and commercially exploit
copyrighted works, bilateral treaties have been entered into by various
nations. In addition, there have been international copyright agreements and
attempts to harmonize national copyright laws. The most important
international copyright treaty is the Berne Convention.
[3]
Over 140 countries are now signatories to this Convention, which was first
signed more than a century ago and reiterates certain core copyright rights,
such as the right of reproduction, etc., to be enjoyed by authors regardless of
nationality. The Convention also provides for minimum terms and moral rights,
while emphasizing an author’s rights, all without the need
for formal national registration systems.
Although
the precise definition of copyright may differ somewhat globally, the U.S.
Copyright statute is fairly indicative. It provides copyright protection for
original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression from
which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either
directly or with the aid of a machine or device. Copyright law does not
protect the short phrase or title, which remains subject to protection under
principles of trademark law. Copyright does not protect processes, methods,
discoveries, etc., which are capable of protection under patent law.
[4]
Also, while it is not mandatory to register a work in order to secure copyright, it
is necessary to file a copyright registration in order to proceed with an
infringement action in the United States and, for U.S. and foreign works, to
obtain statutory damages and attorney’s fees.
[5] The
United States, as with many countries, sets forth examples of what kinds of
works are protected, such as the following:
literary
and textual works; musical works, including accompanying lyrics; dramatic works, including any accompanying music; pantomimes and choreographic works; pictorial, graphic and sculptural works; motion pictures and other audiovisual works; sound recordings; and architectural works. It
should be stressed that works need not have literary value to be protected.
The quality of the work is not an issue. Thus, simple commercial text or
labeling is at least potentially protectable under copyright. For example,
copyright registrations may be filed for at least certain kinds of logos and
for advertising artwork. Elements of collections of either un-copyrightable
material or material that is no longer protected by copyright may be protected
as compilations, although such protection is quite limited.
The
rights protected by U.S. copyright, and to varying degrees in other
jurisdictions, include the right of reproduction, right to prepare derivative
works, right of distribution (i.e. of copies of works or phonorecords), public
performance and the right to display a work publicly.
The
rights of a copyright holder are often balanced against the rights of others,
often expressed in such concepts as “fair use,” “fair
utilization,” etc. The U.S. Copyright Act, for example, codifies the four
factors to be considered by courts in deciding whether a use is a "fair use":
"(1)
the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a
commercial nature or is for non-profit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work." [6] Determining
fair use is almost necessarily made on a case by case basis and is one of the
most common issues for which clients seek copyright advice and/or result in
litigation involving copyrighted works. There have been and are numerous such
cases, as, for example, the current well-known litigation in the United States
concerning a book titled “The Wind Done Gone,” which used
characters and other elements from the book “Gone With The Wind” by
Margaret Mitchell, relying upon, and thus far succeeding in, a claim of fair use.
[7] Unlike
trademarks, and more like patents, copyrights are limited in duration.
Historically, copyright terms were quite short, but they have increased over
the years, especially during the 20
th
century. The Berne Convention provides, for example, works to be protected for
a minimum of life of the author plus 50 years. The European Community enacted
a directive in 1993 by which the copyright term in its member countries has
been extended to life of the author plus 70 years. Other countries may follow
variations of the 50 or 70 year term, including India, whose current term of
copyright is life of the author plus 60 years. Indeed, the last twenty years
or so has witnessed a dramatic extension of copyright terms in the United
States and the European Union, many with retroactive application that can make
utilizing the works of others in different jurisdictions quite a daunting task.
The
United States presents a particularly complicated situation in determining
copyright terms. Unlike Berne-member and most other countries, in the United
States, prior to its major 1976 Copyright Act, as well as its accession to
Berne in 1989, copyright protection commenced on the date of publication and
was subject to a rigorous system of formalities, such as mandatory copyright
notice and registration. For works created since 1978, the generally applicable
term of copyright in the United States is life of the author plus 70 years
except for works made for hire, anonymous works and pseudonymous works, whose
copyright duration is 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation,
whichever is shorter. For works created before 1978 and governed by the
Copyright Act of 1909, the U.S. employed dual terms of 28 years each, requiring
initial and renewal registrations by the proper parties in order for the
copyright to be effective. These terms were later also subject to extensions,
such that, for many years, the rule of thumb for determining whether a work was
in the public domain was publication plus 75 years. Clearly, it is useful to
have guidance through this patchwork of terms for these older U.S. works.
The
primacy of the author is central to the vision of copyright articulated in the
Berne Convention. Generally speaking, under Berne and the laws of the vast
majority of countries, authorship as an initial matter vests in the actual
“flesh and blood” person who created the work. It is common, for
example, even for the authors of cinematographic works to be defined as being
authored by the primary individuals who actually made the motion picture, such
as the director, etc.
[8]
The
most significant departure from this basic principle is the concept of a work
for hire, which is most recognized and utilized in the United States,
particularly with respect to the motion picture industry. For many years, U.S.
works created at the “instance and expense” of a commissioning
party were likely to be deemed as works made for hire. The 1976 Copyright Act,
for the first time, specifically defined a work made for hire, as follows:
a
work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment; or a
work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a
collective work, as a part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, as a
translation, as a supplementary work, as a compilation, as an instructional
text, as a test, as answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the parties
expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be
considered a work for hire. The Act does not define
“employee” or “scope of his or her employment.” Those terms have been left for the courts to interpret.
[9] Of
course, authors can and do assign the rights in their works to others.
However, under the work for hire concept, the hiring party, e.g. a corporation,
controls the rights as an author and such rights are not subject to statutory
termination rights, which exist under United States law. These termination
rights enable an author to terminate rights in a work many years after the work
is completed. Even as to assignments, the documents conveying copyright and
other intellectual property rights, such as trademark or patent, must be done
in accordance with the requirements of the various jurisdictions. Therefore, it
is important for companies to incorporate assignments and/or work for hire
language in the employment and independent contractor agreements it may use.
It
should be pointed out that India also incorporates work for hire principles
into its Copyright law, particularly with respect to motion pictures.
[10]
Text, images and
any other material and/or objects that can be represented in a digital environment
are more readily available to be used by others than ever before. Copyright
law has also been at the center of the controversies involving the Internet,
such as the litigation over Napster and other on-line music providers. Legislation
has also addressed copyright in the digital arena, including the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) which provides protections concerning the
anti-circumvention of technological copyright protection systems, fair use
in the digital environment, and online service provider liability for the
acts of third parties subscribing to their services. Reflecting the trend
toward harmonization of intellectual property rights is the EC Directive
on Copyright and Related Rights in the Information Society, 2001/29/EC.
This proposal is aimed at extending copyright protection in the member states,
with respect to rights of reproduction, distribution, etc. Member states
have until December 22, 2002 to implement the Directive. Although the directive
does not call for radical change in copyright law, with many countries already
providing equivalent rights, the implementing legislation for this Directive
in the member states bears watching over the coming year. In
addition, in some countries, other than certain instances in the United States,
the author of a copyrighted work, and at least his or her heirs, also have
certain moral rights,
adroit
de moral
,
in addition to the “economic” rights of a subsisting copyright.
Thus, for example, although the copyright in the motion picture “The
Asphalt Jungle” belonged to the motion picture production company, the
heirs of the director of the film were able to prevail ultimately in litigation
brought against the colorization of the motion picture in France. Similarly,
a U.S. publisher, which was the assignee of rights in the musical composition
“The Rite of Spring,” attempted to assert moral rights against the
inclusion of the music in a videotape version of Walt Disney’s
“Fantasia.” The U.S. court, applying French law under U.S.
conflict of law principles, rejected the claim, ruling that the plaintiff lacked
standing to assert the claim because the plaintiff was not an heir.
The
world of copyright is developing at a rapid pace, and those wishing to protect
their rights must stay abreast of new changes in the laws throughout the world,
whether through counsel or in-house. As part of the primary triumvirate of
intellectual property rights, it is important that business decision-makers
keep a steady view to the continuing development and harmonization of copyright
laws worldwide.
Conclusion As
business continues to expand globally, it becomes increasingly important for
business owners to secure experienced counsel to establish and safeguard
their intellectual property rights, particularly with respect to their
trademarks, service marks, trade/company names, domain names, geographical
indications, copyrights, patents, etc.
There
are various trans-national treaties and numerous procedures dealing with such
intellectual property rights. Harmonization of these treaties and procedures,
in terms of the underlying principles and specific mechanisms, continues to
occur, aiming to increase the scope, predictability and ultimate fairness of
intellectual property law and administration. However, despite significant
advances in achieving these goals over recent years, the continually, and often
rapidly, changing legal and technological landscapes present ongoing challenges
to business owners who desire to protect their intellectual property rights.
Informed and diligent legal guidance, therefore, becomes a vital element in
succeeding commercially in our ever evolving world marketplace.
[*]
Ian Jay Kaufman, a resident partner in the New York office of the multinational
law firm Ladas & Parry, has written extensively on intellectual property
issues. The author acknowledges the assistance of Michael D. Stewart, Esq. and
Joseph G. Walsh, Esq., associates in Ladas & Parry’s New York office,
in the writing of this paper, which was first presented by Dr. Kaufman at
conferences held in New Delhi & Hyderabad, India in January 2002. Copyright
Ian Jay Kaufman 2001. All Rights Reserved.
[2]
Pursuant to the International Copyright Act of 1891 (The Chace Act), the United
States concluded bilateral copyright agreements with France, Switzerland, the
United Kingdom and Belgium in 1891, with Germany and Italy in 1892 and with
many other countries over the years.
[3]
The Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Scientific Works, 1886
(as amended, in Stockholm in 1967 and in Paris in 1971) (U.S. acceded
to Convention in 1989). Other international treaties include the Universal
Copyright Convention in 1952 (Geneva, 1952, with later revisions), to which the
U.S. was signatory and prime advocate before the U.S. finally joined the Berne
Convention. It is similar to the Berne Convention, but requires certain
copyright notice formalities. Although these and similar agreements
undoubtedly increased the level of harmonization in copyright law
internationally, there continues to be an interplay between national
legislation and the various bi-lateral and pan-national treaties, which must be
accounted for, depending upon the circumstances.
See
also
Convention of Buenos Aires of 1910 (U.S. and Latin America).
[4]
See, e.g.
Baker v. Selden, 101 U.S. 99, (1879) (copyright protection available only for
particular expression of idea, not for the idea itself) (case involved a book
explaining new system of bookkeeping and including certain blank forms).
[5]
Of interest, during fiscal year 2000, the U.S. Copyright Office received
588,498 claims to copyright covering more than 800,000 works and registered
515,612. The Office also recorded 18, 894 documents covering hundreds of
thousands of titles. Statement of the Register of Copyrights before the
Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet and Intellectual Property. May 2001.
[6]
See, e.g., Campbell v. Acuff Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994) (“...the more
transformative the new work, the less will be the significance of the other
factors, like commercialism...); Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation
Enterprises, 471 U.S. 539 (1985); Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City
Studios, Inc, 464 U.S. 417 (1984); William Patry, The Fair Use Privilege in
Copyright Law (1985); Pierre Leval, Toward A Fair Use Standard, 103 Harv. Law
Rev. 1105 (1990).
[7]
See,
e.g.,
Suntrust
Bank v. Houghton Mifflin, 268 F.3d 1165 (11
th
Cir. 2001).
[8]
See
Article
2(2) of Council Directive (93/98/EEC) that pertains to the European Community
extension of copyright to the 70-year term, which states, in part, the following:
The
term of protection of cinematographic or audiovisual works shall expire 70
years after the death of the last of the following persons to survive, whether
or not these persons are designated as co-authors: the principal director, the
author of the screenplay, the author of the dialogue and the composer of music
specifically created for use in the cinematographic or audiovisual work.
[9]
The most significant decision in this area is the U.S. Supreme Court decision,
Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Rei
d,
490 U.S. 730 (1989) which utilized the principles of agency law to determine
who constitutes an “employer” and “employee,” setting
forth various factors to be evaluated in determining who is an
“employee” for purposes of the Act, such as the skill required, the
source of the instrumentalities and tools, the location of the work, the
duration of the relationship between the parties; the provision of employee
benefits, the tax treatment of the hired party.
Id.
at 751
[10]
See
Copyright Act of 1957, as amended through January 15, 2000 (Section 17 &
Proviso thereof); Indian Performing Rights Society v. Eastern India Motion
Picture Association, A.I.R. 1977. S.C. 1443 (rights of music in motion picture
film to producer absent agreement to the contrary).
|
[Home] [About Ladas
& Parry LLP] [Contact Us] [Search]
[Trademarks] [Domain
Names & E-Commerce] [Patents &
Copyrights]
[Litigation] [IP
Rights Maintenance] [IP as Property]
[News & Bulletins]
© Copyright 2001 Ian Jay Kaufman - Posted July 2002
Please read our disclaimer.