Copyright Law Notes

Historical Overview

  • Statute of Anne: 14-year term with a possible second 14-year term.
  • 1909: 18-year term with a possible second 28-year term.
  • 1976: Life plus 50 years.
  • 1989: US finally recognizes Berne Convention of 1866.
  • 1998 (Sonny Bono Amendment): Life plus 70 years.

Copyright & Constitution

  • Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution grants Congress the power to protect inventions (patents) and writings (copyright).
  • The first Copyright Act was in 1790, protecting writing.

Copyright Evolution

  • 1802: Protection for prints was added.
  • 1831: Music was included.
  • 1865: Photos gained protection.
  • 1870: Paintings were added.
  • The Copyright Act was rewritten in 1909 and again in 1976 (implemented Jan. 1, 1978).

Copyright Eligibility

  • Originality: Work must be original.
  • Minimal Creativity: Work must possess a minimal degree of creativity.
  • Fixation: Work must be fixed in a tangible medium.
  • Facts themselves cannot be copy protected, but the way facts are presented (e.g., the style) can be.

Early History: Donaldson v. Beckett (1710)

  • The court ruled that a term for copyright ownership is legal.

Early History: White Smith Music Pub. v. Apollo (1908)

  • Player piano rolls could not be copyrighted.
  • The 1976 Copyright Act addressed this issue for computer programs.

Early History: Mazer v. Stein (1954)

  • The court declared that encouraging individual effort through personal gain is the best way to advance public welfare using the talents of authors and inventors.

Early History: Scene a Faire

  • Scene a faire refers to expected components of a story that cannot be copy protected (e.g., a shootout in a Western).

Copyright Facts: Obtaining a Copyright

  • To obtain a copyright, a person needs to include:
    • Name
    • Year
    • Copyright notice (e.g., ©2016, Smith)

Copyright Facts: Registering the Work

  • Register the work by sending it to the Copyright Office, Washington, D.C.
  • Send the appropriate fee (e.g., 35 - $65, depending on the written form).
  • Send two copies of the best works within 3 months of publication.

Advantages of Registering Work

  • Ability to file a lawsuit with registration in hand.
  • Entitlement to statutory damages.
  • Recovery of lawyer’s fees.
  • Ability to obtain an injunction.

Additional Copyright Facts

  • Group copyright can be used for photography or publications over an extended period.
  • Distinction between Creator vs. Work for hire.

Section 101 of the Copyright Act: Work Made for Hire

  • A Work Made for Hire is defined under three conditions:
    • (1) Employee within Scope of Employment: A work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment, then the employer is the author.

Section 101 of the Copyright Act: Work Made for Hire (cont.)

  • (2) Prior Agreement:Prior to commencement of work, both parties must expressly agree in a signed document that the work shall be considered a work made for hire; and

Categories Eligible for Protection

  • (3) Commissioned Work: The work falls within one of 9 broad categories of commissioned work.
    • A work specially ordered or commissioned for use
    • as a translation
    • as a supplementary work
    • as a compilation
    • as an instructional text
    • motion pictures and other audiovisual works
    • as a test
    • as answer material for a test
    • as an atlas

Categories of Eligible for Protection (cont.)

  • If the work falls into one of 9 categories AND there is a written contract, then it is a work for hire, i.e., the employer owns the copyright.
  • If the work neither falls in one of 9 categories nor is there a written contract, then it is not a work for hire, i.e., the creator owns the copyright.

Work For Hire: Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid

  • Criteria for determining “work for hire” was articulated in the Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid.
  • Facts: James Earl Reid was a sculptor working on commission for the CCNV. Both wanted to copyright work.

Work for Hire Considerations

  • Was the person supervised?
  • Did the company provide a place to work or the tools to work with?
  • Did the person receive fringe benefits?

Work for Hire Considerations (cont.)

  • Was there a long-term relationship between the employee and employer?
  • Importance: USSC established these criteria for “independent contractors.”

Rights of the Copyright Holder

  • Right to copy the work.
  • Right to Divisibility of the work - each version or derivative work can have a separate copyright, and only the copyright holder can sue for infringement.
  • Right to Publicly perform the work.
  • Right to Publicly display the work.
  • Right to Publicly distribute the work.
  • Right to transmit a sound/video work through digital means.

Case Law: Feist Pub. v. Telephone Service Co. (1991)

  • Facts: Feist created a new phone book by copying information from another source.

Case Law: Feist Pub. v. Telephone Service Co. (1991) (cont.)

  • Importance: USSC rejected the “sweat of the brow” argument.
  • Feist Telephone Service had not created works that could be copyrighted.
  • No copyright infringement because what he copied lacked originality, which is what copyright protects and not effort.

Distribution Rights: Droit de Suite

  • Droit de suite - the right to follow a work, ensuring owners continue to receive royalties from all works sold.

Distribution Rights: Driot moral (Moral Rights)

  • Driot moral (Moral Rights) - a person can protect alterations of a painting, drawing, and photography; but not motion pictures, posters, charts, books, magazines or newspapers.
  • Congress passed the Visual Artists Rights Act in 1990.

Plaintiff’s Burden in Copyright Infringement Cases

  • Entity has a valid copyright.
  • The work is registered.
  • Reasonable opportunity or access to work.
  • Substantially similar works.
    • Courts have used the “extrinsic” test - comparison of things like plot, dialog, etc.
    • Then apply “intrinsic” test - whether a reasonable person would judge the two works similar.

Case Law: Great American Hero v. Superman (1981)

  • Facts: Superman Comic Books sued the parties involved in the television program, Greatest American Hero for infringement.

Case Law: Great American Hero v. Superman (1981) (cont.)

  • Importance: The court ruled that the program was not substantially similar and there was no infringement.

Fair Use: Section 107

  • Four factors considered in determining fair use:
    • Purpose and character of the use.
    • Nature of the copyrighted work.
    • Effect upon the potential market.
    • Amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the work as a whole.

Case Law: Williams and Wilkins v. US (1973)

  • Facts: Libraries run by the National Institutes of Health and the National Library of Medicine made multiple copies of articles from a single scientific journal for library patrons.

Case Law: Williams and Wilkins v. US (1973) (cont.)

  • Importance: The court ruled that preventing noncommercial copying would hamper medical research.
  • Also, there was insufficient evidence that the multiple copies hurt the journal publishers financially.

Case Law: Wainwright Securities Inc. v. Wall Street Transcripts (1978)

  • Facts: Wall Street Transcripts summarized Wainwright Securities’ report.
  • Wall Street Transcripts then advertised that it was unnecessary to buy the reports.

Case Law: Wainwright Securities Inc. v. Wall Street Transcripts (1978) (cont.)

  • Importance: The US Court of Appeals held that summaries of commercial reports infringed on Wainwright’s copyright because the summaries made it unnecessary to purchase the original.

Case Law: Harper and Row v. Nation (1985)

  • Facts: The Nation published 300-400 words from President Ford’s memoirs, which was under contract to Harper and Row.
  • This action by Nation also voided a contract H & R had with Time.

Case Law: Harper and Row v. Nation (1985) (cont.)

  • Importance: The USSC held that Nation had captured the “heart” of the book.
  • This action by Nation was determined not to be fair use.

Case Law: Salinger v. Random House (1987)

  • Facts: An author working for Random House quoted from letters written by Salinger for an unauthorized biography.
  • The letters had been donated to a university library collection.

Case Law: Salinger v. Random House (1987) (cont.)

  • Importance: The Court of Appeals ruled that unpublished letters are assumed to have a copyright on them.
  • The writer of the letters may acquire an injunction to stop publication.

Case Law: New Era Pub. Int’l v. Henry Holt & Co. (1990)

  • Facts: Henry Holt had a work based on letters by L. Ron Hubbard, founder of the Church of Scientology.
  • New Era claimed copyright over the letters.

Case Law: New Era Pub. Int’l v. Henry Holt & Co. (1990) (cont.)

  • Importance: A Federal Appeals Court declared a person’s unpublished material is deemed to have a copyright, and a court must issue an injunction against any book or magazine violating such copyrights.

Congressional Action Regarding Unpublished Materials

  • Congress, reacting to pressure from researchers, declared that all unpublished materials are covered by the Copyright Law until 2003.

Case Law: Sony v. Universal Studios (1984)

  • Facts: Universal Studios sued Sony, claiming the VTR violated copyright law.

Case Law: Sony v. Universal Studios (1984) (cont.)

  • Importance: The USSC held that technology wasn’t in violation of the fair use standard because people used the technology to “time shift.”

Case Law: Basic Books v. Kinko’s Graphics (1991)

  • Facts: Kinko was sued for putting student course packets together without securing copyright.

Case Law: Basic Books v. Kinko’s Graphics (1991) (cont.)

  • Importance: The court declared course packets as commercial ventures in violation of fair use.

Case Law: Acuff-Rose Music Inc. v. Campbell (1993)

  • Facts: 2 Live Crew did a parody of Roy Orbison’s “Pretty Woman” without securing copyright permission.

Case Law: Acuff-Rose Music Inc. v. Campbell (1993) (cont.)

  • Importance: USSC ruled that the music parody was not a copyright infringement; it was a transformative use of the original.

Case Law: Burnett v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. (2007)

  • Facts: A cartoon character in the animated program Family Guy characterized Burnett’s famous cleaning lady character mopping up an X-rated book store with a slightly altered Carol Burnett theme song running in the background.

Case Law: Burnett v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. (2007) (cont.)

  • Held: Court ruled this was a classic protected parody: “The 18-second clip of the animated figure resembling the ‘Charwoman,’ mopping the floor next to ‘blowup dolls,’ a rack of ‘XXX’ movies, and ‘video booths’ in a porn shop is clearly designed to imitate [Ms. Burnett’s] characteristic style.”

Home Recording Act of 1992

  • This legislation allows people to record one copy of a record or CD for personal use.
  • AHRA limited to nearly obsolete digital technology.

Music Rights Associated with BMI, ASCAP, or SESAC

  • Price paid depends on three criteria:
    • Use
    • Where it’s used
    • Length

Types of Licenses

  • Synchronization - Putting an image with music.
  • Performance
  • Mechanical - Gives limited permission to create copies of a work - recording, sheet music, lyrics, etc.

Music with Visuals

  • Synchronization licenses - obtained from music publishers.
  • Used for music with video, film, slide, or multimedia.

Use of Record

  • Permission from the record company.
  • Performance license from ASCAP or BMI.

Use of Audio-Only Music

  • Obtain a mechanical license from ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC.

Use of Live Music

  • Pay ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC.

Sound Recording Issues

  • A sound recording must have originality for a separate copyright - two elements - performers bring the performance to life, and second, things added by the record producer, sfx, etc.
  • Three rights for sound recording copyright holders:
    • No one may copy the sound recording without permission.
    • Consent is required to make a derivative work.
    • Only the sound recording copyright owner may decide to publicly distribute the recording.

Case Law: Marya v. Warner/Chappell Music (2015)

  • Facts: Rupa Marya filed suit claiming that Warner/Chappell Music did not have a copyright on the song “Happy Birthday.”
  • Holding: The court held in favor of Marya, stating that the original lyrics were in the public domain.
  • Millions of dollars had been collected by Warner/Chappell for the use of the popular song.

Use in Trade Show or Convention

  • Need synchronization license if used with a visual image.
  • If audio only - no license needed.
  • Event sponsor has to obtain ASCAP or BMI license.
  • Typical charge is 4 cents per person with a 5050 minimum for less than 1250.

Examples of Prices for Performers

  • Performers - one-time use 500500-1,000 or for one year 1-$3,000.
  • Some performers don’t allow use at all (e.g., Dylan).

Case Law: INS v. AP (1918)

  • Facts: International News Service (INS) was accused of misappropriating the news from the Associated Press (AP).

Case Law: INS v. AP (1918) (cont.)

  • Importance: The Court held that a news service could not take material that is a result of organization and expenditure of labor, skill, and money.
  • Brings up the question of “unfair competition” - situations where blogging from a sports event has been determined in violation where a group has exclusive rights to the content, such as the NCAA, NFL, etc.

Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998

  • The Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act or the Mickey Mouse Protection Act.
  • Makes the works created after 1998 for the life of the author + 70 years, in part to “save the Mouse” and in part to line up with the Berne Convention agreements.
  • Additionally, life of author plus 70 years; for anonymous and pseudonymous and work for hire 120 years from publication or 95 years from creation (whichever is less).

Case Law: MGM v. Grokster (2005)

  • Facts: Grokster and StreamCast distributed free software products that allowed P2P of MGM products.
  • Holding: Grokster’s P2P product was found to be in copyright infringement and not in “safe harbor” of DMCA.
  • Importance: Motion Picture and Recording Companies are free to go after P2P and BitTorrent providers of illegally distributed music and movies.

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)

  • Representatives of 160 nations met in 1996 to adopt new regulations for the digital age.
  • Adopted two treaties in December 1996:
    • One covers artistic and literary works (including films and computer software).
    • One covers recorded music.

Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)

  • US Congress signed on to WIPO treaties in 1998.
  • Act:
    • Prohibits circumvention of technology measures.
    • Exempts ISPs from liability when simply transmitting information.

Digital Millennium Copyright Act (cont.)

  • Imposes a compulsory licensing and royalty distribution scheme for the transmission of music on the Internet.
  • A three-person arbitration panel is presently working on the royalty fee issue.

Digital Millennium Copyright Act: Takedown Notices

  • DMCA protects ISPs from copyright infringement suits if the ISP removes material that a copyright holder tells the website is posted without permission.
  • This is called a “takedown notice.”

Case Law: Eldred v. Ashcroft (2003)

  • Significance: The USSC upheld the Bono Extension Act.
  • The Court ruled that the Constitution gives Congress “wide leeway to prescribe ‘limited times’ for copyright protection.”

Trademark Definition

  • Definition: A word, name, or symbol used by a company to identify itself as the source of the goods.
  • The main idea is not to confuse the public.
  • TM is used if in the process of registering, and a circle R (®) is used if registered.

Trademark Registration

  • The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is where you would register your trademark.
  • Marks registered before Nov. 16, 1989, were enforced for 20-year periods.
  • Marks registered after that date have 10-year terms.
  • You can renew your trademark indefinitely.

Case Law: WCVB-TV v. Boston Athletic Association (1991)

  • Facts: The trademark holder of the “Boston Marathon” did not want a TV station to use the phrase in its coverage of this athletic event.

Case Law: WCVB-TV v. Boston Athletic Association (1991) (cont.)

  • Importance: A federal court rejected the trademark holder's argument.

Trademark Types

  • Service Marks (MGM – lion roars)
  • Collection Marks (franchise marks or union stamps)
  • Certification Marks (Seals of approval or marks of origination)
  • Trade Dress (Used to ID a company name)