Last week we explored the rules of US copyright under the terms of the Copyright Act of 1976, which extended registration for 20 years over previous versions of the copyright laws, meaning that works registered in 1923 would fall into the public domain this year. But with the passage of the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (or here in pdf form) all this gets thrown out the window. This Act extends the copyright for all current covered and future works for an additional 20 years. This means that works registered in 1922 went out of copyright in 1998, but works registered in 1923 (and properly renewed) will remain copyrighted until January 1, 2019. In other words, for all intents and purposes, we will not see anything enter the public domain until 2019!
The law was essentially pushed through not by the creators of the works subject to copyright, but their descendants, ASCAP (the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers) 1, and Disney (threatened by the loss of royalties provided by Mickey Mouse).
U.S. Copyright Office's explanation of the exemptions under the extension for "certain libraries and archives."
Also, in a memo to National Humanities Alliance members and friends, NHA Director John Hammer attempted to explain how the Term Extension (as well as The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 and other pending legislation) effects "scholars, scholarly societies, libraries and others in communities that the National Humanities Alliance (NHA) serves. The memo is reproduced here.
At the forefront of the opposition is Eric Eldred and his Eldritch Press, with their civil action suit against the US Attorney General. (Here's the link for a copy of the complaint.) According to their press release:
Eric Eldred founded the Eldritch Press in late 1995 as a means of demonstrating that computers could be used to present books on the Internet in new ways, and in ways that improved upon the capabilities of print books. Initially, the Eldritch Press began with works of American literature, by authors such as Nathaniel Hawthorne, Oliver Wendell Holmes (Sr.), and Henry James. Because some of the works Eldritch Press posts are not included in library collections or are long out of print, they are not obtainable by the public in any other way. The Eldritch Press now posts new works the moment they enter the public domain.
Mr. Eldred has some very strong arguments for limitation of copyright.
In support of Eldred v. Reno, is a site run by CAUCUS, (Coalition Against Unlimited Copyright in the United States), which believes "that a vibrant public domain is essential to preserving and building upon our cultural heritage," and "a strong public campaign is critical for a successful attack against longer copyrights."
Michael S. Hart's Project Guttenberg ("Fine Literature Digitally Re-Published") is another site dedicated to making works available as soon as they enter public domain. (According to Mr. Eldred, Project Guttenberg is one of several mirrors of the Eldritch Press site -- mirrors which were established to save the digital works in case of a forced shut down of his server.) You can read their reaction to the Copyright Extension debate in Now is The Time!
Although not a direct repository of online books, John Mark Ockerbloom's The On-Line Books Page maintains links to over 8000 books published online. Also part of the site is a page entitled Information About Catalog of Copyright Entries which helps in the question of whether a work published after 1922 has had its copyright renewed or fallen into the public domain. (They've not yet dealt with music copyrights. Hopefully they'll get to it in the future. If you'd like to help out they'd be happy to have you.)
Dennis S. Karjala, Professor of Law at Arizona State University, put a lot of energy into creating a clearinghouse for information about the Term Extension prior to its passage. His site, Opposing Copyright Extension, lives on, however, providing clear description, legal analysis, and extensive links to original legal documents, media coverage, commentary, third party letters of opposition, even congressional lists -- basically providing a slew of ammunition for those interested in the copyright issue, as well as those ready to enter the fray.
Dennis McCarthy's "No Cense" - Copyright Reform Campaign site "calls for the end of consumer taxes and artistic censorship that lengthy copyright terms produce." While not opposing copyright in "a limited form," McCarthy believes (as do most others who oppose the Extension) that unlimited copyrights "prevent historians and other artists from open use of information in their own creative works."
Society of American Archivists believes that the Extension "disrupts the balance between public and private interests and will have a severe negative impact on the public's use of unpublished materials for teaching, scholarship, and research." Read the rest of their statement of opposition here.
Finally, the National Humanities Alliance maintains a page devoted to Basic Principles For Managing Intellectual Property In the Digital Environment, "in an effort to build consensus within the educational community on the uses of copyrighted works in the digital environment."
As a footnote, I must say that I am of two minds about the issue, as are many in my situation. As a composer and author I'd love to see perpetual copyright in effect, guaranteeing that if there is any income to be derived from my work it will benefit my heirs. But as a potential adaptor of the works of others -- and one not particularly capable of bearing the weight of large licensing fees -- I hate to see the loss of what might have seen the light of public domain.
Under pressure from the National Music Publishers' Association, Inc. and its subsidiary, The Harry Fox Agency, Swiss authorities and police shut down the International Lyrics Server and seized its computers for alleged copyright violations. Here's a New York Times report on the incident. In a Suite101.com Theatre article entitled "Dee dee dah Dum" we highly praised the site for its value to scholars, researchers, and students of lyric writing. Please think about signing their petition in defense of fair use of copyrighted material.
C U @ the Theatre!
1 The railroading of the Term Extension Act kind of backfired on ASCAP and its membership; other special interests managed to see the "Fairness in Music Licensing" bill attached to the Term Extension. This "Fairness" bill exempts "bars, restaurants and taverns from paying music license fees to songwriters, composers and publishers for copyrighted music played over radio and TV played in their places of business." See ASCAP's site, ASCAP Legislative Matters at paragraph number 2.
Originally published at Suite101.com Theatre, 2/9/99
| <---Previous article |