Xref: utzoo misc.legal:8001 news.groups:8523 news.sysadmin:2211
Checksum: 31308
Lines: 69
Path: utzoo!utgpu!utfyzx!sq!msb
From: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader)
Date: Tue, 28-Mar-89 01:45:06 EST
Message-ID: <1989Mar28.014506.8151@sq.com>
Newsgroups: misc.legal,news.groups,news.sysadmin
Subject: Re: The Coming of the Berne Convention
Summary: What has changed? What are the real rules in Canada?
References: <37625@bbn.COM>
Reply-To: msb@sq.com (Mark Brader)
Organization: SoftQuad Inc., Toronto

This article is in the public domain.

If you see two versions of it, sorry, I canceled the first one promptly.

> I'm told that the Berne Convention is coming to the US on 1 April. ...
> I have been lead to believe that the *major* difference for us in the
> US with the Berne Convention is that the default for "public domain" is
> reversed.  That is, that in the current environment I think it is the
> case that if you "publish" something with no copyright, it is in the
> public domain, unless and until you make rather spirited efforts at (in
> essence) undoing the publishing.  By contrast, ALL published items are
> implicitly copyrighted by their authors under the Berne Convention.

I too am finding this whole business rather confusing.  (I don't live
in the US, but I do read a great number of Usenet articles from there!)

My understanding of expert opinion on the net over the past few years
has been as follows:

[1]  The US has for some years not required copyright notices for the
     author of something to retain its copyright.

[2]  If you publish or distribute something without a copyright
     notice, you may nevertheless be assumed to have no desire to
     retaining your copyright, and the thing may be treated as if
     public domain [a technical term meaning "not copyrighted"].

[3]  The legal status of posting to the net has not been evaluated in
     court but it seems more like publishing than anything else.

And therefore...
[4]  Net articles from the US with no copyright notice may be treated as
     public domain.
	    
I believe several people who claim expertise have concurred in the above.
On the other hand, the general theme of the articles posted recently about
the coming of the Berne Convention in the US have said:

[5]  Because of signing the Berne convention, the US will now not require
     copyright notices for the author to retain copyright.

I have also seen it noted that:

[6]  As Canada is a signatory to the Berne Convention, rule [1] applies
     here in Canada also.

You will notice that [1] and [5] are rather similar, and [6] clinches it.
This makes me, as I said, rather confused as to what is actually going
on here.  What I am wondering is that if the Berne Convention's real effect
is to reverse rule [2] (and hence [4]).  Is this true?

Now, I don't think anyone has ever said on the net that rule [2] applies
here in Canada also, but I've certainly assumed it does.  My intention in
posting the things I have posted has always been that they should be public
domain, and (for what it's worth, which in court is nothing) I hereby abandon
any implicit copyright on any past postings of mine.  And if I've violated
the copyright of anyone from Canada when they posted material to the net
with no copyright notice and I reused it, well, it was unintentional
and I apologize, for what *that's* worth.


*Expert* commentary, please?

Mark Brader		    "It can be amusing, even if painful, to watch the
SoftQuad Inc., Toronto	     ethnocentrism of those who are convinced their
utzoo!sq!msb, msb@sq.com     local standards are universal."	-- Tom Chapin

		[Would that be fair use, by the way, if the quoted article was
		copyrighted (which to the best of my recollection it wasn't)?]