Alex, Nice idea but I don't think it would work legally.
Initially copyright is owned by the creator of the work (for a limited period of time) or by whomever the creator sells it to. For example, I owned the copyright of the text of a book I wrote, until I accepted the payment of the commission for which I wrote it, after which the person paying me the commission owned the copyright. Material that has moved into the public domain means that it is owned by the public. No one can legally "take out" copyright for material they did not either create of the material or purchase from the current owner of the copyright (not just purchase a copy of the material). University of Arizona would have to pay the public for the copyright somehow... I put quotes around "take out" above because that's a misleading concept. Under our law, copyright is something inherently owned by the creator of anything of their own design or by a second party to whom it is sold (explicitly or implicitly, such as material created for an employer), whether the rights to the material are registered with the Library of Congress or not, and even whether or not the material is marked with a copyright declaration (although copyright is harder to enforce in the latter case). There is also the legal concept of "fair use", by which we are allowed to copy excerpts from copyrighted material for personal use (but not for sale, even as excerpts). This is more complicated--e.g., how much can you copy? what is "for sale"--using it as course materials?, etc., and is typically addressed on a case-by-case basis (and preferrably by attorneys). Sorry to post such a long dissertation on the subject, but it is an important one for lacemakers to understand so we don't inadvertently violate our colleagues' copyrights to lace patterns, prickings, reconstructions, etc., no matter how strongly we may feel that material should be in the public domain. Also, I think Devon is quite correct in all her points about material under copyright but out-of-print etc. (One issue there is who owns the copyright--the publisher or the author? This issue is what underlies actors' and musicians' issues with their "publishers", for example.) And finally, Tess should be applauded for her community spirit in making work for which she owns the copyright freely available to us (altho Devon's points there are valid also). --Nancy ________________________________ From: Alex Stillwell <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Monday, October 5, 2009 12:35:34 PM Subject: [lace] Copyright Dear Arachnids I still have copyright for all my books. As far as I am concerned I have given the Arizonal University the right to publish it free on their site and I do not think Google can do anything about it because it is still within copyright. Could the University can take out copyright for any on their site that are out of copyright so that they can continue to provide their excellent free service? Then Google would have to make arrangements with them. Happy lacemaking Alex - To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [email protected]. For help, write to [email protected] __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe send email to [email protected] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [email protected]. For help, write to [email protected]
