>> No, the copyright treaties the United States has entered into specify >> that something copyrighted in a foreign country is not subject to >> copyright in the U.S. *unless* it would have been subject to copyright >> if it were made in the U.S. Typefaces are not subject to copyright in >> the U.S., no matter where they were made. >> >> FF > >Unless there is an actual case involving a typeface you can cite, isn't >what you say just an opinion? Should it ever come to that, are you ready > to shell out real money for real lawyer to prove this point? > >- Chris
Yes, there is a major case about this: Eltra v. Ringer. This case confirms typefaces are not subject to copyright: _http://altlaw.org/v1/cases/535269_ (http://altlaw.org/v1/cases/535269) ELTRA CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Barbara A. RINGER, Appellee, International Typographic Compositon Association and Advertising Typographers Association of America, Inc., Amici Curiae. United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit June 14, 1978 579 F.2d 294; 198 U.S.P.Q. 321 E. Fulton Brylawski, Washington, D. C. (J. Michael Cleary, Robert H. Johnson, Senior Patent Atty., Eltra Corp., Toledo, Ohio, Henry W. Leeds, Mason, Fenwick & Lawrence, Washington, D. C., W. Gibson Harris, Annie Marie Whittemore, McGuire, Woods & Battle, Richmond, Va., on brief), for appellant. Jon A. Baumgarten, Gen. Counsel, Library of Congress, New York City (Dorothy M. Schrader, Senior Atty., Library of Congress, James H. Simmonds, Arlington, Va., on brief), for appellee. Hazel, Beckhorn & Hanes, Fairfax, Va. (Cowen, Liebowitz & Latman, New York City, on brief), for amici curiae International Typographic Composition Ass'n and Advertising Typographers Association of America, Inc. Before WINTER, RUSSELL and WIDENER, Circuit Judges. DONALD RUSSELL, Circuit Judge: 1 This appeal involves the application of the Copyright Act.1 The appellant is a manufacturer of typesetting equipment. It filed for registration with the Copyright Office a design of an alphabet and other typographical symbols placed on devices used in connection with its equipment. Such symbols are generally known as "typeface designs."2 The design of the appellant had been prepared by a well-known typeface designer, to whom the appellant paid $11,000 for the design. It sought registration of this typeface as a "work of art" under the terms of what was then § 5(g) of the Copyright Act.3 The Chief of the Examining Division of the Copyright Office refused to register the design, finding that it contained "no elements, either alone or in combination, which can be separately identified as a 'work of art.' " Such refusal represented the final action of the Copyright Office on the proposed registration. Following this rejection, the appellant instituted in the District Court its mandamus action to compel the appellee, the Register of Copyrights, to register its proposed copyright as a "work of art" under § 5(g).4 Both parties made motions for summary judgment. The District Court denied the appellant's motion but granted the appellee's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the action. This appeal followed. 2 We affirm. 3 The appellant's right to registration necessarily turns on whether its design submitted for registration qualified as a "work of art" as that term was used in § 5(g). Congress offered no definition of "work of art" in the statute nor is there in the legislative history any clear declaration of Congressional intent in the use of the term. It did replace an earlier phrase, "work of fine arts," used in the predecessor provision of the Act. Obviously, though, the change in phraseology was "deliberately intended as a broader specification than 'works of fine arts' in the (earlier) statute."5 Primarily, it seems to have been adopted in order to eliminate any "(v)erbal distinctions between purely aesthetic articles and useful works of art"6 in the application of the term under the Act. And, in Mazer v. Stein (1954) 347 U.S. 201, 74 S.Ct. 460, 98 L.Ed. 630, the Court gave effect to this obvious intention of the Congress in its new phrasing. -----There is plenty more to read, click on the link above if you wish to read the rest---- **************Make your summer sizzle with fast and easy recipes for the grill. (http://food.aol.com/grilling?ncid=emlcntusfood00000005)
