Print

Print


> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas Stern" <[log in to unmask]>
>>  Anyone know what the (US) copyright is on printed material - it used 
>> to be
>> something like 28 years, renewable another 28 (=56 years), which 
>> would make anything up to
>> c.53 public domain.  One would hope that ephemera such as flyers and 
>> catalogs are NOT
>> copyright, the booklets probably are.  

Anything that was still in copyright at the time the 1975 copyright law 
went into force the next year was grandfathered into the new time 
lengths of the new law.  So that means that post-1920 print items would 
go under the new law if they had been renewed.  Authored books go under 
the same life-plus-50 (now life-plus-70) that songs do, and corporate 
publications, such as catalogs, go under the 75 (now 95) year term.  
However, these terms are from the year of PUBLICATION.  However, 
anything that was copyright 1903 would have been PD long before 1976, so 
we are back to that 1976-minus-56 date, meaning 1920.  But if they were 
not renewed -- and I doubt they were -- it would be 1976-minus-28, or 
1948.  But remember, if they were still in copyright in 1976 then they 
are 95 years from publication.  For example, a 1925 catalog which had 
been renewed would be in copyright until 2020.  A 1950 catalog will be 
in copyright until 2045 because the original 28 year term had not 
expired, so renewal was not necessary for the copyright to be 
grandfathered.  Also remember that this is only for corporate 
copyrights.  Personal copyrights are life-plus 95 from date of 
publication if they were still in copyright i 1976. 

Mike Biel  [log in to unmask] 
>> It might be in the name of the authors (such as Alan Lomax for booklets
>> for the RCA and Decca 78s.)  One would hope the Lomax archives would 
>> grant
>> permission if needed, and others might follow that lead (again, if 
>> needed).
>>  IMAGES of these booklets might be exempt, or under fair use.
>>  Another reason that Loc, Smithsonian, or a University would be a 
>> preferred
>> repository since they would have the resources to explore these 
>> issues, AND they have special
>> rights regarding copyright.
>>
Steven C. Barr wrote:
> IIRC, Record catalogs (and, I presume, supplements) usually had copyright
> notices in them...either second or last pages of them.
>
> Steven C. Barr
>