Legal Question in Intellectual Property in United Kingdom

Re: Revived Copyrights Under EU Law

You're starting from the wrong point in analyzing US rights. Wasn't the work ever registered in the US for a US copyright under the 1909 Act? If so, the outcome is going to be calculated under US law without regard to the status of the work under UK law. But if it was a work of foreign origin, and it was in the public domain in the U.S. for some other reason (such as failure to publish with proper copyright notice), then U.S. implementation of GATT restored the copyright as of January 1, 1996. The restoration would not be free for anyone other than the composer's heirs to claim, although identifying them after 60 years may prove quite difficult.

Best wishes,

LDWG

Re: Revived Copyrights Under EU Law

Under US law, once a work has passed into public domain, it cannot be "re-copyrighted". That does not mean that the pd work cannot be incorporated into a new work that itself receives protection. For example, if an artist records a song that is pd, the underlying song does not become a newly copyrighted work. However, the recording of the song is a copyrighted work. Any person who wished to reproduce the new recording would have to obtain the consent of the recording artist to do so.

Thus a pd work can be used in a new work, and the new work receives copyright protection.

I do not know of any law under the EC that permits for a revival of copyright. The question as it applies to US law would be under the Berne Convention, our major international accord with the majority of the EC states. Under the Berne Convention, a work cannot receive any greater protection in a forgein country than it receives in the country of origin. Thus, in the US, the "revival" cannot be done.

I would really have to know more about the work in question as well as the specific countries at issue to give a more detailed response, but my initial and broad response is that the original work cannot receive new or extended protection, but could be incorporated into a new work that can receive protection.

Re: Revived Copyrights Under EU Law

The answers are 1.Yes, 2. Yes, 3(1st part)Yes, and 3(second part) No.

Apparently the two prior posters, Mr. Graves and Mr. Rosen do not know of the UK revival of copyright provisions. A learned discussion by a UK Lord in proposing the discussion can be found at http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/ld199596/ldhansrd/vo951218/text/51218-19.htm.

The revival of copyright came from the extension of UK copyright term from 50 years after death to 70 years after death in order to harmonize EU copyright law (France & Germany(as to music) had life+70, Spain had life+60). The harmonization was to the longest term, life=70, so the UK had to extend copyright protection by 20 years and thus certain copyrights, which had expired due to passage of the 50 year term were "revived" and extended to life+70 years.

Thus, the copyright in the work in question would be revived and now last until 2012.

The US has a term of life +70 and is a member of the Berne convention, so the revived copyright can, in fact, be enforced in the US.

The right of revival lies only with the copyright owner, which is apparently the UK publisher, so third parties cannot jump in and snatch the copyright.

This also shows the danger of US attorneys giving advice in international copyright matters without doing proper research. If my colleagues had only done a simple Google search on "revival of copyright", they might not have given you goofy answers.

I am guessing you know these answers and are just playing "stump the attorney". 2 out of 3....not bad.