Rights and Term Quiz

PDF page 116: The term or time period of a copyright varies. For an individual, the term of a copyright is the life of the author plus 70 years after the author is deceased. For a work with two or more authors, the term expires 70 years after the last author’s death. Finally, for works that are “made for hire,” or anonymous or pseudonymous works, the copyright term lasts 95 years from the first publication or 120 years from the year of the work’s xv creation, whichever comes first. As examples, assume a musical artist writes a song that is published and performed under their name. The copyright will last 70 years beyond their death, and could conceivably be quite valuable to their heirs. On the other hand, imagine that an anonymous Korean War soldier’s diary, dated “December 1951” is discovered in an antique shop in the year 2013 and published that same year. Ordinarily, the copyright for an anonymous work would last for 95 years from the date of first publication, expiring in the year 2108. But because the date of creation is known to be 1951, the copyright would expire in 2071, or 120 years after it was written.

PDF page 116: The term or time period of a copyright varies. For an individual, the term of a copyright is the life of the author plus 70 years after the author is deceased. For a work with two or more authors, the term expires 70 years after the last author’s death. Finally, for works that are “made for hire,” or anonymous or pseudonymous works, the copyright term lasts 95 years from the first publication or 120 years from the year of the work’s xv creation, whichever comes first. As examples, assume a musical artist writes a song that is published and performed under their name. The copyright will last 70 years beyond their death, and could conceivably be quite valuable to their heirs. On the other hand, imagine that an anonymous Korean War soldier’s diary, dated “December 1951” is discovered in an antique shop in the year 2013 and published that same year. Ordinarily, the copyright for an anonymous work would last for 95 years from the date of first publication, expiring in the year 2108. But because the date of creation is known to be 1951, the copyright would expire in 2071, or 120 years after it was written.

PDF page 116: The term or time period of a copyright varies. For an individual, the term of a copyright is the life of the author plus 70 years after the author is deceased. For a work with two or more authors, the term expires 70 years after the last author’s death. Finally, for works that are “made for hire,” or anonymous or pseudonymous works, the copyright term lasts 95 years from the first publication or 120 years from the year of the work’s xv creation, whichever comes first. As examples, assume a musical artist writes a song that is published and performed under their name. The copyright will last 70 years beyond their death, and could conceivably be quite valuable to their heirs. On the other hand, imagine that an anonymous Korean War soldier’s diary, dated “December 1951” is discovered in an antique shop in the year 2013 and published that same year. Ordinarily, the copyright for an anonymous work would last for 95 years from the date of first publication, expiring in the year 2108. But because the date of creation is known to be 1951, the copyright would expire in 2071, or 120 years after it was written.

PDF page 116: Just as common law property rights grant owners’ exclusive powers of possession, use, and distribution, so, xiv too, does copyright law provide for six roughly analogous exclusive rights:

PDF page 116: These rights are exclusive to copyright owners—only they or those to whom they have legally assigned their rights can act upon them. Only the author of a copyrighted book, for example, can decide to make copies of (i.e., publish) the work and prepare derivatives of the book, such as a movie version of it. If any person other than the author and copyright owner were to make a movie based on the book, that person would infringe the copyright.

PDF page 116: These rights are exclusive to copyright owners—only they or those to whom they have legally assigned their rights can act upon them. Only the author of a copyrighted book, for example, can decide to make copies of (i.e., publish) the work and prepare derivatives of the book, such as a movie version of it. If any person other than the author and copyright owner were to make a movie based on the book, that person would infringe the copyright.

PDF page 117: It is important to note, however, that an author’s distribution rights (No. 3 above) are strictly limited by what is known as the first-sale doctrine, which terminates those distribution rights once he sells or distributes the work to someone else. For example, once the author of a copyrighted novel lets a publisher distribute copies of that novel to a bookstore, the author’s distribution rights to those copies are ended and the bookstore can do whatever it wants with them—sell them, rent them, give them away, or throw them in the dumpster. The bookstore owner cannot, however, make additional copies of the book because the first-sale doctrine does not limit a copyright owner’s reproduction right (the first right listed above). The first-sale doctrine was first delineated in the 1908 Supreme Court case Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus (https://www.openstax.org/l/BobbsMerrillCoVStraus). The Bobbs-Merrill Co. distributed copies of a novel titled The Castaway to retailers with the proviso that these be sold for exactly one dollar. Printed right in the book itself, in fact, right after the title page, was the following notice: “The price of this book at retail is $1 net. No dealer is licensed to sell it at a less price, and a sale at a less price will be treated as an infringement of the copyright.”

PDF page 117: It is important to note, however, that an author’s distribution rights (No. 3 above) are strictly limited by what is known as the first-sale doctrine, which terminates those distribution rights once he sells or distributes the work to someone else. For example, once the author of a copyrighted novel lets a publisher distribute copies of that novel to a bookstore, the author’s distribution rights to those copies are ended and the bookstore can do whatever it wants with them—sell them, rent them, give them away, or throw them in the dumpster. The bookstore owner cannot, however, make additional copies of the book because the first-sale doctrine does not limit a copyright owner’s reproduction right (the first right listed above). The first-sale doctrine was first delineated in the 1908 Supreme Court case Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus (https://www.openstax.org/l/BobbsMerrillCoVStraus). The Bobbs-Merrill Co. distributed copies of a novel titled The Castaway to retailers with the proviso that these be sold for exactly one dollar. Printed right in the book itself, in fact, right after the title page, was the following notice: “The price of this book at retail is $1 net. No dealer is licensed to sell it at a less price, and a sale at a less price will be treated as an infringement of the copyright.”

PDF page 117: It is important to note, however, that an author’s distribution rights (No. 3 above) are strictly limited by what is known as the first-sale doctrine, which terminates those distribution rights once he sells or distributes the work to someone else. For example, once the author of a copyrighted novel lets a publisher distribute copies of that novel to a bookstore, the author’s distribution rights to those copies are ended and the bookstore can do whatever it wants with them—sell them, rent them, give them away, or throw them in the dumpster. The bookstore owner cannot, however, make additional copies of the book because the first-sale doctrine does not limit a copyright owner’s reproduction right (the first right listed above). The first-sale doctrine was first delineated in the 1908 Supreme Court case Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus (https://www.openstax.org/l/BobbsMerrillCoVStraus). The Bobbs-Merrill Co. distributed copies of a novel titled The Castaway to retailers with the proviso that these be sold for exactly one dollar. Printed right in the book itself, in fact, right after the title page, was the following notice: “The price of this book at retail is $1 net. No dealer is licensed to sell it at a less price, and a sale at a less price will be treated as an infringement of the copyright.”

PDF page 117: It is important to note, however, that an author’s distribution rights (No. 3 above) are strictly limited by what is known as the first-sale doctrine, which terminates those distribution rights once he sells or distributes the work to someone else. For example, once the author of a copyrighted novel lets a publisher distribute copies of that novel to a bookstore, the author’s distribution rights to those copies are ended and the bookstore can do whatever it wants with them—sell them, rent them, give them away, or throw them in the dumpster. The bookstore owner cannot, however, make additional copies of the book because the first-sale doctrine does not limit a copyright owner’s reproduction right (the first right listed above). The first-sale doctrine was first delineated in the 1908 Supreme Court case Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus (https://www.openstax.org/l/BobbsMerrillCoVStraus). The Bobbs-Merrill Co. distributed copies of a novel titled The Castaway to retailers with the proviso that these be sold for exactly one dollar. Printed right in the book itself, in fact, right after the title page, was the following notice: “The price of this book at retail is $1 net. No dealer is licensed to sell it at a less price, and a sale at a less price will be treated as an infringement of the copyright.”

PDF page 117: It’s the first-sale doctrine that explains why Amazon.com and eBay allow users to resell secondhand copies of printed books, music, and movies at prices of their own choosing—but only if those copies were legally obtained. It is still illegal to sell pirated works. In 2011, however, a new case in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit— John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Supap Kirtsaeng (https://www.openstax.org/l/SecondCircuit2011)—waived the first-sale doctrine in xviii cases where the copies of the copyrighted work were manufactured abroad. But in March of 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned that ruling in a 6-to-3 decision that affirmed that Mr. Kirtsaeng’s rights after first sale trumped the publisher’s right to ban imports. He couldn’t make unauthorized copies of the book. But just as with secondhand books or Gucci bags bought at a flea market, if the books had been bought legally (regardless of whether they had been imported or sold originally in the United States), Mr. Kirtsaeng had a right to sell them. The first-sale doctrine was also limited by Vernor v. Autodesk (https://www.openstax.org/l/VernorVAutodesk), when an appeals court in 2010 ruled that software was not subject to the first-sale doctrine because purchasers of software were actually only licensees and therefore could not resell the software to others.

PDF page 117: It’s the first-sale doctrine that explains why Amazon.com and eBay allow users to resell secondhand copies of printed books, music, and movies at prices of their own choosing—but only if those copies were legally obtained. It is still illegal to sell pirated works. In 2011, however, a new case in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit— John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Supap Kirtsaeng (https://www.openstax.org/l/SecondCircuit2011)—waived the first-sale doctrine in xviii cases where the copies of the copyrighted work were manufactured abroad. But in March of 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned that ruling in a 6-to-3 decision that affirmed that Mr. Kirtsaeng’s rights after first sale trumped the publisher’s right to ban imports. He couldn’t make unauthorized copies of the book. But just as with secondhand books or Gucci bags bought at a flea market, if the books had been bought legally (regardless of whether they had been imported or sold originally in the United States), Mr. Kirtsaeng had a right to sell them. The first-sale doctrine was also limited by Vernor v. Autodesk (https://www.openstax.org/l/VernorVAutodesk), when an appeals court in 2010 ruled that software was not subject to the first-sale doctrine because purchasers of software were actually only licensees and therefore could not resell the software to others.