Copyrights and Wrongs
Recently, a magazine I sometimes read, from a publisher I occasionally write for, printed a warning to readers about copyright infringement. This same publisher offers writers a non-negotiable work-for-hire standard contract. In light of this hidden side of the business, their full-page editorial warning readers not to make copies - in pretense of protecting artists rights - struck me as a farce.
Who owns what you write?
The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the right to promote the progress of… useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors… the exclusive right to their… writings. Under the law in effect before 1978, copyright was secured on the date a work was published with a copyright notice or on the date an unpublished work was registered. Today, copyright immediately becomes the property of the author. When you sign a contract with a publisher, however, you are selling some or all of your rights.
www.copyright.gov/title17/
What's a fair contract?
Fair contracts give publishers first (or second) print rights, but properly compensate writers for the extra uses of their work, such as reprinting a piece in a book or posting it on a web site. Work-for-hire contracts, by contrast, transfer the ownership of your work to the publisher. These contracts strip artists of rights to their own work, and are considered unfair by all major writers associations.
www.asja.org/pubtips/wmfh01.php
Current copyright law
In 1790, the first U.S. copyright law granted authors sole rights over their work for 14 years, with the option to renew for another 14. Over time laws have extended the duration of copyright to the life of author plus seventy years for individuals, and to ninety-five years for corporate authorship and anything originally published before 1978. As a result, no additional works will enter the public domain United States until 2019. (Unsurprisingly, this act covers several characters owned by the Walt Disney Company. Without the extension, Mickey Mouse would be entering the public domain in 2004.)
At first copyright extension might seem like a good idea to writers, but it hampers our ability to use sources that could enhance our newer works.
When is it legal to make a copy or use a quote?
Unfortunately, copyright laws are ambiguous and the only way to be certain if a making a copy or using a quote is legal is to have disputes resolved in federal court. A use is most likely to be considered fair by a judge when it is:
- Noncommercial educational, rather than profit-making.
- Factual rather than creative.
- A small portion of a larger work, rather than an entire document.
- Not effecting the potential market for the copyrighted work.
Making individual photocopies causes particular concern to authors of cookbooks and crafts books. It is unclear whether or not this is legal. In a similar situation in the music industry, the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 essentially granted permission for personal copying. However, the current controversy over sharing MP3 files muddies the waters.
www.eff.org/IP/eff_fair_use_faq.php
Doing your part
Ive been told that if I have a problem with the current state of copyright laws, I should tell my congressman and not bother complaining elsewhere. I couldnt disagree more. Open an honest public debate is a critical part of the democratic process. Writers, readers, and publishers should discuss these issues frequently and fervently. Only when we understand the issues can we work towards reasonable solutions that work for everyone.
***
This article was first published in the Women Writing the West newsletter.
