![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
It's my understanding (from the corporate lawyers at a previous job) that the three-character sequence "(c)" or "(C)" has no standing in US copyright law. This should perhaps be mentioned on this page, but "my understanding" is not a strong enough reference, so I'm hoping someone knows of one... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfriedl ( talk • contribs) 17 February 2011
I'm deleting the assertion that there are 20 foreign countries that require copyright notice. For one thing, as far as I can tell, it's wrong; the U.S. was pretty unusual in its former copyright notice requirement. For another, its supported only by a book that is actually about medical devices, and while I assume that the book is probably a reliable source when it's talking about medical devices, I think the author is, to put it politely, outside his comfort zone when he is trying to discuss copyright law.
I suspect the author's misunderstanding stems from one of two things. the first may be adherence to the now-dead Buenos Aires Convention, which conditioned international recognition of copyright on including the talisman "All Rights Reserved". Eighteen countries were party to that, which is close enough for his "some 20 foreign counties" figure. Another thing he may have been looking at is a list of countries who has signed onto the Universal Copyright Convention (which allowed, but did not require, signing countries to implement a copyright notice requirement) but had not signed the Berne Convention, which disallowed the requirement.
In any event, given the lack of specificity in the cited source, and that extraordinary claims should have extraordinary support, I am deleting this statement.
This also came up a couple years ago in the Copyright article. See here. The only editor who wanted to keep it was SasiSasi ( talk · contribs · logs · block log), who misunderstood the WP:RS policy and was ultimately permanently blocked for repeated copyright violations; and who had copied that cite here. TJRC ( talk) 00:14, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
As noted by TJRC, the U.S. appears to be fairly unusual in the importance (prior to implementation of Berne treaty) it places on the copyright notice. There's a lot to say about U.S. copyright law on this issue. If there is something to say about notice under the copyright law of other countries, that information would probably be better suited to a separate article (or articles) anyway. Article could be renamed "Copyright notice (U.S. law)" Federalist51 ( talk) 03:09, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
So, is the use of a range of years in a notice "incorrect"? It would be great to shed some light on this, and clarify what happens if one does use a range (which is very common, for instance, in program source code). 82.48.123.28 ( talk) 22:16, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
It's my understanding (from the corporate lawyers at a previous job) that the three-character sequence "(c)" or "(C)" has no standing in US copyright law. This should perhaps be mentioned on this page, but "my understanding" is not a strong enough reference, so I'm hoping someone knows of one... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jfriedl ( talk • contribs) 17 February 2011
I'm deleting the assertion that there are 20 foreign countries that require copyright notice. For one thing, as far as I can tell, it's wrong; the U.S. was pretty unusual in its former copyright notice requirement. For another, its supported only by a book that is actually about medical devices, and while I assume that the book is probably a reliable source when it's talking about medical devices, I think the author is, to put it politely, outside his comfort zone when he is trying to discuss copyright law.
I suspect the author's misunderstanding stems from one of two things. the first may be adherence to the now-dead Buenos Aires Convention, which conditioned international recognition of copyright on including the talisman "All Rights Reserved". Eighteen countries were party to that, which is close enough for his "some 20 foreign counties" figure. Another thing he may have been looking at is a list of countries who has signed onto the Universal Copyright Convention (which allowed, but did not require, signing countries to implement a copyright notice requirement) but had not signed the Berne Convention, which disallowed the requirement.
In any event, given the lack of specificity in the cited source, and that extraordinary claims should have extraordinary support, I am deleting this statement.
This also came up a couple years ago in the Copyright article. See here. The only editor who wanted to keep it was SasiSasi ( talk · contribs · logs · block log), who misunderstood the WP:RS policy and was ultimately permanently blocked for repeated copyright violations; and who had copied that cite here. TJRC ( talk) 00:14, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
As noted by TJRC, the U.S. appears to be fairly unusual in the importance (prior to implementation of Berne treaty) it places on the copyright notice. There's a lot to say about U.S. copyright law on this issue. If there is something to say about notice under the copyright law of other countries, that information would probably be better suited to a separate article (or articles) anyway. Article could be renamed "Copyright notice (U.S. law)" Federalist51 ( talk) 03:09, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
So, is the use of a range of years in a notice "incorrect"? It would be great to shed some light on this, and clarify what happens if one does use a range (which is very common, for instance, in program source code). 82.48.123.28 ( talk) 22:16, 6 December 2020 (UTC)