[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: LEGAL DEPOSIT OF BOOKS
- To: BOOK_ARTS-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
- Subject: Re: LEGAL DEPOSIT OF BOOKS
- From: Derek Lyons <elde@HURRICANE.NET>
- Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 11:21:56 -0400
- In-Reply-To: <199705281517.IAA02507@wind.hurricane.net>
- Message-Id: <199705291522.IAA16481@SUL-Server-2.Stanford.EDU>
- Sender: "The Book Arts: binding, typography, collecting" <BOOK_ARTS-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU>
At 11:36 AM 5/28/97 -0400, you wrote:
>>This is indeed 'all wet'. It provides no legal protection whatsover.
>Derek---I'd be interested in seeing the authority for your statement.
Talk to a copyright lawyer rather than listening to urban legends. People
tend to 'believe' in the 'mail it to myself' method because it's been an
urban legend for many years (decades).
>understanding is that the registration does not *confer* rights but just
>provides conclusive (I guess) proof of the latest possible date of
>creation. The unregistered copyright is just as valid as the registered
>one. The problem is proof of date. Any other probative evidence of date can
>also be used but may not be conclusive. The failure to register injects a
>fact issue into the case which may be found against the creating artist but
>this is a question of evidence, not a question of the legal validity of the
>copyright. Obviously registration is the safest way to go and pretty well
>closes the door on the date question. But failure to register does not, in
>and of itself, sink the ship.
I never said that failure to register sinks the ship. I said that 'mailing
to yourself' provides no legal proof. If you must document an ongoing
creation, then place it on deposit with a lawyer. No other method will
stand up in a court of law.