Copyright, When, if ever?

[accessfleet]

If a database is starting to look better than any other and entering, accessing and reporting the data is getting ship shape too. Should you ever copy right it?

Has anyone any experienced the process and would you do it again?

just wondering..

 

[Rabbie]

If a database is starting to look better than any other and entering, accessing and reporting the data is getting ship shape too. Should you ever copy right it?

Has anyone any experienced the process and would you do it again?

just wondering..

As a matter of routine I aways copyright all my programming work. I put a copyright notice on the front screen of each access DB I develop and also put a copyright notice at the begnning of each code module.

 

[the_net_2.0]

As a matter of routine I aways copyright all my programming work. I put a copyright notice on the front screen of each access DB I develop and also put a copyright notice at the begnning of each code module.

Rabbie,

Do you actually register your copyrights with the government? On some of the websites I have designed, I know people put 'copyright@company' near the bottom, but from a legal standpoint it really doesn't mean anything because the trademark/copyright is not legally documented in the government's database.

I'm not sure what it's like in your country, but from the way I understand it here in the US, you cannot legally take any action against others using your work as their own unless the trademark is registered with the government. And I'm not even sure if the us accepts code for registration. I know it accepts sophisticated algorithmic code like google's or dating sites, etc because they're very complex but other than that I'm not sure.

Would you have any other information regarding this?

 

[ChipperT]

the_net 2.0,
In the US, your work has copyright the moment you create it. Putting a notice on it merely codifies it and registering makes it easier to prove. But even unregistered with no notice, you own the copyright and can take legal action if someone infringes on it. Since the burden of proof is on you that it was your original idea it is generally difficult to obtain damages in court without regsitering with the Copyright office. Even then it can be tricky.

 

[Rabbie]

Rabbie,

Do you actually register your copyrights with the government? On some of the websites I have designed, I know people put 'copyright@company' near the bottom, but from a legal standpoint it really doesn't mean anything because the trademark/copyright is not legally documented in the government's database.

I'm not sure what it's like in your country, but from the way I understand it here in the US, you cannot legally take any action against others using your work as their own unless the trademark is registered with the government. And I'm not even sure if the us accepts code for registration. I know it accepts sophisticated algorithmic code like google's or dating sites, etc because they're very complex but other than that I'm not sure.

Would you have any other information regarding this?

I the UK all that is necessary is to include a statement like

Copyright © CentreCode Ltd 2010

in a clearly visible place. There is no government registry for copyrights. For physical inventions you can take out a patent with the Patent Office if your invention is genuinely new.

 

[accessfleet]

Thanks for all the guidance.

The copy right web sight provides online registration of song text, photos and software. The fee is reasonible. I registered my program. Now I'll just wait to see what the results are.

When I retire I'd like to license the software to every municipality in New York. then in America

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Because I also write fiction as a hobby, I researched this kind of question once. The only law I had available was USA Copyright Law. Staring in 1974, copyright is in place, whether or not it was registered, the moment that you mark the documents, modules, etc. However, you must follow certain rules.

If the work to be copyrighted exists as a single file, one set of marks is enough. You must have the year, the copyright symbol (but parenthesis -small c - parenthesis is acceptable), and the name of the work's owner. To preserve international copyright rights, you must include the phrase "All Rights Reserved."

When it becomes a multiple-file program, the requirements I mentioned above apply to each file. It is permitted but not required to identify a file as part of a larger work.

You can find on-line help easily enough to get the fine points handled, so I won't go into them. However, one issue that MUST be considered is that if your work is a program that actively does something, it is required that the date, copyright symbol (c), and owner's name must appear in some sort of display image that is one of the first outputs of the program. For instance, put up a "splash graphic" for the first couple of seconds after the program starts. Include the copyright notice in the splash.

 

[Steve R.]

Copyright has drifted from its original purpose of fostering creativity by providing an author with a monopoly for limited period of time in which to make money. Copyright, has now been distorted into a perpetual "toll-booth" to extort revenue. Consequently, the common perception now concerns the issue of revenue rather than producing creative works that serve a social benefit.

Furthermore, the scope of copyright has expanded to include material that was not originally subject to copyright. Computer software, being one such category. Exactly how can you claim a copyright privilege over a do/while loop? Concerning the complexity/absurdity of copyright today, Orson Scott Card had an excellent post ripping J.K. Rowling.

You probably did not expect a "lecture" for answer. I would suggest visiting Against Monopoly and TechDirt. With that I will shut-up.

In terms of responding to your question, of asserting the copyright privilege, it is up to you.

 

[accessfleet]

Thanks for all the advise. I have filed for a copyright. Partly just to see what all the interm steps are and what the result will be. So far its been 2 months and I haven't heard a thing .

As far a money is concerned. The (c) is more like an artist touch-mark. It will serve to make availible to my children for generations to come something important to me and how I made the work better. Although, in retirement if I can make a few bucks I'll gratefully "cash the check"

Steve R. Thanks for the post, I look at it more like a do "this"/ when, process. After all, changing the "this" is what we do to make the work better, faster, smarter.

Drop me a post once in awhile and you too can follow-up on the process.

John.

 

[gemma-the-husky]

it's one thing copyrighting something- the hard thing is stopping people using it anyway....

 

[Thales750]

it's one thing copyrighting something- the hard thing is stopping people using it anyway....

True enough, but copy rights have much more legal byte then a patent. Copy right infringement caries criminal penalties, whereas a patent is merely a legal tool to use as evidence of” proof of concept” in a civil trial.

 

[Thales750]

Copyright has drifted from its original purpose of fostering creativity by providing an author with a monopoly for limited period of time in which to make money. Copyright, has now been distorted into a perpetual "toll-booth" to extort revenue. Consequently, the common perception now concerns the issue of revenue rather than producing creative works that serve a social benefit.

Furthermore, the scope of copyright has expanded to include material that was not originally subject to copyright. Computer software, being one such category. Exactly how can you claim a copyright privilege over a do/while loop? Concerning the complexity/absurdity of copyright today, Orson Scott Card had an excellent post ripping J.K. Rowling.

You probably did not expect a "lecture" for answer. I would suggest visiting Against Monopoly and TechDirt. With that I will shut-up.

In terms of responding to your question, of asserting the copyright privilege, it is up to you.

And the way they foster creativity is to protect the owner of the copyrighted material.

 

[Steve R.]

And the way they foster creativity is to protect the owner of the copyrighted material.

Wrong. I will avoid an expansive diatribe on this.

People have been creating content long before copyright was "legitimized". So they will continue to create with or without copyright.

Another growing concern with the onerous trend in copyright is that changes to copyright law are continuing to increasingly deprive the "accused" infringer of due process. In the name of "protecting" content, copyright holders claim they have a right to conduct warrantless searches of your internet activity, your computer, etc. While you have a right to protect your property, you do not have a unilateral whimsical right to break into someone's house to check it out on the mere belief that something might be occurring.

As a final point, the copyright holders by extending the time and scope of copyright have been stealing from the public domain. To bad that this type of theft has been swept under the rug.

 

[Thales750]

Wrong. I will avoid an expansive diatribe on this.

People have been creating content long before copyright was "legitimized". So they will continue to create with or without copyright.

Another growing concern with the onerous trend in copyright is that changes to copyright law are continuing to increasingly deprive the "accused" infringer of due process. In the name of "protecting" content, copyright holders claim they have a right to conduct warrantless searches of your internet activity, your computer, etc. While you have a right to protect your property, you do not have a unilateral whimsical right to break into someone's house to check it out on the mere belief that something might be occurring.

As a final point, the copyright holders by extending the time and scope of copyright have been stealing from the public domain. To bad that this type of theft has been swept under the rug.

You would have us work for free then. Your argument has a fundamentalist ring to it.

The "public domain" is quite alive and well.


Maybe we should all be allowed to go to the movies for free. And get our software for free and oh yeah. Why should anyone ever make a living writing songs.

The absence of copy right protection will make economic slaves out of all of the creative people in the world.

You should be careful what you ask for.

 

[Steve R.]

You would have us work for free then. Your argument has a fundamentalist ring to it.

No. You miss the point. If you can't make money too bad. Saying You Can't Compete With Free Is Saying You Can't Compete Period. Should we have protected those who make buggy whips because of the invention of the automobile? What about all the typists/artists that have been put out of work because of word processing programs. Technology progress, we need to adapt. Incentive to Create Cartoon

The "public domain" is quite alive and well.

Let's reverse that question, how would you feel if the law was changed to restore copyright to a period of 14 years. I would assume that you would be complaining that this would constitute "theft".

Please see the graphic here which demonstrates how copyright has been expanding itself at the expense of the public domain.

While the public domain still exists, may things that would have fallen into the public domain by now have not because of the Copyright Term Extension Act. "The Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) of 1998 extended copyright terms in the United States by 20 years. Since the Copyright Act of 1976, copyright would last for the life of the author plus 50 years, or 75 years for a work of corporate authorship." (Wikipedia). So exactly how does the copyright law (as it is written today) incentivize a dead author to create?

Please note that I am not totally against copyright if it is for a limited period of time, allows for fair use, infringement is not considered a criminal offense, and does not eliminate due process.

 

[Thales750]

I can't speak to how long after someone dies. That of course could be argued in both directions.

But if a person creates intellectual property, I cannot imagine a society that would not protect their right to enjoy the fruits of their labor.

Once again in your utopian world there would be no money for anyone creating intellectual property. No money for movie makers, no money for music, no money for software makers.

Soon many more millions would be out of work. I see no logic in an argument for devaluing intellectual property.

How would all those people be employed?

 

[Steve R.]

I will simply end, with the assertion that "intellectual property" does not exist. It is a government created privilege of limited duration and limited scope that has mushroomed into a so-called "right". You may have the last word.

 

[ChipperT]

I will simply end, with the assertion that "intellectual property" does not exist. It is a government created privilege of limited duration and limited scope that has mushroomed into a so-called "right". You may have the last word.

That is very true. But then, the concept of "real" property is something that is codified and enforced by government. It does not (or did not) exist in some societies. So, by your reasoning I should be able to just take whatever I need. After all, you don't really own anything, except by laws passed by the government.

 

[Steve R.]

I guess that I can't pass without typing 10 characters. Pass.

 

[ankrumc]

Ok, I'm really not great at this either, and I don't know how original my program is, but if we are thinking of trying to sell it more as a concept, how important is the programming copywrite as opposed to the concept? I feel like our concept is much more worthy of being bought than my programming/programming ability.

Most everything that's been done has been using access default stuff, and very rarely I've had to clean up something in the code.