Joe Nation wrote:Unless the newsletter has a notice on it to the effect that the materials contained therein are private (which would be a very weird newsletter) or indicates in some way that distribution of it without permission is prohibited, you are in the clear.
Joe(Pay the librarian for the copy)Nation
That's a myth. It's even in the "Top 10 Copyright Myths" on the UK Copyright Agency website, which specifically outlines the USA situation.
Quote:Copyright will apply whether there is a copyright notice or not.
In the US, a notice was required to retain copyright on works published before January 1st 1978, but this was the exception not the norm, and is certainly no longer the case. Also, once the US signed up to the Berne convention, US law was amended, and the use of copyright notices became optional on work published from March 1st 1989.
Having said this, it is still certainly worth placing a copyright notice on your work. A copyright notice reminds others that copyright exists, and may therefore help to deter infringement.
I think a bit of common sense is called for. Breaching copyright law is a civil, not a criminal offence. It's not like smoking marijuana or stealing a car. To succeed in suing you, the copyright owner would have to show that they had suffered loss or damage in some way. If you xeroxed a published book or magazine or some sheet music and circulated it either for free or charged money for it, then maybe you should worry. Making a photocopy of the local public library newsletter is unlikely to get you a letter from an attorney. If you really are worried, call the library and ask them. They may well say "Go ahead, it saves our paper stocks".
If they get federal or state money, their newsletter may even be in the public domain anyway.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace