Read: [next] [previous] message

Re: [d@DCC] Chronology of Canadian Copyright Law

From: Russell McOrmond <russell _-at-_>
To: "General Copyright Discussions \(questions, organizing, etc\)" <discuss (at)>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 11:39:11 -0500
References: <>

Wallace J.McLean wrote:
> 1924.
> Prior to the 1921 act (which came into force in 1924) the term was 28-
> and-14; 28 on formalities; another 14 possible on renewal.

Thank you for the update.  I've added this to

   Can you clarify.  Is that 28 years + 14 years for a possible total of 
42?  This would suggest that the term extension was:

   a) Remove formalities and renewal  (a very bad idea, but made more 
sense in this pre-ICT era than it does today)
   b) extend term by 8 years.

   I'm curious what your thoughts are on the Berne question about 
whether Copyright not being "subject to any formality" actually removes 
the ability to require renewal.  While I understand Berne not allowing 
required registration, it seems reasonable to allow an initial term of 
unregistered copyright with a need for registration to renew.

   It seems odd to me that it is so easy to get bad ideas (1996 WIPO 
treaties) passed at WIPO that are massive changes from Berne, and yet a 
modernization to take new information technology into consideration 
(that makes renewal cheap/easy in an era where the general public needs 
clarity on what works are in the public domain) seems to be hard.

  Russell McOrmond, Internet Consultant: <>
  Please help us tell the Canadian Parliament to protect our property
  rights as owners of Information Technology. Sign the petition!

  "The government, lobbied by legacy copyright holders and hardware
   manufacturers, can pry my camcorder, computer, home theatre, or
   portable media player from my cold dead hands!"
Discuss mailing list

Read: [next] [previous] message
List: [newer] [older] articles

You need to subscribe to post to this forum.
XML feed