Reprinted From Library of Congress
NewsNet Issue 666, June 1, 2017
Copyright Office Releases an Updated Draft of the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, Third Edition
Acting Register of Copyrights Karyn Temple Claggett today released a revised draft of the Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, Third Edition. This draft includes the first proposed updates to the Compendium since its release in December 2014. The public draft is available on the Office’s website at https://copyright.gov/comp3/
The Compendium is the administrative manual of the Register of Copyrights concerning the mandate and statutory duties of the Copyright Office under Title 17 of the United States Code. See 37 CFR. § 201.2(b)(7). The proposed updates are the result of a comprehensive review of the Office’s practices and procedures. The draft revisions to the registration chapters clarify how and when the Office communicates with applicants and how it handles duplicate claims, deposit requirements, and claims involving multiple works, among other improvements. The update also provides preliminary guidance for claims involving useful articles based on the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Star Athletica v. Varsity Brands.
The draft revisions to the recordation chapter provide additional guidance for recording notices of termination and information on the Office’s new electronic system for the designation of agents. The draft update also addresses recent changes in the Office’s regulations, including the “mailbox rule” for requests for reconsideration, new procedures for removing personally identifiable information, and changes made by the Office’s technical amendments. For a full accounting of draft Compendiumrevisions, read more.
Additionally, the Compendium has been reformatted to improve readability for online and offline users. When the revision is released in final form, it will include improved hyperlinks to provide direct access to legal citations and resources on the Office’s website, as well as improved cross-references between chapters.
What does it mean for a contract to be not enforceable because of a lack of consideration?
Answer: In order for a contract to be enforceable, the mutual promises of the parties must be supported by “consideration.” Considerations means each party gives something of value to the other. The reason that the courts and legislatures generally require some form of consideration is to insure that the promises being made are not merely a casual statement, and accident, or gratuitous – in short – to make sure the people making the agreement really mean it. Consideration looks at whether the parties have assumed an obligation on the condition of an act or forbearance of another. Except in cases of employment matters, Minnesota courts generally do not look at the adequacy of the consideration being offered – only whether some consideration has been exchanged. For written agreements, the court presumes valid consideration. While adequacy of consideration is not usually analyzed, vague or indefinite terms of consideration (including other conditions of the agreement) may invalidate an agreement, unless it is clear from the subsequent actions.
In contracts related to copyrights and trademarks, this mean that things like royalties might be subject to discontinuance if the only thing that it does is to grant a right to use the IP and it turns out the licensor in fact does not have the rights in the first place (assuming the licensor did not know that the rights were invalid). However, if the contract also goes on to provide that the licensor will discontinue use of the rights for their own use, this forbearance may be enough to be deemed adequate consideration to enforce the contract.
Consideration is important as a part of any contract. When setting up a licensing arrangement it’s important that you evaluate what the parties are exchanging.
You Own Devices Act
Congressman Blake Farenthold (R-TX) recently reintroduced to committee H.R.862, You Own Devices Act (YODA), to amend title 17, United States Code. If enacted, the bill will provide that the first sale doctrine applies to any computer program that enables a machine or other product to operate. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr5586/text Expect opposition to come from
From the United States Copyright Office
May 5, 2014
The U.S. Copyright Office will hold a series of public roundtables to gather input for its music licensing study. The roundtables will take place in Nashville, Tennessee on June 4 and 5, 2014, in Los Angeles, California, on June 16 and 17, 2014, and in New York, New York, on June 23 and 24, 2014. The roundtables will offer an opportunity for interested parties to comment on the music licensing issues set forth in the Notice of Inquiry issued by the Office on March 17, 2014. Those seeking to participate in the roundtables should complete and submit the online form. Requests to participate must be received by the Copyright Office by May 20, 2014.
- All photographs appearing on this website and in the archive of the Maloof Collection are copyrighted and protected under United States and international copyright laws. The photographs may not be reproduced in any form, stored or manipulated without prior written permission from the Maloof Collection.
Can I Copyright my Tattoo?
A while back someone asked me about writing a blog post on copyright law and tattoos. After thinking about it, I realized that the issue is one that provides a great opportunity to illustrate (no pun intended) some core concepts about copyright law that are often misunderstood by the general public and sometimes by creatives.
At issue is who owns the copyright in that tat on your forearm. After all, a tattoo is really no different than other creative work and as long as it is an “original work of authorship” (Most likely) and “fixed in a tangible form” (most defiantly), US law states that the subject matter is subject to copyright protection. A person who originally creates something generally has the exclusive right to control how that “expression” is used by others – they can give it away, sell it, or just prevent anyone else from using it. Tats are no different. When a tattoo artist does a design, whether directly on flesh or inked on a stencil, that creative work is his to control. The fact that it is a work being put onto the body of the customer is really no different than a wedding photographer’s right to control prints of a wedding, a musician controlling copies her composition, or a fine artist preventing prints being made of their work.
The same holds true for the stencils and “flash.” Flash is the process of putting a design on paper and tattoo designers committing their work to paper, which is then used by tattoo artist to ink the design. Over the years, the creation of “flash” has become an industry in itself, with designers being able to get their designs out to far more people than they could personally ink, by providing the designs to other tattoo shops.
Which leads me to language I found in a licensing agreement for a tattoo flash website “You may not . . .Remove the (c) from any design.” At least on its face, meaning that even when the design is inked, the © must appear. We hope they wont be this literal.
Now where can go out and get that tattoo on my backside “© my mama 1967” ?