Pulp Pricing and Copyrghts..a few thoughts
John P. Gunnison
THE ADVENTURE HOUSE GUIDE TO THE PULPS finally went to the printer and my
several weeks of 16-18 hour days is behind me, I've ventured out onto the
net. Therein I've found several items that really steamed me.
A company with the ironic name of TRADEMARKS is selling a cd on ebay that
includes MP3's of SHADOW radio shows as well as copyrighted covers and text
to SHADOW pulps. I guess they decided to trademark their own little brand
of copypirated material.
An ebayer with an interesting name that starts with "X" is promoting once
more the ludicrous suggestion that pulps purchased from a collector in
Yakima, Washington are the finest pulp examples in existence and therefore
should be sold at an extremely inflated price. I did notice that a friend
of mine actually placed a bid on one, but several others went without bids.
I still say that a white paper pulp with pieces out of the cover, or badly
trimmed is still a pulp with a grade of GOOD or maybe GOOD PLUS. I figure
anyone who tries to sell a pulp with a psuedo "pedigree" for greatly
inflated prices, might find a buyer, but lose a customer in the long run
when they find the same material for much less elsewhere.
The most recent pulp renaissance hopefully will continue. I would hate to
see it die due to greed, overzealous ultra-hyped sales pushes, literary and
artistic ghouls who try to cash in without getting permission from copyright
holders.
Just one man's opinion!
John P. Gunnison
Adventure House
Publisher of THE ADVENTURE HOUSE GUIDE TO THE PULPS.
http://www.adventurehouse.com
Cat Savage Woman Of Bronze
the coffee this morning !
It seems that the people who ask and offer to pay for the use of the CR/TM
materials are 'punished' (turned down) and the people illegally selling CD ROMS
and unlicensed posters get rewarded by no legal action brought against them.
Most times it's a matter of one fax to an ISP or a call to Ebay to stop this,
yet the CR/TM holders just turn the info over to lawyers, who aren't web-savy,
and don't do anything at all about it. No wonder people think that the stuff
is in the public domain.
I hate this duplicity-I am not allowed to sell my Spider posters over the web
anymore, yet someone can illegally make and sell Spider posters over Ebay.
GRRRRR.
Trademarks: Use them or Lose them.
Copyright: is for the entire term whether they use it or not.
I would really hate to be an author or artist nowdays.
Nothing is stopping us from posting negative feedback for these sellers, you
know.
All it takes is for good men (and women) to stand by and do nothing.
(Yes, I know I've been spending too much time on http://www.michaelmoore.com/
lately)
====
Meow, Frozencat >^..^<
"I refuse to fight. I'm a consciences objector. You know, a coward."
(Fry-Futurama-Sunday 6pm CST on FOX)
John P. Gunnison
pictures of pulps. Not that such a low resolution file gets my blood
boiling, it's just that I have already found images that I scanned for my
web site as part of this person's albums of pulp images. Although I hold no
copyrights, I do not grant wholesale permission to copy images and text off
my web site without permission.
Does anyone know who crush2apulp is?
John Gunnison
Catts4
>know.
Except that they only take feedback from successful bidders. So theoretically
you could bid $25.99 and buy an original DOC Clock, and then post feedback that
it was a rip-off and trademark infringement, but that doesn't seem to be the
best use of time or money. This is the proper use for the NG -- keeping folks
aware.
I have seen this dodge several times in different areas of e-Bay -- the seller
says, "Well I don't know about the legality of this, but I bought it from
somebody who said it was ........."
Dave
Cat Savage Woman Of Bronze
<gunn...@adventurehouse.com> writes:
> it's just that I have already found images that I scanned for my
>web site as part of this person's albums of pulp images. Although I hold no
>copyrights, I do not grant wholesale permission to copy images and text off
>my web site without permission.
Try this for protecting your images:
http://www.gamacles.com
Joseph Teller
> This is the proper use for the NG -- keeping folks
>aware.
Except in the case of the MP3s of Shadow Episodes you are in the wrong
if you state they are not in the Public Domain.
Take a look at the reality of copyrights - before 1978 recordings were
NOT copyrightable under US Copyright law. This has been specifically
clarified by the Library of Congress staff a number of times. Check
out their website and contact their staff.
There was a short period of time, when the law changed, when the
companies could have put in claims to retrieve copyright protection in
1978-79 by filing forms with the government, having their rights
posted in the Congressional Record (as the law required) and giving
the public the right to challenge the attempt to reclaim protection
under the law change. NO US companies or individuals filed such
documents accoriding to searches by the LOC staff for any material
except some foreign language recordings.
Exception is musical performances (which are protected under a
different set of laws under which sheet music is protected).
You cannot take something that is in the public domain and legally
return it to copyright status (check on Project Gutenberg Site
regarding this, theres a ton of material regarding this and legal
battles associated with such last time I checked).
You can re-edit a recording that was in Public Domain, as you can
re-edit a book, and thus put the new revised edition under copyright
law (Thats what Media Bay's Radio Spirits subsidiary does, they
remaster and cleanup the audio digitally, and remove some of the
material along the way, including ads etc.)
Many of the early Shadow Novels were not renewed under their original
form (the later PPB series was a re-edited collection, often with as
much as 10,000 words of content removed and thus counts as a seperate
NEW copyright of the PPB edition). Additionally Walter Gibson was
said to have sued for his rights for a number of the novels that were
renewed and regained control of the copyright. The status of his
estate is unknown at this time (anyone with further info on this
please post about it and quote sources).
Now, trademarks are another thing entirely, and making knock-off
materials using trademarks without permission is a different ballpark
entirely.
Joe
Joseph Teller joet...@mindspring.com
"Put Some Fantasy Back In Your Life!"
The Fantasy Library
http://www.fantasylibrary.com
John P. Gunnison
> > This is the proper use for the NG -- keeping folks
> >aware.
>
> Except in the case of the MP3s of Shadow Episodes you are in the wrong
> if you state they are not in the Public Domain.
There was a very public lawsuit in regards to THE SHADOW radio programs
being copied and redistributed. The company who holds (that company name
has been forgotten by yours truly) those copyrights won the battle, and a
company who was trying to sell cassettes of the shows lost.
SNIP
>
> Many of the early Shadow Novels were not renewed under their original
> form (the later PPB series was a re-edited collection, often with as
> much as 10,000 words of content removed and thus counts as a seperate
> NEW copyright of the PPB edition). Additionally Walter Gibson was
> said to have sued for his rights for a number of the novels that were
> renewed and regained control of the copyright. The status of his
> estate is unknown at this time (anyone with further info on this
> please post about it and quote sources).
Which novels are you speaking of. The last time I looked, and I'll admit
that I didn't check each issue, THE SHADOW was renewed by first Street &
Smith, and then Conde Nast. S&S was one of the few pulp publishers who
spent the money to copyright and renew.
The lawsuit you are thinking of, was when Walter Gibson was helping produce
the reprint editions through Mysterious Press. He basically said to Conde
Nast, I'm the writer and I'm 70 something, go ahead and try to sue...you'll
just look bad. He didn't sue them to the best of my recollection.
>
> Now, trademarks are another thing entirely, and making knock-off
> materials using trademarks without permission is a different ballpark
> entirely.
>
> Joe
My biggest problem with companies like TRADEMARKS is that they are using
product that we know is copyrighted and trademarked and thumbing their nose
and saying go ahead and try and sue. To me, I wouldn't even dare doing
something like that, and perhaps that's why I have such a snit fit over it.
John Gunnison
Adventure House
http://www.adventurehouse.com
kar...@my-deja.com
> >aware.
>
> Except in the case of the MP3s of Shadow Episodes you are in the wrong
> if you state they are not in the Public Domain.
>
> NOT copyrightable under US Copyright law. This has been specifically
> clarified by the Library of Congress staff a number of times. Check
> out their website and contact their staff.
>
> There was a short period of time, when the law changed, when the
> companies could have put in claims to retrieve copyright protection in
> 1978-79 by filing forms with the government, having their rights
> posted in the Congressional Record (as the law required) and giving
> the public the right to challenge the attempt to reclaim protection
> under the law change. NO US companies or individuals filed such
> documents accoriding to searches by the LOC staff for any material
> except some foreign language recordings.
>
> Exception is musical performances (which are protected under a
> different set of laws under which sheet music is protected).
>
> You cannot take something that is in the public domain and legally
> return it to copyright status (check on Project Gutenberg Site
> regarding this, theres a ton of material regarding this and legal
> battles associated with such last time I checked).
>
> You can re-edit a recording that was in Public Domain, as you can
> re-edit a book, and thus put the new revised edition under copyright
> law (Thats what Media Bay's Radio Spirits subsidiary does, they
> remaster and cleanup the audio digitally, and remove some of the
> material along the way, including ads etc.)
>
> form (the later PPB series was a re-edited collection, often with as
> much as 10,000 words of content removed and thus counts as a seperate
> NEW copyright of the PPB edition). Additionally Walter Gibson was
> said to have sued for his rights for a number of the novels that were
> renewed and regained control of the copyright. The status of his
> estate is unknown at this time (anyone with further info on this
> please post about it and quote sources).
>
> materials using trademarks without permission is a different ballpark
> entirely.
not too different...while the person selling the mp3's might be able to do so
because that material is pd, they are not allowed to use any other material
with the shadow logo or likeness, new or otherwise, to market that material
because the shadow as a property is not pd. the most famous example is the
fleischer superman cartoons that went pd. to package and market the video,
you are only allowed to use images actually found in the cartoon.
much like gunnison's reproduction of the first tarzan novel that went pd. as
long as he only reprinted from that novel (including the cover with the word
tarzan on it), he didn't have to worry about trademark infringement. if he
had made up his own cover with his own tarzan logo on the other hand...
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
je...@ionet.net
>Except in the case of the MP3s of Shadow Episodes you are in the wrong
>if you state they are not in the Public Domain.
>Take a look at the reality of copyrights - before 1978 recordings were
>NOT copyrightable under US Copyright law. This has been specifically
>clarified by the Library of Congress staff a number of times. Check
>out their website and contact their staff.
Joseph is absolutely correct on this score. However, the script
can be still be protected.
James
Ronwixziv
law, but the publishers no loger exist, do the copyrights stil hold?
I'm thinking particularly of...
Freeway Press (Operator 5)
Corinth (G-8, Operator 5, Secret Agent X, et al)
Belmont (new Shadow novels by Walter GIbson & Dennis Lynds)
Plus, though the publishers still exist, Berkley & Pocket (The Spider)
The Corinth & Belmont series are now over the initial 29-year period, and since
they no longer exist, who could legally renew the rights?
-R
Alan D Glick
Alan Glick
"Joseph Teller" <fantas...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:39495471...@news.mindspring.com...
Joseph Teller
<gunn...@adventurehouse.com> wrote:
>There was a very public lawsuit in regards to THE SHADOW radio programs
>being copied and redistributed. The company who holds (that company name
>has been forgotten by yours truly) those copyrights won the battle, and a
>company who was trying to sell cassettes of the shows lost.
Check again - company that presently distributes Shadow radio programs
and claims licensing ownership is Media Bay's subsidiary, Radio
Spirits. Radio Spirits has been trying to claim ownership or licensing
for about 90% of OTR, but when push has come to shove with many
collectors, clubs, organization etc has had to back down as what they
have is a license to use the Shadow TRADEMARK.
They remaster the material, clean it up, edit it, and resell it. They
did not originate the masters, in many cases they got the masters from
collectors and clubs. They then claim copyright on the remastered
material, since it has been altered and "improved" (sort of a Ted
Turner job in some cases).
The shows are in the PD, as is nearly all of pre-1978 radio
recordings, as copyright law did not cover them. There are a handful
of exceptions (Music shows, Shows that were derrived from hollywood
feature films like the Lux Radio Theatre and the Academy Award
Theatre, and shows that were direct adaptations of books & novels -
which the Shadow Radio Shows weren't). There were only two authors
writing for radio that registered their scripts as seperate
copywritten documents of note: Arch Obler and Carlton E. Morse.
Many of the surviving shows are from 1) The Government overseas disc
collection from WWII, used to broadcast radio shows on board ship and
on bases outside the USA 2) Private collections of Performers 3) Wire
and transcription disk copies made by individuals or rescued from the
trash heap after being discarded.
There was also a MAJOR lawsuit in regards to Amos & Andy radio shows
and CBS where CBS lost control of all the early Amos & Andy material
to the public domain. (The case might be Silverstein vs CBS, I don't
remember for sure). All of this has been discussed by the way in the
otr discussion newsgroup over the past year, including legal
information, the running battle with the OTR collectos with Media
Bay/Radio Spirits etc.
Joseph Teller
<a.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Which editions and which novels are you talking about having been edited?
>Alan Glick
Check out the site: http://www.spaceports.com/~deshadow/
You'll find details about what was altered, and also ascii texts of
the shadow novels that are in the public domain.
On Project Gutenberg you can find copies of Edgar Rice Burroughs
novels now, and also of some of the Fu Manchu novels by Sax Rohmar
(and if you want some fancy versions of the Sax Rohmar material drop
on by my own website www.fantasylibrary.com and check in the stacks,
as I'm the official distrubution site for the PDF Retro-Novella
editions (free to download).
Alan D Glick
source material, I have chosen to use the original pulps rather than the
edited reprint versions. " Does this mean that more were edited than the
three Grosset & Dunlop editions? I'll pose this question to John also.
Alan Glick
"Joseph Teller" <fantas...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:394c2a5a...@news.mindspring.com...
Alan D Glick
referring to just these three or more?
je...@ionet.net
As long as the copyright was in it's renewal term at the time of the
1976 copyright act, it got a twenty year "freebie" extention. Under
the DMCA, this has been extended even further. As a general rule, you
should assume that all of the hero pulps have valid copyrights, at
least until you do some real legwork. Most American E-publishers just
simplify their lives and decline to publish works produced after 1922.
European copyright (in striciter accordance with the Berne Convention)
can run substantially longer.
James
Catts4
VOODOO DEATH, were edited when they were combined into a hardback collection
(title slipping my mind) in the late 1960's...
Does anybody think these were published without a clearly renewed copyright?
Same with the Crime Club editions? Or that when the SHADOW stories came out as
paperbacks in the 1960's it was done without a renewed copyright? Wish I had a
SHADOW paperback around -- all the DOCs, AVENGERs, and SPIDERs have the
copyright renewal notice in the front.
Dave
Joseph Teller
<a.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> Just checked the site again and came across this sentence, "As to my
>source material, I have chosen to use the original pulps rather than the
>edited reprint versions. " Does this mean that more were edited than the
>three Grosset & Dunlop editions? I'll pose this question to John also.
> Alan Glick
You need to ask him - I am not an expert in the differences between
the pulp and paperback versions etc.
Ronwixziv
>If the reedited versions of pulp stories are covered by more recent copyright
>law, but the publishers no loger exist, do the copyrights stil hold?
>I'm thinking particularly of...
>Freeway Press (Operator 5)
>Corinth (G-8, Operator 5, Secret Agent X, et al)
>Belmont (new Shadow novels by Walter GIbson & Dennis Lynds)
>Plus, though the publishers still exist, Berkley & Pocket (The Spider)
>The Corinth & Belmont series are now over the initial 29-year period, and
since
>they no longer exist, who could legally renew the rights?
>-R
je...@ionet.com replies...
As long as the copyright was in it's renewal term at the time of the
1976 copyright act, it got a twenty year "freebie" extention. Under
the DMCA, this has been extended even further. As a general rule, you
should assume that all of the hero pulps have valid copyrights, at
least until you do some real legwork. Most American E-publishers just
simplify their lives and decline to publish works produced after 1922.
European copyright (in striciter accordance with the Berne Convention)
can run substantially longer.>>
But, again, if the publisher NO LONGER EXISTS, who retains the copyright? In
other words, who can legally claim the copyright & defend it?
In the case of the Belmont Shadows, they were published before 1976, and the
publisher no longer exists.
In the case of the Berkley/Pocket Spiders, they were published before 1976.
In the the case of the Corinth/Freeway Press Operator 5s, they were published
before 1976, and the publisher no longer exists!
In the case of the other Corinth titles, all published before '76 AND the
publisher no loger exists!
-R
John P. Gunnison
"What about copyrights? Are these legal? To quote from the United States
Copyright Office circular 22 : "If a work was first published or copyrighted
between January 1, 1923 and December 31, 1949, it is important to determine
whether the copyright was renewed during the last (28th) year of the first
term of the copyright. This can be done by searching the Copyright Office
records or catalogs as explained previously. If no renewal registration was
made, copyright protection expired permanently at the end of the 28th year
of the year date it was first secured."
A search of the Library of Congress web site at www.loc.gov failed to find a
notice of copyright renewal for the stories on this site."
The reason you won't find them listed, is that the Library of Congress
hasn't updated those files. You have to go to the Madison Building, 4th
Floor and into the Copyright Card Files to find the renewal. I can tell
you...you will find the renewals and the original copyrights. The Shadow is
under copyrights and all those text files are illegally posted and
reprinted. This is a problem, when someone assumes. If these are all
public domain, why hasn't some decent publisher rushed to reprint these
stories? I can tell you why...Advance Magazines, Inc, which is a subsidary
of Conde Nast Publications hasn't granted permission. That's why!
John Gunnison
Adventure House
John P. Gunnison
Bantam's and Jove paperbacks are printed complete and unedited.
John Gunnison
Adventure House
> Just checked the site again and came across this sentence, "As to my
> source material, I have chosen to use the original pulps rather than the
> edited reprint versions. " Does this mean that more were edited than the
> three Grosset & Dunlop editions? I'll pose this question to John also.
> Alan Glick
>
> "Joseph Teller" <fantas...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:394c2a5a...@news.mindspring.com...
John P. Gunnison
and the original story still do. In some cases, like Corinth, they
reprinted the pulp stories without copyright permission and was shut down
when Steeger found out.
John Gunnison
>
> >If the reedited versions of pulp stories are covered by more recent
copyright
> >law, but the publishers no loger exist, do the copyrights stil hold?
>
> >I'm thinking particularly of...
> >Freeway Press (Operator 5)
> >Corinth (G-8, Operator 5, Secret Agent X, et al)
> >Belmont (new Shadow novels by Walter GIbson & Dennis Lynds)
> >Plus, though the publishers still exist, Berkley & Pocket (The Spider)
> >The Corinth & Belmont series are now over the initial 29-year period, and
since
> >they no longer exist, who could legally renew the rights?
> >-R
>
> As long as the copyright was in it's renewal term at the time of the
> 1976 copyright act, it got a twenty year "freebie" extention. Under
> the DMCA, this has been extended even further. As a general rule, you
> should assume that all of the hero pulps have valid copyrights, at
> least until you do some real legwork. Most American E-publishers just
> simplify their lives and decline to publish works produced after 1922.
> European copyright (in striciter accordance with the Berne Convention)
> can run substantially longer.
>
>
> James
>
>
>
Steven Rowe
(Ronwixziv) writes:
>But, again, if the publisher NO LONGER EXISTS, who retains the copyright? In
>other words, who can legally claim the copyright & defend it?
some companies which no longer exists have sold their assets to another
company.
(or just changed their name)
Steven Rowe
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------
Don't forget to Delete "Unspam" if you wish to e- mail me.
join the FelixTheCat list at www.onelist.com
.
Spider9137
other words, who can legally claim the copyright & defend it? >>
The successor-in-interest claims it. That is, whomever purchases the copyrights
(or the company owning the copyrights) claims them.
Alan D Glick
one. They were originally published from 1931-1935. They all list
copyright renewal dates of 1958-1963.
Alan Glick
"Catts4" <cat...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000618083506...@ng-da1.aol.com...
Robert Weinberg
pb reprint.
The other two novels were not edited.
As to the novels not being renewed, it is the first I've ever heard of it.
They were copyrighted in the books.
Joseph Teller wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Jun 2000 03:19:18 GMT, "Alan D Glick"
> <a.g...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> > Just checked the site again and came across this sentence, "As to my
> >source material, I have chosen to use the original pulps rather than the
> >edited reprint versions. " Does this mean that more were edited than the
> >three Grosset & Dunlop editions? I'll pose this question to John also.
> > Alan Glick
>
Robert Weinberg
all the other Popular Publications stuff was) and they were discontinued for
several reasons - one being that they were about to be sued for publishing the
stuff.
Freeway Press and Dimedia were owned by Argosy Communications. They are still in
business. If a publisher reprints a novel and that novel is in copyright, it
means zero if the paperback publisher goes out of business. The original
copyright still holds.
Those people who assume they can reprint Popular Publications material without
permission on websites are going to be in for some surprises. One of the less
active owners of Popular Publications copyrights has finally pursuing copyright
infringements on the internet. As that owner, along with his wife and brother are
all attorneys, and have won copyright cases against such companies as Avon, Harper
Collins, etc. I expect some of the more notorious violators of copyright are soon
going to find that their open violation of copyright law is not going to be so
much fun.
Ronwixziv wrote:
> << ronw...@aol.com (Ronwixziv) wrote:
> >If the reedited versions of pulp stories are covered by more recent copyright
> >law, but the publishers no loger exist, do the copyrights stil hold?
> >I'm thinking particularly of...
> >Freeway Press (Operator 5)
> >Corinth (G-8, Operator 5, Secret Agent X, et al)
> >Belmont (new Shadow novels by Walter GIbson & Dennis Lynds)
> >Plus, though the publishers still exist, Berkley & Pocket (The Spider)
> >The Corinth & Belmont series are now over the initial 29-year period, and
> since
> >they no longer exist, who could legally renew the rights?
> >-R
>
> je...@ionet.com replies...
> As long as the copyright was in it's renewal term at the time of the
> 1976 copyright act, it got a twenty year "freebie" extention. Under
> the DMCA, this has been extended even further. As a general rule, you
> should assume that all of the hero pulps have valid copyrights, at
> least until you do some real legwork. Most American E-publishers just
> simplify their lives and decline to publish works produced after 1922.
> European copyright (in striciter accordance with the Berne Convention)
> can run substantially longer.>>
>
> But, again, if the publisher NO LONGER EXISTS, who retains the copyright? In
> other words, who can legally claim the copyright & defend it?
Cat Savage Woman Of Bronze
<rwei...@para-net.com> writes:
> I expect some of the more notorious violators of copyright are soon
>going to find that their open violation of copyright law is not going to be
>so
>much fun.
I saw this blurb in James Patrick Kelly's On The Net column in ASIMOV's this
month.
Quote: A reader suggested I check out the VIRGINIA TECH SPECULATIVE FICTION
HOME PAGE http://ebbs.english.vt.edu/vtsf/sf-project2.html
where they are digitizing the materials from the SF magazines and book
collection of one William Heron. Heron amassed 5 thousand issues of 2 hundred
publications dating from 1926 to 1987 Unquote
Do universities have special permission to do this?
====
Meow, Frozencat >^..^<
"If I didn't know better, I'd almost think he was abusing electricity."
(Leela-Futurama-Sunday 6pm CST on FOX)
Catts4
>
No, they did not. They simply assumed it was out of copyright when the posted
it to the net (they frankly admit so on their web-site). They've already been
hit with lawyers, which is why their STARTLING STORIES link doesn't work -- had
posted a Heinlein story, from under his Lyle Monroe pen name -- some college
experts; didn't even realize who he was. They now claim they are "negotiating"
for rights,
Dave
Ronwixziv
copyrights...
<<As to the novels not being renewed, it is the first I've ever heard of it.
They were copyrighted in the books.>>
But the point is that most of the Shadow pulp run (unlike Doc Savage, The
Avenger, or even Captain Future, has NOT been reprinted since the inital pulp
printings, so how can copyright be renewed on something NOT reprinted? Don't
you have to reprint it to renew copyright?
Example: Several newspaper syndicates issue limited-run strip reprints to
maintain copyrights on the strips. Hotalings in NYC used to carry the Tribune
Syndicate reprints until they moved into much smaller quarters.
On a similar note, to maintain trademarks, Marvel & DC used to use their
team-up books (Marvel Team-Up, Brave & Bold, etc.) to feature characters who
weren't appearing anywhere else in their line for a calendar year.
-R
kar...@my-deja.com
ronw...@aol.com (Ronwixziv) wrote:
> The nigh-legendary Robert Weinberg says this about the Shadow pulps and
> copyrights...
> <<As to the novels not being renewed, it is the first I've ever heard of it.
> They were copyrighted in the books.>>
>
> But the point is that most of the Shadow pulp run (unlike Doc Savage, The
> Avenger, or even Captain Future, has NOT been reprinted since the inital pulp
> printings, so how can copyright be renewed on something NOT reprinted? Don't
> you have to reprint it to renew copyright?
>
nope. if you reprint something legally and changes have been made, you can in
effect copyright the new version as a separte work. it does not effect the
copyright status of the original.
trademarks on the other hand have to be used every so often to be maintained
which is what the following were actually doing.
> Example: Several newspaper syndicates issue limited-run strip reprints to
> maintain copyrights on the strips. Hotalings in NYC used to carry the Tribune
> Syndicate reprints until they moved into much smaller quarters.
>
> On a similar note, to maintain trademarks, Marvel & DC used to use their
> team-up books (Marvel Team-Up, Brave & Bold, etc.) to feature characters who
> weren't appearing anywhere else in their line for a calendar year.
> -R
>
Cat Savage Woman Of Bronze
Trademarks: Use them or Lose them.
Copyrights: As long as they're renewed, they don't have to 're-release' them.
Spider9137
Avenger, or even Captain Future, has NOT been reprinted since the inital pulp
printings, so how can copyright be renewed on something NOT reprinted? Don't
you have to reprint it to renew copyright? >>
No. Back in the "old days," you simply had to apply for copyright renewal
before the first 28 years expired.