Page 2 of 10

Public Domain Day – 2015

Image is a four panel comic strip titled “Public Domain Day – 2015”. First panel: Two people in an office setting exclaim: “Happy Public Domain Day!!!” and a caption states: “Many countries welcome new works into the public domain each year as copyrights expire on January 1st.” Second panel: One of the people from the first panel says: “This year’s collection of works entering the public domain in some countries** includes notable works like the famous painting “The Scream” by Edvard Munch.” Third panel: Shows a map of the United States with a caption that says: “However, due to the copyright extension included in the 1976 Copyright Act, no new works will enter the public domain in the USA until 2019. Fourth Panel: The other person from the first panel is shown in a posture and setting reminiscent of the painting “The Scream.”

It’s that time again! We celebrate Public Domain Day each year as many countries welcome new works into their public domain when the copyrights  for those works expire on January 1st.

Read our blog post on the public domain and its cultural importance, and visit these sites around the Web for more coverage of Public Domain Day 2015 and the works entering the public domain for various countries around the world:

 

________________________________________________________________________________________

By Jessica Meindertsma, Rights Management Specialist at the Copyright Resources Center, The Ohio State University Libraries

Open Access Week 2014

Happy Open Access Week to all! I hope you’ve been taking advantage of the vast array of educational events and joining in celebrations around the world this week in the name of Open Access. I’ve collected a few of the things that caught my eye for those still looking for another dose of OA:

Ohio artists remix the public domain: Q&A with Celia C. Peters, producer of Public Domain pop-up exhibit

As previously mentioned, a pop-up exhibit of new works by Ohio artists incorporating public domain materials will be on display October 11 at the Homeport Gallery in Columbus:

Event flyer: Public Domain art of the people, by the people. Ohio artists create from the public domain! Presented by Artistic Freedom Ltd.

PUBLIC DOMAIN
Pop-Up Exhibit & Reception
October 11, 2014
6pm-9pm
Homeport Gallery
779 East Long Street
Columbus, OH 43215
​(Adjacent to the Lincoln Theater)

We reached out to the exhibit’s founder and producer, Celia C. Peters, to learn more about the upcoming show and the relationship between artists, art, and the public domain.

Copyright Resources Center: What inspired you to curate an exhibit featuring artwork that incorporates public domain materials?

Celia C. Peters: I thought it would be an interesting creative challenge to present artists with: asking them to choose an element that speaks to them and use that to create something new. I like the idea of artists being inspired by the work of creators who came before them —- not to plagiarize, but to create something completely unique. I call it ‘recycling creativity.’

Also, before coming here, I lived on the East Coast for some years before (I’m still pretty new to Columbus) and I wanted to bring a bit of the vibe I’m used to — something a little different — to the Columbus art scene. This show felt like just the thing.

CRC: In your experience, why is the public domain important to artists and art in general?

Peters: The public domain is important to artists because it connects us to artists from the past and our shared drive to create; there’s something very powerful about that. It also removes the barrier of licensing fees from the equation. Depending on the nature of a project, an artist may need to access music, imagery or other creative elements from outside sources….and that can be cost prohibitive or challenging in terms of tracking down who actually owns the rights and paying to use the content. But, in the case of public domain content, though, it belongs to all of us!

CRC: You required participating artists to verify that the works they used are in the public domain; how did this process work?

Peters: We initially provided artists with links to a plethora of public domain material that they could use for their pieces. Artists in the show are providing me with links to sources that confirm that either the expired copyright of the content they’ve used was not renewed or that the work has been put into the public domain by the copyright owner.

CRC: Have you encountered any confusion or misconceptions from artists or your audience about what the public domain actually is? Has this exhibit helped you to educate people about the public domain? 

Peters: There were a couple of artists who (like many others in the general public) weren’t quite clear on the boundaries of copyright.  I think feel it’s very important for all of us as artists to know what protection our own work has as well as making sure we don’t violate anyone else’s intellectual property rights, in particular having access to something versus having permission to use it. I. So I try to shed light on copyright and also clarify where the public domain comes into play. And of course, having the support of the Copyright Resource Center was a great resource! [Editor’s Note: Thanks! It was our pleasure.] In talking to people about the show, I’ve found that lots of folks have heard the term ‘public domain,’ but they weren’t really sure what it means. That’s why I decided to include the definition on the show’s web site!

CRC: Can you share a few details about the new art that will be on display at this exhibit, and/or the public domain works that were incorporated in the art on display?

Peters: Well, I don’t want to give too much away…but I will say that Public Domain is a group show and that it features artists working in a mix of media: illustration, 3D art, painting, graphic art, video and even paper sculpture. There are very diverse aesthetics and very distinctive perspectives represented in the show, which is exactly what I’d hoped for. The artists have pulled from very different areas of the public domain for inspiration and, something else that I’m quite excited about: many of them chose to use public domain content in a different medium than the one their piece is in. I love that they’ve mixed it up. It’s all about imagination!

CRC: Thanks Celia– We look forward to the exhibit!

headshot photo of Celia C. Peters

Photo of Ms. Peters
© 2014 Celia C. Peters

Celia C. Peters is an avant-garde filmmaker creating compelling stories of authentically diverse characters. Peters is a member of New York Women in Film and Television and the Writers Guild of America. Her psychologically inspired, character-driven screenwriting has been both prize-winning and recognized in competition otherwise. She is the founder of Artistic Freedom Ltd., and her graphic art, photography and video work have shown at galleries in New York, Dallas, Detroit and London. She is completing post-production of her science fiction short film, Roxë15 and developing her sci-fi feature film project, Godspeed. See her full bio at ARTISTIC FREEDOM LTD.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————

By Jessica Meindertsma, Rights Management Specialist at the Copyright Resources Center, The Ohio State University Libraries

 

Identifying United States federal government documents in the public domain

According to the Office of Management and Budget, the United States government “is the largest single producer, collector, consumer and disseminator of information in the United States.”  United States copyright law places works of the U.S. federal government in the public domain in the United States upon creation.

Works in the public domain are not protected by copyright; either copyright has expired or the work was never protected by copyright.  Changes to copyright law have increasingly limited the amount of works entering the public domain in the United States, which increases the importance of U.S. government documents as a source of new public domain materials.

At first glance, 17 U.S.C. §105, the section of the United States Copyright law that places works of the U.S. federal government in the public domain seems straightforward: “Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government”; but, as with many aspects of this law, things are rarely as simple as they seem.

Online Sources of U.S. Government Materials

As more United States government works become available digitally, many are conveniently made available online for public use. As always, just because a work is publicly available (e.g. online) it is not necessarily in the public domain.  Many websites providing access to U.S. government works also provide rights and permissions information that may indicate whether the works are in the public domain.

A few resources for finding U.S. government public domain materials are listed below; however, as always, be sure to check the copyright information for any specific item you want to use because many of these sites also contain materials that are not in the public domain.

I.   What the law says

17 U.S.C. §105 places “any work of the United States Government” in the public domain.  The law defines “work of the United States Government” in 17 U.S.C. §101 as (1) a work prepared by “an officer or employee of the United States Government” (2) “as part of that person’s official duties.”  A United States government work does not enter the public domain unless it satisfies both parts of this definition.

Section 105 is subject to several additional restrictions. It only applies to United States federal government works – it does not place state, local or foreign government works in the public domain.  And §105 only places U.S. government works into the public domain within the United States. Other countries are subject to their own copyright laws, which may provide copyright protection to United States government works in those countries.  Nor does §105 mean that all U.S. government works are available for use within the United States without restriction.  Even if a work meets the §105 requirements for entering the public domain, other limitations may apply such as an individual’s publicity or privacy rights, trademark limitations, Freedom of Information Act restrictions, or a prohibition against using information the materials to imply a government endorsement.

II.   Exploring the Definition

Even though §105 places many U.S. government works in the public domain, many other U.S. government works do not meet the statutory definition “work of the United States government” and receive copyright protection.  How could a United States government work fail to satisfy this definition?

Not all government works are created by employees or officials of the government.  If someone other than a U.S. government officer or employee, like a contractor, prepared a work for the agency, the work would not enter the public domain under §105.

Another situation where a possible U.S. government work does not enter the public domain under §105 occurs when a U.S. government official or employee prepares a work outside of their official duties.  In that instance, the U.S. government official or employee receives the same copyright protection as anyone else, since §105 only applies to those works prepared by a government officer or employee as part of their official duties.

For example, a U.S. Admiral received copyright protection for a speech he prepared on his own time while employed by the government because “the writing and delivery of the speeches formed no part of Admiral Rickover’s official duties and that the speeches are the Admiral’s private property which he was entitled to copyright” Public Affairs Associates, Inc. v. Rickover, 268 F.Supp. 444, 450 (1967).  Section 105 also does not apply to “personal narratives written by public servants after they leave Government service” Harper & Row Publishers v. Nation Enterprises, 471 U.S. 559, fn. 6 (1985).

III.   Applying the Definition

As a practical matter, it can be difficult to tell whether a United States government work falls within §105 and therefore belongs to the public domain.  Some documents do explicitly indicate whether the contents are in the public domain.  Many do not.

If a document does not indicate whether it is in the public domain, someone wanting to use the document in a way that might implicate copyright must try to make an informed decision about whether or not the document is in the public domain.  The following bullet points provide suggestions on what to look for and things to think about when investigating the copyright status of a U.S. government document.

  • Look for a copyright notice on the work. A notice indicates that someone is claiming a copyright in the work, whether the copyright is claimed by the government or a third party.  Section 105 does not prohibit the U.S. government from holding a copyright in the United States.  Although §105 places items created by the government in the public domain, the law also permits the United States government to hold copyrights “transferred to it by assignment, bequest, or otherwise” (17 U.S.C. §105).
  • Look for a statement indicating that the work is in the public domain (as seen in the image below), but keep in mind that the government is not required to put a public domain notice on works, and not all works with public domain status under §105 will display a notice.

    Photograph of a public domain notice on a US federal government publication: Public Domain Notice: All material appearing in this publication is in the public domain and may be reproduced or copied without permission from SAMHSA. Citation of the source is appreciated. However, this publication may not be reproduced or distributed for a fee without the specific, written authorization of the Office of Communications, SAMHSA, HHS.

    Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (U.S.), & ICF International (Firm). (2010). Focus on prevention. Rockville, MD: U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Prevention.

  • Are the authors identified as employees or staff of the government agency? This may be an indication that the work qualifies as a “work of the United States Government” and belongs to the public domain.
  • Look for information indicating that the author(s) was not a government employee or official. For example, works prepared by a contractor, commissioned by the agency from another organization, or created by some other third party. Author affiliations and biographies may provide additional clues.If the document provides the authors’ names, but not their affiliation(s), researching the author(s) may reveal whether they work for the government.
  • Contact the government agency and ask for additional information about the document.  Even if they are not able or willing to tell you whether it is in the public domain, they may be able to provide additional information about the creation of the document that will help you determine its status.

IV.   Conclusion

Government information is a valuable national resource.  Section 105 places U.S. government works in the public domain to facilitate use of this important resource.   If users cannot clearly determine that a U.S. government document belongs in the public domain, they may have to treat the work as protected by copyright – which seems contrary to the reason Congress placed such works in the public domain.

Ideally, U.S government agencies would clearly indicate whether a work belongs in the public domain. Historically, this has not been the case; however as more works become available digitally, U.S. government agencies may increasingly provide rights information indicating whether the works fall within the public domain.

Despite the challenges involved in determining the copyright status of some U.S. government works, it is possible to identify many U.S. government works as part of the public domain.  Although it may not be as simple as it should be to identify public domain “work[s] of the United States Government”, the U.S. government remains an important source of public domain material.

——————————————————————————————————————————————

Marc Jaffy is a graduate of the Kent State University School of Library and Information Science and former practicum student at the OSU Libraries Copyright Resources Center 

Upcoming copyright workshops offered through the University Libraries’ Research Commons

The University Libraries’ Copyright Resources Center is partnering with our colleagues at the Research Commons and other experts across campus to bring you three new workshops this fall! These workshops are intended to support OSU researchers at specific stages of the research process. Find descriptions of the copyright-related sessions and registration links below, and visit the Research Commons events page to peruse the complete schedule of upcoming workshops.

Fair Use and You: Copyright Considerations for Writing Theses and Dissertations

Want to know more about how copyright law and fair use affect what you can and can’t use in your work? Have you hit a wall with your writing and need some support to get back on track? Join the Copyright Resources Center and the Writing Center for an overview of author’s rights, copyright, and the services offered to help keep you productive as a writer.

Who: OSU graduates and undergraduates
When: Tuesday, October 21, 3:00 – 4:30pm
Where: Thompson Library, Room 165
Register now for this free workshop.

Protecting and Promoting Your Research: From Copyright to Commercialization

Concerned about retaining ownership of your research output or getting assistance with publisher’s agreements? Interested in turning your intellectual property into business opportunities or products? Join the Copyright Resources Center and the Technology Commercialization Office for a discussion of important things to consider for protecting and promoting original research.

Who: OSU faculty and postdocs
When: Wednesday, October 29, 2:00 – 4:00pm
Where: Thompson Library, Room 165
Register now for this free workshop.

Publishing Images in the Digital World

Interested in learning more about the basics of digital imaging, including image quality, reproduction, and file types? Need to know how to locate and clear rights to use images in a publication? Join the Fine Arts Librarian and the Copyright Resources Center for an overview of issues associated with preparing and publishing images in print and electronic formats.

Who: This workshop is primarily aimed at graduate and undergraduate researchers in Art, Art Education, Art History, Cinema Studies, Design, and Material and Visual Culture, but is open to researchers in all disciplines interested in learning more about formatting and publishing images.
When: Wednesday, November 5, 5:00 – 6:30pm
Where: Fine Arts Library (located on the lower level of The Wexner Center for the Arts)
Register now for this free workshop. (Due to limits on available technology, this workshop will be capped at 15 attendees.)

 

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

By Jessica Meindertsma, Rights Management Specialist at the Copyright Resources Center, The Ohio State University Libraries

Back to School Workshop: Copyright and Fair Use in the Classroom

Please join the OSU Libraries’ Copyright Resources Center and the Health Sciences Library Copyright Coordinator for a session on copyright in the classroom that will help you understand your rights and responsibilities as an educator. We will review the principles of fair use, suggest tools to help evaluate the rights involved with using copyrighted materials, and utilize case examples to illustrate common copyright questions related to teaching and learning. Bring a laptop or mobile device to participate in interactive portions of the session.

This workshop will be offered twice, and instructors will be available for an additional 30 minutes at the end of each session for optional Q&A.

September 11, 2014
Health Sciences Library (Prior Hall), Room 400
3:30-4:30pm

September 22, 2014
Thompson Library, Room 150B
1:30-2:30pm

Please RSVP at the following link: go.osu.edu/copyrightRSVP

Calling all Ohio artists: Submissions for Public Domain pop-up exhibit are open until Sept. 5

A new pop-up exhibit titled “Public Domain” is debuting in Columbus this October. The exhibit will feature original artwork that incorporates public domain materials; Ohio artists are invited to submit their work, which “can be in any medium, any aesthetic, [and] addressing any theme” so long as it includes material from the public domain.

PUBLIC DOMAIN
Pop-Up Exhibit & Reception
October 11, 2014
Homeport Gallery
779 East Long Street
Columbus, OH 43215
​(Adjacent to the Lincoln Theater)

Learn more about the public domain on the Copyright Resources Center website and blog post on the public domain. You can also contact the Copyright Resources Center with questions about the rights status of a particular work, and for help finding sources of public domain materials.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

By Jessica Meindertsma, Rights Management Specialist at the Copyright Resources Center, The Ohio State University Libraries

Articles of interest: January-June 2014

This post highlights citations for recent scholarly articles with a focus on copyright, especially as it pertains to libraries, higher education, and scholarly communication. Articles were selected according to the following criteria: scholarly/peer-reviewed, English language, published within the past six months, and subject matter pertaining to copyright and libraries, higher education, or scholarly communication. Links to the full-text articles are provided when available; [OSU full text] links will connect authenticated users through The Ohio State University Libraries, while [OA full text] links point to an open access version of the article that should be available to all users.

Did we miss an interesting article? Please share the citation in the comments!

Library services

Crews, K. D. (2014). Copyright and universities: Legal compliance or advancement of scholarship? The growth of copyright. IPRinfo Magazine, 2, 14-15. [OA full text]

Gilliland, A. T., & Bradigan, P. S. (2014). Copyright information queries in the health sciences: trends and implications from the Ohio State University. Journal Of The Medical Library Association102(2), 114-117. doi:10.3163/1536-5050.102.2.011 [OSU full text]

Gore, H. (2014). Massive open online courses (MOOCs) and their impact on academic library services: Exploring the issues and challenges. New Review of Academic Librarianship20(1), 4-28. doi:10.1080/13614533.2013.851609 [OA full text]

Myers, C. S. (2014). Answering copyright questions at the reference desk: A guide for academic librarians. Reference Librarian55(1), 49-73. doi:10.1080/02763877.2014.856260 [OSU full text]

Library policies & procedures

Bowen, T., Calter, M., Lee, F., & Parang, E. (2014). Using computing power to replace lawyers: Advances in licensing and access. Serials Librarian66(1-4), 232-240. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2014.881221 [OSU full text]

Clark, A., & Chawner, B. (2014). Enclosing the public domain: The restriction of public domain books in a digital environment. First Monday19(6), 6. doi:10.5210/fm.v19i6.4975 [OA full text]

Dryden, J. (2014). The role of copyright in selection for digitization. American Archivist77(1), 64-95. [Abstract only]

Dygert, C., & Langendorfer, J. M. (2014). Fundamentals of e-resource licensing. Serials Librarian66(1-4), 289-297. doi:10.1080/0361526X.2014.881236 [OSU full text]

Simon, J. C. (2014). E-book purchasing best practices for academic libraries. Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship26(1), 68-77. doi:10.1080/1941126X.2014.878640 [OSU full text]

Legislation

Michael, G. J. (2014). Politics and Rulemaking at the Copyright Office. Journal of Information Technology & Politics11(1), 64-81. doi:10.1080/19331681.2013.872073 [OSU full text]

Muhammad Waris, B. (2014). National Library of Pakistan as Legal Depository. Pakistan Library & Information Science Journal45(1), 18-23. [OSU full text]

Nsibirwa, Z., Hoskins, R., & Stilwell, C. (2014). Building the South African nation through legal deposit: The impact of legislation on preservation of digital materials. African Journal of Library, Archives & Information Science24(1), 53-65. [OSU full text]

Publishing & scholarly communication

Björk, B., Laakso, M., Welling, P., & Paetau, P. (2014). Anatomy of green open access. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology65(2), 237-250. doi:10.1002/asi.22963 [OA full text]

Cheng, W., Ren, S., & Rousseau, R. (2014). Digital publishing and China’s core scientific journals: A position paper. Scientometrics98(1), 11-22. doi:10.1007/s11192-012-0873-8 [OA full text]

Ludewig, K. (2014). MedOANet: The Copyright and OA Landscape in Mediterranean Europe. Liber Quarterly: The Journal of European Research Libraries23(3), 187-200. [OA full text]

Lwoga, E., & Questier, F. (2014). Faculty adoption and usage behaviour of open access scholarly communication in health science universities. New Library World115(3/4), 116-139. doi:10.1108/NLW-01-2014-0006 [OSU full text]

Melero, R. R., Rodríguez-Gairín, J. M., Abad-García, F. F., & Abadal, E. E. (2014). Journal author rights and self-archiving: The case of Spanish journals. Learned Publishing27(2), 107-120. doi:10.1087/20140205 [OSU full text]

Updated 8/8/2014 with K. D. Crews article. 

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

By Jessica Meindertsma, Rights Management Specialist at the Copyright Resources Center, The Ohio State University Libraries

Open access and “A Subversive Proposal”

In 2012, The Ohio State University Libraries adopted the Faculty Open Access Resolution, which requires Ohio State Libraries’ faculty to grant the University a license to make their scholarly articles openly accessible.  The goal of this initiative, and open access in general, is to increase the accessibility of research so that others can easily make use of it. According to Peter Suber, open access works are “digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.” While free of many restrictions, open access works are still protected by copyright law; publicly available does not mean copyright free.

An important contributor to the open access movement is Stevan Harnad.  In 1994, Harnad posted a message to a discussion list on electronic journals hosted by the Virginia Polytechnic Institute.  Harnad’s message, titled “A Subversive Proposal”, suggested that researchers should make their papers freely available.  The message sparked significant discussion and Harnad is now credited with initiating the concept of self-archiving.  In 1995, Harnad’s original message and the email discussion it provoked were collected into a book: Scholarly Journals at the Crossroads: A Subversive Proposal for Electronic Publishing.  The full copy of that book is available through HathiTrust, under an open-access, Google digitized license. In honor of the proposal’s twentieth anniversary, Richard Poynder posted an interview with Harnad titled “The Subversive Proposal at 20”, which looks back at the proposal’s impact and discusses the development of the open access movement.

Scholarly articles are increasingly available as open access documents.  Learn more about open access on the Copyright Resources Center’s open access page, or by reading other articles tagged “open access” on the Copyright Corner Blog.

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Marc Jaffy is a practicum student at the OSU Libraries Copyright Resources Center and is currently a Masters student at the Kent State University, School of Library and Information Science

Patterns and copyright protections

In the United States, patterns are generally not eligible for copyright protection as copyright does not apply to methods or “procedures for doing, making, or building things.” Additionally, an item created from a pattern also lacks copyright protection if it is considered to be a functional object. Under the Useful Article doctrine in US copyright law, if an object has a practical or useful function, copyright protection applies only to the original, creative elements “that can be identified separately from the utilitarian aspects of an object”, but does not extend to the underlying design of the functional object.

photo of vintage sewing pattern

Photo: Butterick Dress 5579 Instr (c) Allison Marchant, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0
Here, while the drawing of the dress may be considered a creative expression of the author and therefore eligible for copyright protection, the pattern instructions and any dress made from the pattern would not be protected by copyright.

In the absence of copyright protection for functional objects, a user of a pattern may be able to use whatever she makes from that pattern for any purpose, including selling the items. However, accompanying materials included with the pattern, such as images, may be eligible for copyright protection (see image above). The United States Copyright Office provides the example that while a drawing or photo of a dress may be copyrighted, that does not give the artist the exclusive right to make a dress of that particular design.

Despite this legal landscape, copyright notices and terms of use such as the following are still commonly found on patterns:

“Copyright 2014. All Rights Reserved. Pattern is for personal, non-commercial use only. Selling items made from this pattern is prohibited.”

What does this mean for designers and those wanting to use the pattern? Are the copyright notices and accompanying terms of use legally binding? Some designers believe that the notice they put onto their patterns provides them with legal protection, but because copyright law does not protect the pattern itself, are the terms of use stipulating personal, non-commercial use legally enforceable?

When it comes to what can be done with the final product made from a pattern, there is a conflict between the desires of those who want to use the pattern and those who designed the pattern. With no relevant case law available as a guide, there really are no definitive answers. Despite the lack of legal precedent, those wanting to use patterns and the items made from those patterns should be aware of how they can legally make use of these materials. In the same vein, designers should understand to what extent and how they can protect their work.

The view commonly held by designers is relatively simple: follow the restrictions set in the pattern’s disclaimer. For example, if a knitting pattern you downloaded was accompanied by a disclaimer that read “personal, non-commercial use only” you could make as many items as you wanted using that pattern, but you could not sell any of them because that would constitute a non-personal, commercial use. However, when designers place notices on their patterns, they may be exaggerating copyright protections and licenses. But it is important to remember that even if copyright protection is not available, a user may be agreeing to a license that restricts the way he may use the pattern when he consents to the terms and conditions set by the designer.

Pattern users should be aware of what they are agreeing to when purchasing or downloading a pattern. By clicking a box that reads, “I agree to the terms & conditions”, a user may be entering into a legally binding agreement that can restrict what she may do with the pattern. Under US law, terms that parties consent to in a contract can trump copyright law, leaving designers with possible legal recourse for misuse of a pattern.

Seeking clear legislative guidance and wanting protection for their work, the fashion industry lobbied Congress to create legislation that would protect unique designs. First introduced in 2007, the Innovate Design Protection and Piracy Prohibition Act (IDPPPA) sought to protect designs for a period of three years if registered with the US Copyright Office within three months of being made available to the public. While similar legislation to limit design piracy has been enacted in Europe, India and Japan, legislative progress of the IDPPPA has stalled as of 2014, and patterns are still generally not copyrightable in the United States.

Unless and until moves are made in Congress, answers about copyright protection and designs still lie in a gray area. Whether you are a designer or a user of patterns, it is important to remain informed about your legal rights and understand the possible ramifications that can come along with something as simple as a pattern.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Morgan Cheek is a legal intern at the OSU Libraries’ Copyright Resources Center and is currently a student at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law

« Older posts Newer posts »