174:
and use a space at any one time. Copyrighted works are neither scarce nor rivalrous: books are created anew, by specific authors, and can be read by five million people as easily as by five dozen, depriving none of them, nor the author, of the ability to use the work." Critics state that copyright expiration does not deprive a creator's heirs of the right to continue to appreciate and use the works of that creator as though a government had legally confiscated their physical possessions after a set period of time. Society as a whole is granted the same right to appreciate and exploit the property that once was under the exclusive control of a single family or corporate entity. This wider potential for the creative exploitation of works formerly under the exclusive control of a copyright owner promotes learning. Public
Knowledge and other critics wrote that existing
556:. Clemens stated in testimony before Congress, "So if I could have convinced that gentleman that a book which does consist solely of ideas, from the base to the summit, then that would have been the best argument in the world that it is property, like any other property, and should not be put under the ban of any restriction, but that it should be the property of that man and his heirs forever and ever, just as a butcher shop would be, or--I don't care--anything, I don't care what it is. It all has the same basis. The law should recognize the right of perpetuity in this and every other kind of property."
312:
perpetual copyright, and eventually an understanding was established whereby authors had a pre-existing common law copyright over their work, but that with the
Statute of Anne parliament had limited these natural rights in order to strike a more appropriate balance between the interests of the author and the wider social good. According to Patterson and Livingston there remains confusion about the nature of copyright ever since. Copyright has come to be viewed both as a natural law right of the author and as the statutory grant of a limited
25:
270:
booksellers would then set upon books whatever price they pleased "till the public became as much their slaves, as their own hackney compilers are". He declared that "Knowledge and science are not things to be bound in such cobweb chains." In its ruling the House of Lords established that copyright was a "creature of statute", and that the rights and responsibilities in copyright were determined by legislation. By confirming that the
244:
on whether printed ideas could be owned and London booksellers and other supporters of perpetual copyright argued that without it scholarship would cease to exist and that authors would have no incentive to continue creating works of enduring value if they could not bequeath the property rights to their descendants. Opponents of perpetual copyright argued that it amounted to a
295:, works now considered classics. The expansion of the public domain in books broke the dominance of the London booksellers and allowed for competition, with the number of London booksellers and publishers rising threefold from 111 to 308 between 1772 and 1802. Nevertheless, calls for perpetual copyright continued in Britain and France until the mid-19th century.
198:. Anyone seeking to create derivative works based upon orphan works faces the risk of copyright infringement if the copyright holders were to come forward at some later time to enforce their rights. Perpetual copyright would create a significant disincentive to the creation of new literary or artistic works which build upon older material.
173:
issued a response which argued that copyright expiration ultimately provides a net benefit to society. It distinguishes intellectual property rights from those associated with material goods; the latter "are scarce and rivalrous: cannot be created anew, and only a limited number of people can occupy
389:
provides that the hospital trustees are entitled to a royalty "in respect of any public performance, commercial publication or communication to the public of the whole or any substantial part of or an adaptation of it." This law does not apply to earlier works which feature the Peter Pan character,
97:
from outset, or when a copyright's original finite term is perpetually extended. The first of these two scenarios is highly uncommon, as the current laws of all countries with copyright statutes set a standard limit on the duration, based either on the date of creation/publication, or on the date of
243:
existed in an author's work. The London booksellers argued that the
Statute of Anne only supplemented and supported a pre-existing common law copyright. The dispute was argued out in a number of notable cases, including Millar v. Kincaid (1749–1751) and Tonson v. Collins (1761–1762). A debate raged
471:
were protected by common law, which recognized perpetual copyright in these works for as long as they remained unpublished. The 1976 Copyright Act exerted federal jurisdiction over unpublished works for the first time and all copyrights in these works were assigned a fixed term even if they remain
311:
before it was superseded by the
Statute of Anne. The Lords had traditionally been hostile to the booksellers' monopoly and were aware of how the doctrine of common law copyright, promoted by the booksellers, was used to support their case for a perpetual copyright. The Lords clearly voted against
462:
had granted perpetual copyright in certain special cases not covered by federal copyright law. Sound recordings made before 1972 were under the jurisdiction of state copyright laws. which provided perpetual, common-law protection; these laws were pre-empted by the Hatch–Goodlatte Act. Prior to 1
356:
to hold in
Perpetuity their Copy Right in Books given to or bequeathed to the said Universities and Colleges for the advancement of useful learning and other purposes of education." All provisions granting copyright in perpetuity were abolished by the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, but
282:
ruling confirmed that a large number of works and books first published in
Britain were in the public domain, either because the copyright term granted by statute had expired, or because they were first published before the Statute of Anne was enacted in 1709. This opened the market for cheap
269:
was most strident in his rejection of the common law copyright, warning the Lords that should they vote in favour of common law copyright, effectively a perpetual copyright, "all our learning will be locked up in the hands of the
Tonsons and the Lintots of the age". Moreover, he warned that
193:
that recast or build upon previous material. If this prior material were perpetually copyrighted, their respective copyright holders would have the indefinite right to license their intellectual property or deny its use as they see fit. Many new derivative works could not be produced if the
1050:
Schedule 1, Section 13 (1): The rights conferred on universities and colleges by the
Copyright Act 1775 shall continue to subsist until the end of the period of 50 years from the end of the calendar year in which the new copyright provisions come into force and shall then
686:, 1(2), 111 – 122. The British judge Lord Kames wrote that "...if the monopoly of was to be perpetual, it would be a sad case for learned men, and for the interest of learning in general: it would enhance the price of books far beyond the reach of ordinary readers."
1125:
Changes made to federal law since 1972 ensure that it will ultimately supersede all statutes in state law governing sound recording copyrights: "Current law provides that pre-1972 sound recordings may remain protected under state law until
February 15,
151:"'Freeing' a literary work into the public domain is less a public benefit than a transfer of wealth from the families of American writers to the executives and stockholders of various businesses who will continue to profit from, for example,
239:. The battle of the booksellers saw London booksellers locking horns with the newly emerging Scottish book trade over the right to reprint works falling outside the protection of the Statute of Anne. The Scottish booksellers argued that no
1186:
1176:"Under the 1909 Copyright Act, works that were neither published nor registered did not enjoy statutory protection, although they were protected under common law in perpetuity as long as they remained unpublished and unregistered."
146:
argues that it is unjust for a government to strip copyright holders of their exclusive rights after a set period of time. He also writes that copyright expiration transfers wealth from private copyright holders to corporations:
226:
for works by authors that fell outside the statute's protection. At the same time the London booksellers lobbied parliament to extend the copyright term provided by the
Statute of Anne. Eventually, in a case known as
489:
Pursuant to Section 197 of the Copyright Act, unpublished governmental literary, dramatic and musical works are under perpetual copyright, but once published, they are copyrighted for 70 years following publication.
418:, which provides that copyright is "for limited times". It does not specify how the length of the term, nor does it impose any restriction on the number of times the term may be extended. Since the enactment of the
695:
Desai, Deven R., Copyright's Hidden Assumption: A Critical Analysis of the Foundations of Descendible Copyright (27 April 2009). Thomas Jefferson School of Law Research Paper No. 1353746. Available at SSRN:
1153:"Prior to the 1976 Copyright Act, pre-1972 sound recordings enjoyed a truly perpetual copyright term. No state that we know of had enacted any limitation on the copyright term of sound recordings."
1198:
133:, illustrated this argument using the analogy: " makes no sense to imagine somebody after a certain time coming in and taking your rug or your chair and saying 'Sorry, your ownership expired.'"
125:
have stated that owners of intellectual property should have the same perpetual right to retain and bequeath this property to their descendants that owners of material goods already possess.
98:
the creator's death. Exceptions have sometimes been made, however, for unpublished works. Usually, special legislation is required, granting a perpetual copyright to a specific work.
590:
Valenti stated before a congressional committee that "Creative property owners must be accorded the same rights and protection resident in all other property owners in the nation."
194:
interested parties were denied permission or could not afford the licensing fees. Moreover, the longer copyright persists, the more copyrighted material falls into the category of
344:
The Copyright Act of 1775 established a type of perpetual copyright which allowed "the Two Universities in England, the Four Universities in Scotland, and the several colleges of
481:(2012), the Supreme Court ruled that Congress could release works from the public domain to submit them again to the protection of copyright, without violating the Constitution.
452:, which held that there was no limit to how many times the term of copyright may be extended by Congress, so long as it is still a limited term at the time of each extension.
708:
Varian, Hal R., Copyright Term Extension and Orphan Works (December 2006). Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 15, Issue 6, pp. 965-980, 2006. Available at SSRN:
336:
to control the first publication of that work, the author did not have a common law right to control reproduction following the first publication of the work.
316:. One theory holds that copyright's origin occurs at the creation of a work, the other that its origin exists only through the copyright statute. In 1834, the
178:
already provide more than sufficient compensation for creators of intellectual property. It has also been argued that copyright should not become a
544:"Remarks of Samuel Langhorne Clemens Before the Congressional Joint Committee on Patents (December 1906)." Quoted in LaForge, William N. (2010).
35:
1137:
1071:
153:
252:. London booksellers were attacked for using rights of authors to mask their greed and self-interest in controlling the book trade.
604:
130:
386:
1014:
987:
956:
929:
902:
875:
848:
821:
794:
767:
740:
1220:
LeitĂŁo, LuĂs Menezes (2020). "A evolução do Direito de Autor em Portugal" [The evolution of copyright in Portugal].
357:
under transitional arrangements these rights do not fully expire until 2039. Separately, the Crown retains rights under the
919:
838:
658:
117:
ownership rights are analogous to other property rights such as those associated with material goods. Proponents such as
1098:
443:
317:
426:
on four occasions, retroactively extending the terms of any copyrights still in force. Following the enactment of the
1260:
1235:
583:
553:
506:
69:
1004:
946:
892:
865:
811:
784:
757:
730:
398:
274:(that is the length of time a work is in copyright) did expire according to statute, the Lords also affirmed the
182:
system used to benefit remote descendants who happen to come into possession of a valuable copyright through the
266:
1190:
423:
620:
427:
382:
248:, which inflated the price of books, making them less affordable and therefore prevented the spread of the
218:
statute, began to expire in 1731, London booksellers fought to defend their dominant position by seeking
1291:
1281:
517:
entity took over the copyrights, and if a company ceased to exist, the copyrights passed to the state.
514:
415:
680:'Back to the Future: Hinton v Donaldson, Wood and Meurose (Court of Session, Scotland, 28 July 1773)'
455:
189:
Critics of perpetual copyright also point out that creative activity often involves the creation of
51:
47:
1286:
113:
The basic philosophical argument employed by proponents of perpetual copyright presupposes that
979:
973:
639:
575:
464:
435:
419:
392:
366:
114:
43:
333:
308:
249:
240:
1063:
93:
that lasts indefinitely. Perpetual copyright arises either when a copyright has no finite
8:
1030:
662:
328:
284:
257:
158:
625:
448:
362:
353:
349:
138:
1256:
1231:
1010:
983:
952:
925:
898:
871:
844:
817:
790:
763:
736:
579:
549:
358:
322:
223:
126:
568:
498:
Portugal recognised copyright as perpetual from 1851 to 1867 and from 1927 to 1966.
713:
666:
510:
307:, disagreement continued over whether the House of Lords affirmed the existence of
292:
190:
183:
170:
513:
such as companies were defined to be perpetual; if a company was reorganized, its
1221:
679:
477:
442:"perpetual copyright on the installment plan". This argument was rejected by the
377:
211:
175:
166:
271:
262:
207:
94:
1045:
1275:
411:
275:
1163:
381:, although out of copyright, is covered by special legislation which grants
786:
Revolutions in Romantic literature: an anthology of print culture 1780-1832
372:
345:
195:
143:
122:
102:
1006:
Intellectual Property and Information Wealth: Copyright and related rights
655:
601:"Mickey Rattles the Bars: the Supreme Court Hearing of Eldred v. Ashcroft"
600:
717:
526:
468:
431:
288:
1112:
1187:"Copyright Act (c. 63, s. 197) - Provisions as to Government copyright"
459:
232:
219:
118:
105:, which may be covered under the copyright law, can last perpetually.
1194:
1138:"Comments submitted on behalf of The Music Library Association (MLA)"
215:
186:, and that society is a "quite important heir" to copyrighted works.
90:
709:
697:
313:
245:
179:
1094:
840:
Digital copyright and the consumer revolution: hands off my iPod
332:
of 1774, that although the author of an unpublished work had a
1164:"Certain Unpublished, Unregistered Works Enter Public Domain"
1113:"Federal Copyright Protection for Pre-1972 Sound Recordings"
921:
Bootlegging: romanticism and copyright in the music industry
165:
Calls for perpetual copyright have been widely criticized.
1230:] (in Portuguese) (3rd ed.). Coimbra: Almedina.
607:, Harvard, 9 October 2002. Retrieved on 7 January 2012.
169:
organized a community response to Helprin's editorial.
684:
International Free and Open Source Software Law Review
621:"A Great Idea Lives Forever. Shouldn’t Its Copyright?"
385:
a right to royalties in perpetuity. Specifically, the
656:"Why Copyrights Must Expire: a reply to Mark Helprin"
629:, New York, 20 May 2007. Retrieved on 7 January 2012.
430:
in 1998, a coalition of plaintiffs led by publisher
894:Copyright law: a handbook of contemporary research
567:
509:, under the 1961 Fundamentals, copyrights held by
1273:
870:. Cambridge University Press. pp. 140–141.
948:Rethinking copyright: history, theory, language
863:
813:Rethinking copyright: history, theory, language
755:
732:Rethinking copyright: history, theory, language
642:, The Lessig Wiki. Retrieved on 7 January 2012.
867:The rise of the public in Enlightenment Europe
759:The rise of the public in Enlightenment Europe
231:(1743–1748), the London booksellers turned to
32:The examples and perspective in this article
1255:. New York: Praeger Publishers. p. 68.
201:
1156:
1009:. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 143.
762:. Cambridge University Press. p. 139.
669:, 21 May 2007. Retrieved on 7 January 2012.
414:, perpetual copyright is prohibited by its
235:and started a 30-year period known as the
1115:. U.S. Copyright Office. 28 December 2011
1064:"Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988"
1046:"Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988"
890:
650:
648:
615:
613:
605:Berkman Center for Internet & Society
131:Berkman Center for Internet & Society
70:Learn how and when to remove this message
1166:. U.S. Copyright Office. 13 January 2003
1135:
971:
917:
897:. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 154.
436:previous extension of the copyright term
1250:
951:. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 24.
816:. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 19.
735:. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 14.
387:Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988
298:
108:
1274:
1219:
1084:Section 301 and Schedule 6, as amended
843:. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 4.
836:
645:
610:
501:
422:, copyright term has been extended by
1074:from the original on 15 November 2021
944:
809:
728:
565:
1032:A Treatise Upon the Law of Copyright
782:
18:
574:. Oxford University Press. p.
570:Moral Panics and the Copyright Wars
13:
1136:Harbeson, Eric (31 January 2011).
1099:Supreme Court of the United States
1002:
14:
1303:
1253:Copyright Law in the Soviet Union
975:Cyberlaw: the law of the internet
339:
16:Copyright that lasts indefinitely
710:http://ssrn.com/abstract=1116430
698:http://ssrn.com/abstract=1353746
405:
326:, a case similar to the British
23:
1244:
1213:
1191:The Attorney-General’s Chambers
1179:
1129:
1105:
1087:
1056:
1038:
1023:
996:
965:
938:
911:
884:
864:Van Horn Melton, James (2001).
857:
830:
803:
789:. Broadview Press. p. 80.
776:
756:Van Horn Melton, James (2001).
749:
722:
399:Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens
129:, a faculty co-director at the
702:
689:
672:
632:
593:
559:
538:
1:
1035:, p.358. John Murray. London.
640:"Against Perpetual Copyright"
532:
484:
428:Copyright Term Extension Act
383:Great Ormond Street Hospital
7:
1029:Macgillivary, E.J. (1902).
972:Jonathan, Rosenoer (1997).
678:Mitchell QC, Iain G (2009)
546:Testifying Before Congress.
520:
493:
438:in the 1970s had created a
434:argued that this act and a
361:to control printing of the
157:, while the descendants of
46:, discuss the issue on the
10:
1308:
1003:Yu, Peter K., ed. (2007).
507:In the former Soviet Union
365:of the Bible, and of the
237:battle of the booksellers
202:Battle of the booksellers
136:In an op-ed published in
891:Torremans, Paul (2007).
837:Rimmer, Matthew (2007).
548:p. 199. TheCapitol.Net.
1251:Newcity, M. A. (1978).
1143:. U.S. Copyright Office
945:Ronan, Deazley (2006).
810:Ronan, Deazley (2006).
729:Ronan, Deazley (2006).
566:Patry, William (2009).
463:January 1978, when the
283:reprints of works from
918:Marshall, Lee (2006).
661:7 January 2012 at the
163:
978:. Springer. pp.
465:Copyright Act of 1976
420:Copyright Act of 1790
393:The Little White Bird
367:Book of Common Prayer
149:
115:intellectual property
1095:"Eldred v. Ashcroft"
924:. Sage. p. 15.
309:common law copyright
299:Common law copyright
241:common law copyright
229:Midwinter v Hamilton
210:provided for by the
109:Copyright philosophy
87:indefinite copyright
52:create a new article
44:improve this article
34:may not represent a
783:Keen, Paul (2004).
663:Library of Congress
502:Former Soviet Union
329:Donaldson v Beckett
305:Donaldson v Beckett
285:William Shakespeare
280:Donaldson v Beckett
258:Donaldson v Beckett
206:When the statutory
159:Katherine Mansfield
101:In many countries,
83:Perpetual copyright
1068:Legislation.gov.uk
718:10.1093/icc/dtl026
638:Lessig, Lawrence.
626:The New York Times
599:Wentworth, Donna.
467:came into effect,
449:Eldred v. Ashcroft
363:Authorised Version
214:(1710), the first
139:The New York Times
1292:Hypothetical laws
1282:Philosophy of law
1201:on 8 October 2016
1016:978-0-275-98883-8
989:978-0-387-94832-4
958:978-1-84542-282-0
931:978-0-7619-4490-4
904:978-1-84542-487-9
877:978-0-521-46969-2
850:978-1-84542-948-5
823:978-1-84542-282-0
796:978-1-55111-352-4
769:978-0-521-46969-2
742:978-1-84542-282-0
469:unpublished works
359:royal prerogative
323:Wheaton v. Peters
224:Court of Chancery
127:Jonathan Zittrain
80:
79:
72:
54:, as appropriate.
1299:
1267:
1266:
1248:
1242:
1241:
1223:Direito de Autor
1217:
1211:
1210:
1208:
1206:
1197:. Archived from
1183:
1177:
1175:
1173:
1171:
1160:
1154:
1152:
1150:
1148:
1142:
1133:
1127:
1124:
1122:
1120:
1109:
1103:
1102:
1091:
1085:
1083:
1081:
1079:
1060:
1054:
1053:
1042:
1036:
1027:
1021:
1020:
1000:
994:
993:
969:
963:
962:
942:
936:
935:
915:
909:
908:
888:
882:
881:
861:
855:
854:
834:
828:
827:
807:
801:
800:
780:
774:
773:
753:
747:
746:
726:
720:
706:
700:
693:
687:
676:
670:
667:Public Knowledge
652:
643:
636:
630:
617:
608:
597:
591:
589:
573:
563:
557:
542:
444:US Supreme Court
334:common law right
318:US Supreme Court
293:Geoffrey Chaucer
191:derivative works
184:lottery of birth
171:Public Knowledge
154:The Garden Party
85:, also known as
75:
68:
64:
61:
55:
27:
26:
19:
1307:
1306:
1302:
1301:
1300:
1298:
1297:
1296:
1272:
1271:
1270:
1263:
1249:
1245:
1238:
1218:
1214:
1204:
1202:
1185:
1184:
1180:
1169:
1167:
1162:
1161:
1157:
1146:
1144:
1140:
1134:
1130:
1118:
1116:
1111:
1110:
1106:
1093:
1092:
1088:
1077:
1075:
1062:
1061:
1057:
1044:
1043:
1039:
1028:
1024:
1017:
1001:
997:
990:
970:
966:
959:
943:
939:
932:
916:
912:
905:
889:
885:
878:
862:
858:
851:
835:
831:
824:
808:
804:
797:
781:
777:
770:
754:
750:
743:
727:
723:
707:
703:
694:
690:
677:
673:
653:
646:
637:
633:
619:Helprin, Mark.
618:
611:
598:
594:
586:
564:
560:
543:
539:
535:
523:
515:legal successor
504:
496:
487:
478:Golan v. Holder
408:
342:
301:
212:Statute of Anne
208:copyright terms
204:
176:copyright terms
167:Lawrence Lessig
111:
76:
65:
59:
56:
41:
28:
24:
17:
12:
11:
5:
1305:
1295:
1294:
1289:
1287:Copyright term
1284:
1269:
1268:
1261:
1243:
1236:
1212:
1178:
1155:
1128:
1104:
1086:
1055:
1037:
1022:
1015:
995:
988:
964:
957:
937:
930:
910:
903:
883:
876:
856:
849:
829:
822:
802:
795:
775:
768:
748:
741:
721:
701:
688:
671:
665:Web Archives,
654:Siy, Sherwin.
644:
631:
609:
592:
584:
558:
536:
534:
531:
530:
529:
522:
519:
511:legal entities
503:
500:
495:
492:
486:
483:
407:
404:
341:
340:United Kingdom
338:
300:
297:
272:copyright term
263:House of Lords
203:
200:
110:
107:
78:
77:
38:of the subject
36:worldwide view
31:
29:
22:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1304:
1293:
1290:
1288:
1285:
1283:
1280:
1279:
1277:
1264:
1262:0-275-56450-9
1258:
1254:
1247:
1239:
1237:9789724083902
1233:
1229:
1225:
1224:
1216:
1200:
1196:
1192:
1188:
1182:
1165:
1159:
1139:
1132:
1114:
1108:
1100:
1096:
1090:
1073:
1069:
1065:
1059:
1052:
1047:
1041:
1034:
1033:
1026:
1018:
1012:
1008:
1007:
999:
991:
985:
981:
977:
976:
968:
960:
954:
950:
949:
941:
933:
927:
923:
922:
914:
906:
900:
896:
895:
887:
879:
873:
869:
868:
860:
852:
846:
842:
841:
833:
825:
819:
815:
814:
806:
798:
792:
788:
787:
779:
771:
765:
761:
760:
752:
744:
738:
734:
733:
725:
719:
715:
711:
705:
699:
692:
685:
681:
675:
668:
664:
660:
657:
651:
649:
641:
635:
628:
627:
622:
616:
614:
606:
602:
596:
587:
585:9780195385649
581:
577:
572:
571:
562:
555:
554:9781587331725
551:
547:
541:
537:
528:
525:
524:
518:
516:
512:
508:
499:
491:
482:
480:
479:
473:
472:unpublished.
470:
466:
461:
457:
453:
451:
450:
445:
441:
437:
433:
429:
425:
421:
417:
413:
412:United States
406:United States
403:
401:
400:
395:
394:
388:
384:
380:
379:
375:'s 1904 play
374:
370:
368:
364:
360:
355:
351:
347:
337:
335:
331:
330:
325:
324:
319:
315:
310:
306:
296:
294:
290:
286:
281:
277:
276:public domain
273:
268:
264:
260:
259:
253:
251:
250:Enlightenment
247:
242:
238:
234:
230:
225:
221:
217:
213:
209:
199:
197:
192:
187:
185:
181:
177:
172:
168:
162:
160:
156:
155:
148:
145:
141:
140:
134:
132:
128:
124:
120:
116:
106:
104:
99:
96:
92:
88:
84:
74:
71:
63:
53:
49:
45:
39:
37:
30:
21:
20:
1252:
1246:
1227:
1222:
1215:
1203:. Retrieved
1199:the original
1181:
1168:. Retrieved
1158:
1145:. Retrieved
1131:
1117:. Retrieved
1107:
1089:
1076:. Retrieved
1067:
1058:
1049:
1040:
1031:
1025:
1005:
998:
974:
967:
947:
940:
920:
913:
893:
886:
866:
859:
839:
832:
812:
805:
785:
778:
758:
751:
731:
724:
704:
691:
683:
674:
634:
624:
595:
569:
561:
545:
540:
505:
497:
488:
476:
475:In the case
474:
454:
447:
439:
416:Constitution
409:
397:
391:
376:
373:J. M. Barrie
371:
343:
327:
321:
304:
302:
279:
261:reached the
256:
254:
236:
228:
205:
196:orphan works
188:
164:
152:
150:
144:Mark Helprin
137:
135:
123:Jack Valenti
112:
103:moral rights
100:
86:
82:
81:
66:
57:
33:
1078:15 November
527:Orphan work
432:Eric Eldred
350:Westminster
289:John Milton
267:Lord Camden
220:injunctions
1276:Categories
533:References
460:common law
354:Winchester
233:common law
161:will not."
119:Mark Twain
60:March 2020
1228:Copyright
1195:Singapore
1170:11 August
1147:11 August
1119:11 August
485:Singapore
378:Peter Pan
320:ruled in
222:from the
216:copyright
142:, author
91:copyright
48:talk page
1205:20 April
1072:Archived
659:Archived
521:See also
494:Portugal
440:de facto
424:Congress
390:such as
314:monopoly
265:in 1774
246:monopoly
42:You may
1101:. 2003.
1051:expire.
410:In the
180:welfare
1259:
1234:
1126:2067."
1013:
986:
955:
928:
901:
874:
847:
820:
793:
766:
739:
582:
552:
352:, and
303:After
278:. The
1226:[
1141:(PDF)
980:34–35
456:State
255:When
89:, is
50:, or
1257:ISBN
1232:ISBN
1207:2008
1172:2012
1149:2012
1121:2012
1080:2021
1011:ISBN
984:ISBN
953:ISBN
926:ISBN
899:ISBN
872:ISBN
845:ISBN
818:ISBN
791:ISBN
764:ISBN
737:ISBN
580:ISBN
550:ISBN
458:and
396:and
346:Eton
291:and
121:and
95:term
714:doi
712:or
576:110
446:in
1278::
1193:,
1189:.
1097:.
1070:.
1066:.
1048:.
982:.
682:,
647:^
623:,
612:^
603:,
578:.
402:.
369:.
348:,
287:,
1265:.
1240:.
1209:.
1174:.
1151:.
1123:.
1082:.
1019:.
992:.
961:.
934:.
907:.
880:.
853:.
826:.
799:.
772:.
745:.
716::
588:.
73:)
67:(
62:)
58:(
40:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.