34

There doesn't need to be any copyright claim for there to be copyright protection. The protection is given automatically whenever someone authors a work. If you make money off of your improved version, the owner of the page may sue you for royalties. The only way to avoid this is to ask him for permission, or to create your page without using any of the ...


21

Under the Berne Convention, a copyright notice is not required at all, although using one is good practice. Using one usually eliminates the claimed status of "innocent infringement", which, if found true by a court, greatly reduces damage awards. It is usual to place such notices at or near the start of a work. That is where people tend to look for them, ...


7

In the United States, the protection of copyright is afforded automatically to authors of original works. You don't need to place a copyright notice, but it is desirable as protection against a defence of innocent infringement. The format of copyright notices for visual works is governed by 17 U.S.C. § 401 : (a) General Provisions.— Whenever a work ...


6

If you copy and republish the page, it's the same as copying and republishing any copyrighted work. There's no difference for "online copyright". Automatic copyright isn't a thing everywhere. (although it is in most places.) If you happen to be in such a place, check your local laws, the page may not have copyright protection. (just where you are) It's ...


5

What are exactly the legal consequences of "All rights reserved"? Almost none. You have to explicitly grant copyright rights. You don't even need the Copyright notice for them to apply. My "almost" is because the notice makes it harder for somebody to argue "they didn't realize". Do I still need an additional SW License Agreement or is the Copyright ...


4

united-states In US law the elements of a copyright notice are 1) the copyright symbol or the word "copyright or the abbreviation "copyr"; 2) the year of publication or creation; and 3) the name of the copyright owner. More specifically, under 17 USC 401 (b)(3) the third element should be: (3) the name of the owner of copyright in the work, or an ...


4

Copyrights You may use the circle c mark (c) normally with a year, the name of the author of the work and possibly the words "all right reserved" without any legal permission. This gives you more rights legally than you would have from the copyright rights that arise automatically upon the creation of the work. Registering the copyright with the ...


4

Copyright in the US has changed Prior to 1978 copyright lasted 28 years and could be renewed for another 28 (hence 1936 and 1964). Anything that was still under copyright then now has copyright for 70 years after the authors death so this will enter the public domain on 1/1/2026. The 1981 work is a derivative work with its own copyright by the new author(...


3

You are not supposed to "explain" anything. See this site: http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/responding-dmca-takedown-notice-targeting-your-content What you have to do is to state, under penalty of perjury, that you have a good faith belief that your material was wrongly removed. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less. Google (or whoever the host is) doesn't ...


3

Evaluating a potential copyright violation is very fact-intensive, so we don't have enough information to answer the question. Making a copy is generally going to be a copyright violation, but there's still going to be a lot of breathing room under the fair use doctrine. Again, we'd need more details to provide a useful answer, but you may be able to ...


3

It is not critical, however, it can help and it can't hurt. You own the copyright and if you were to take legal action you would need to prove this - the notice is evidence you can use to do so. Note that some jurisdictions (including the US) require registration of copyright before commencing legal action and that damages only accrue from the date of ...


3

I would refer you to I Received a Letter/Email. . . from the USPTO website. Generally though you should be careful about using another company's trademark as part of your product's name. A less risky option would be to name your product Shareaholic and then in the subtitle or description write for use with Pinterest. The point of trademarks is to prevent ...


2

If the customer has no right to exploit the copyright in the software, they can't even run it. How can you run software without making at least one copy of it in memory? Perhaps in theory it can be done but that isn't how your average computer works. As to loading software into memory constituting a violation of copyright, see MAI Systems Corp v. Peak ...


2

Yes. Although usually the form of a copyright notice would be: COPYRIGHT © AUTHOR YEAROFPUBLICATION Under Section 55(1) and (2) of the Copyright Act of 1957, you must give the notice to receive any protection other than the right to seek an injunction ordering the infringer to cease using the work, and the notice creates a presumption that the statements ...


2

Yes. The copyright notice is not the definitive means by which the term of a copyright is determined. A copyright arises by operation of law when the work is created and terminated at a date calculated based upon the death of the author, if an individual, or after publication if owned by an entity (assuming U.S. law, the U.K. calculated the term ...


2

It is true that warplanes, including fighter jets, are often named after real objects and concepts. This goes back as far as the WWI Sopwith Camel, latterly famous as the chosen plane of Snoopy. But whether a plane has a unique name or not, a single word or a short phrase such ass a title is not protected by copyright. Such terms might possibly be protected ...


2

No, you may include a general copyright notice. You could more clearly identify what copyright claims you are making by adding something like: Site design and text copyright © 2019 BuisnessName. Images copyright by their individual holders. or Site design and text copyright © 2019 BuisnessName. Image copyrights specified on individual images. It is ...


2

If I place the copyright later in the file, say, after the synopsis, or even at the end of the file, would someone misusing my code be able to get away with saying: "Oh, well you're supposed to put the copyright at the beginning, its not fair to expect me to go looking around for it". Either the person "misusing" your code is doing something they are ...


2

In a comment, the OP says: We don't specify with the client who owns the actual website, which is something I've never really thought about. I'll need to put some thought into that. I'm sure as is, that means we own the website, but I don't know if I want that to be the case with every project, or any project for that matter. In the absence of a written ...


1

I recall reading that the legal disclaimer of warranty/liability (THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS-IS" ...) should be placed prominently (including being upper case) to maximise the chance of standing up in court. Perhaps someone could confirm this. Certainly the "GPL How-To" makes it very clear that the licence should be at the top of the file. At any rate it ...


1

Not a lawyer, but I did spent 3 minutes in a law school building asking directions once. Oh, and a big advocate for F/OSS software. I do not think there is a requirement for the license to be at the top. However, that is the expected location, and an accepted convention. As you probably know, most IDEs can be configured to insert a default block of text ...


1

No, because you are claiming copyright of your website in its entirety, including the choice and arrangement of the images you have obtained. You should probably, however, provide separate copyright/attribution statements for those images, as you can't claim copyright on the individual images.


1

In the US, for works created after 1978, copyright expires for all works created by a given author at the same time, currently 70 years after the death of the author. The year of publication, and the year in the copyright notice, do not matter. If the "author" of the work is a corporation or business (such as a work-made-for-hire), the copyright expires 95 ...


1

You are the copyright holder if you wrote the code, no matter how you write your name. Even if you spell the name wrong, you are still the copyright holder. The only problem is if this could cause confusion about who the copyright holder is. But it is quite unlikely that someone else named "F. Middlename Lastname" would try to steal your copyright (and not ...


1

If that is a way that you identify yourself, it is legal to do so. The primary risk is that this form of abbreviation may prevent someone from accurately determining who owns the copyright causing someone with a similar name to receive a windfall.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible