56

For works released after 1989, Copyright notices don't have any legal consequences in the United States. They are just a friendly reminder of who created the work and that they take their copyrights seriously. But those notices are not required anymore to enforce your copyrights on the works you created. If you have proof that you own the copyright on ...


23

The article is public domain. The pictures aren’t If this was first published in the British Empire (as it then was), then The UK is the place of first publication. What follows is its status under UK law, other jurisdictions may have different results. The original article is public domain because H. C. P. Bell died in 1937 meaning copyright on everything ...


23

It's complicated You still own your own posts First off, you own everything that you originally created. Posting it on Stack Exchange doesn't affect your rights to your own content. Incorporating suggestions If you copy any of the text from posts that were created by others, you must comply with the CC BY-SA license. The exact version will depend on when ...


18

In the US, the right to publish is vested in the copyright holder, who is initially the author. That right can be transferred for example by a transfer agreement, and it can be inherited just as other property can be inherited. Under the terms of the will, it is most likely that the copyright was transferred to the spouse even if the will didn not say "...


16

Yes The directors of a company have a fiduciary duty to act within the law for the benefit of their shareholders - not to their customers, not to the government, not to the environment and not to the public. A lawsuit against the company will incur financial loss irrespective of if it is won or lost. It is difficult to see how it is in the shareholder's ...


12

Publishing government records is pretty classic First Amendment-protected activity. Keeping in mind that one can find a lawyer to sue for anything, I think that person would likely be operating well within the law. One thing in particular that I'd recommend staying aware of is how one might attempt to monetize this endeavor. There have been a lot of sites ...


12

The underlying text(s) may be subject to copyright protection, but the individual words are not -- they are usually independently existing words of the language (there are invented words like "chrowl" which I have never seen appearing in a word frequency list). A frequency count is the simply a factual report about language use in a corpus. Even in ...


12

You really asked two different questions, so let's take them one at a time: Publisher Within the scope of 47 USC 230, Stack Exchange is defined as a provider of an "interactive computer service," which is defined as follows: Interactive computer service The term “interactive computer service” means any information service, system, or access ...


9

As specified in the Public Records Act, under RCW 42.56.050 "invasion of privacy" (which is restricted by law) only arises when the content (1) Would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, and (2) is not of legitimate concern to the public. In publishing such information would be an invasion of privacy, it is not subject to public inspection under ...


9

Just to be clear - Disney makes lots and lots of money off its characters, movies yes but its characters are the cash cow. It is very very likely that one of Disney's strategies to not give up these rights to characters is to revisit them continuously. By not supplying a date in their movies they are not giving reasonable expectations of usage at some ...


8

Data is not copyrightable, but databases (structured, organized data) might be. This depends on the jurisdiction, e.g. database rights are recognized in the EU. Whereas copyright protects creative expression, database rights protect the effort that went into collecting and organizing the data. Note that even when database rights apply, this doesn't prevent ...


7

I would be careful that no records belong to EU citizens, as it would likely be illegal under GDPR to have their information without their specific permission, and giving them the right to have it removed.


6

It is a fact that a particulate chess game was played on a particular date by certain specific players, who made specific moves. Facts are not protected by copyright. Anyone is free to report such a game, including the exact moves, and the names of the players. Such games are often used in books about chess, and the same thing is done in books about other ...


6

You must give appropriate credit User content on stack exchange sites is licensed under the CC BY-SA 4.0 licence. Appropriate credit is: If supplied, you must provide the name of the creator and attribution parties, a copyright notice, a license notice, a disclaimer notice, and a link to the material. Note that if you do include material (or create a ...


5

The first copyright law dates from 1710, so it's not true that Chekhov wrote before any copyright laws. Any work from prior to 1924 isn't necessarily safe to use (it depends on when the author died). It is in the US but will complicate things if you publish internationally. Unless you translate with something like Google translate, translation is definitely ...


5

Yes (in most jurisdictions), but why should you? There might be some interests in publishing the 1,000 most common passwords, e.g. to support security awareness lectures (or to build rainbow tables for nefarious purposes), but anybody who wants to hash them with a specific algorithm can do so easily. It is probably easier to type the passwords from a printed ...


4

Copyright includes authorization of derivative works such as translations, so you must have permission of the copyright holder to create a translation. You could be sued for creating the unauthorized translation for your friend. If you attempt to further distribute the book, the chances of getting sued increase substantially. That path probably includes your ...


4

Whether published or unpublished, they are still protected by copyright. (They are probably unpublished for copyright purposes, but in the US this makes little difference for any recently created work (that is anything after 2002). For older work see the Cornell chart.) They cannot be copied or distributed without permission, unless an exception to ...


4

According to the current version of the TOS: You own the rights to the content you create and post on Medium. By posting content to Medium, you give us a nonexclusive license to publish it on Medium Services, including anything reasonably related to publishing it (like storing, displaying, reformatting, and distributing it). In consideration for Medium ...


4

The closest that you can come to an official list is the registry maintained by the US copyright office. That tells you which copyrights have been registered, and does not tell you much about items not on the list. But, if a work is registered (and the copyright has not expired, which you can calculate), you know it is not in the public domain. The question ...


4

A (legal) derivative work has its own independent copyright I'll use the same example Wikipedia does, L.H.O.O.Q.: This is a derivate work of da Vinci's Mona Lisa. It's a legal work because the Mona Lisa was well and truly public domain partly because da Vinci had been dead 401 years but mostly because he died 191 years before the first copyright law was ...


4

Translating any text produces a derivative work. If the original text is protected by copyright, this requites the permission of the copyright holder. Any ancient text or translation of the Bible is totally free of copyright protection. Any version published in the US before 1926 is now out of copyright in the US. The rule3s for copyright of a Bible version ...


3

The Merida Font As noted by Tardigrade, the Merida chess font is available from https://github.com/vasiliyaltunin/chess-merida-font. However this is a derived work which incorporates a much older file containing the actual glyphs in TTF format. Edit: If you google for "Armando Hernandez Marroquin" you will find a lot of font download sites offering ...


3

You can take pictures of public buildings and use them in your game, if you want. You cannot copy pictures (of anything) taken by someone else without the copyright owner's permission, so you need Google's permission to copy their photographs. The public building exception is specifically about architectural works and does not include e.g. murals drawn on ...


3

Can you locate your license (generally not a trivial task)? It may appear under Help-About and a click to view EULA. The EULA specifically addresses redistribution of parts of the software and number of installations you can make with a single license. They do not say what uses you make make of the software, except that "You may not rent, lease, lend or ...


3

Under Copyright? The first question is: Is this novel still under copyright. This depends on the place and date of publication. In many countries copyright now lasts for 70 years after the death of the author. Some countries use different rules. In the US, a work published before 1978 is in most cases copyrighted for 95 years. Works published after that are ...


3

If they are public domain, you can copy them The relevant terms in the USA are: Works created before 1978 For works published or registered before 1978, the maximum copyright duration is 95 years from the date of publication, if copyright was renewed during the 28th year following publication. So, anything published in or before 1924 is definitely public ...


3

It is not correct to say that "Gutenberg is banned in Germany". A German court ruled that Project Gutenberg (US) could not provide copies of 18 works to addresses in Germany. PGLF (the foundation that runs Project Gutenberg) decided to block all access from Germany, because similar claims might be made about other works, leading to added legal ...


3

This is likely to be fine and is fairly common. A chess position cannot be copyrighted. Nor can a sequence of moves. The creative work is your analysis of them and the presentation. As for the people playing, I can't see it being an issue legally. If you're that concerned about offending them, don't include names.


2

Assuming for the sake of argument that the book is infringing, either the author or the publisher (or both) may be sued. Copyright includes several rights - the right to make copies, the right to create derivative works, the right to distribute and sell copies, etc. Both the author and the publisher are going to do one or more of these things in the act of ...


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