Copyright

[Kate_McKee]

@zarf

(Sometimes the author designates another entity. For example, Terry Pratchett books say “Copyright (C) YEAR by Terry and Lyn Pratchett.” His wife is not a co-author, but he’s assigned the copyright to both of them for legal reasons – I suppose it simplifies inheritance.

And likely extends the term of copyright. If his wife outlives him by five or ten years, the seventy years starts ticking at her death, not his.

@dannii

Even if the original author maintains ownership of their copyrights, my impression is that there are few publishers which are willing to make non-exclusive distribution deals. Signing over distribution rights exclusively to one publisher almost amounts to the same as selling copyright (aside from leaving you with the option to make adaption rights in other media etc.)

Certainly in the US and UK, “copyright” is primarily an economic issue, and naïve authors can sign away most, if not all, of the economic interest in their work to the Col. Tom Parkers of media. Other countries that have an “author’s rights” tradition (Germany, Spain, Latin America) are much more author-friendly, certainly as far as legal protection against plagiarism and misattribution; it’s nearly impossible to reassign copyright to a corporation. IIRC, it’s also harder to enforce “all-current-and-future-media” contracts in author’s rights countries, and “killed” manuscripts can be revived by the author and reshopped to other distributors.

[Felix_Larsson]

For what it’s worth:

In the European Union today, the fact that copyright for ”Alice in Wonderland” expired in 1907 under the UK copyright act of 1842 is strictly of no legal importance. What matters legally for copyright issues there now is the EU 1993 Copyright Duration Directive, its national implementations, and the 2006 Copyright Term Directive, which builds on these.

Accordingly, author’s copyright in EU countries has a life+70 years duration, and it is applied retrospectively; so, copyright is restored to any previously public domain works, if the author died less than 70 years ago. (First publishers of previously unpublished public domain works are accorded 25 years’ copyright from publication.)

Not that it matters to the Alice books, since Caroll died 1898, and the copyright of his works in the EU thus retrospectively expired(!) in 1968 – except for “The Wasp in a Wig Episode” of “Through the Looking-Glass” which was first published in 1977, and the copyright of which for EU purposes thus expired 2002 (that it was first published in the US is of no consequence).

(“Alice’s Adventures under Ground”, i.e. the original manuscript version given to Alice Liddell was published in facsimile as early as 1866.)

[Greeny]

Thanks Felix, that’s interesting and good to know. I certainly didn’t realise that.
As you say though it has no effect on Caroll’s work. The fact remains, it has been out of copyright since 1907.
.

[zarf (Andrew Plotkin)]

And likely extends the term of copyright. If his wife outlives him by five or ten years, the seventy years starts ticking at her death, not his

I believe that’s not the case. Assigning a copyright after you write a book does not change the copyright term. It would be different if Lyn Pratchett was actually a co-creator, or if the partnership had legally hired Terry Pratchett to write the book. But the copyright page doesn’t make either of those claims.

However, this is now outside the domain I’m confident about.

[Kate_McKee]

@zarf

And likely extends the term of copyright. If his wife outlives him by five or ten years, the seventy years starts ticking at her death, not his

I believe that’s not the case. Assigning a copyright after you write a book does not change the copyright term. It would be different if Lyn Pratchett was actually a co-creator, or if the partnership had legally hired Terry Pratchett to write the book. But the copyright page doesn’t make either of those claims.

However, this is now outside the domain I’m confident about.

You know, I think you’re right after all, and I erroneously conflated multiple concepts. Or multiple couples (“David Eddings” later becoming “David and Leigh Eddings,” perhaps?)

I don’t know which is more embarrassing, that, or confusing Sendaria with Ankh-Morpork.