{"id":88,"date":"2015-06-01T22:32:08","date_gmt":"2015-06-01T22:32:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/?page_id=88"},"modified":"2026-01-01T13:07:39","modified_gmt":"2026-01-01T13:07:39","slug":"copyright-history","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/copyright\/copyright-history\/","title":{"rendered":"Copyright basics &#038; history"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"attachment_3270\" style=\"width: 420px\" class=\"wp-caption alignright\"><a href=\"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/01\/Copyright.Pirate.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-3270\" class=\"wp-image-3270 \" src=\"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/01\/Copyright.Pirate-300x199.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"410\" height=\"272\" srcset=\"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/01\/Copyright.Pirate-300x199.jpg 300w, https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/01\/Copyright.Pirate-768x509.jpg 768w, https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/01\/Copyright.Pirate-800x531.jpg 800w, https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/01\/Copyright.Pirate.jpg 864w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 410px) 100vw, 410px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-3270\" class=\"wp-caption-text\"><strong>A copyright pirate, 1900.<\/strong> While European countries opposed piracy at the time, US policy did not actually discourage international copyright piracy until the copyright act of 1976, when the US joined the Berne convention.<\/p><\/div>\n<p>The right of authors, artists and musicians to control who uses and profits from their work has been a source of controversy since the invention of the printing press.<\/p>\n<p>Today, an international treaty exists to protect these rights, but copyright is usually based in national laws, and these may differ somewhat from country to country.\u00a0 For example, the duration of copyright protection is longer in the US than most other countries, while the &#8220;moral rights&#8221; of authors and artists tend to get more respect under European laws.<\/p>\n<h4><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>What is copyright?\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n<p>The US patent and copyright system was established\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.archives.gov\/founding-docs\/constitution-transcript\">by the Constitution in 1787.<\/a>\u00a0In Section 8.8, the Constitution says Congress shall have the power:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>&#8230; To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>All work becomes technically copyrighted under US law when it is fixed in some medium.\u00a0 Once an idea is written down (or recorded in some way) it is yours.\u00a0 Registration is something you may do to ensure protection, but so long as you can prove the idea was original to you, registration is only necessary for commercial projects.<\/p>\n<p>Generally, authors, artists and musicians rely on copyright law, while businesses protect their logos and symbols through trademark and\u00a0 inventors rely on patent law. All of these are considered intellectual property.<\/p>\n<p>Copyright is regulated by the<a href=\"https:\/\/www.copyright.gov\/\"> Library of Congress Copyright Office<\/a>. Patents and trademarks are regulated by the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.uspto.gov\/\">US Patent and Trademark Office<\/a>.<\/p>\n<h4><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong><em>What\u2019s the difference between copyright, trademarks and patents?: \u00a0\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n<p><strong>All three are\u00a0 \u201cintellectual property,\u201d\u00a0<\/strong>and a business might use all three at some point.<\/p>\n<p>Here\u2019s\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.uspto.gov\/trademarks-getting-started\/trademark-basics\">an example from the US Patent and Trademark office<\/a>:\u00a0<em>Imagine\u00a0\u00a0you invent a new type of vacuum cleaner. \u00a0You might apply for a\u00a0<strong>patent<\/strong>\u00a0to protect the invention itself. You could apply to register a\u00a0<strong>trademark<\/strong>\u00a0to protect the brand name of the vacuum cleaner once its being sold on the market. \u00a0And you might register a\u00a0<strong>copyright<\/strong>\u00a0for the TV commercial you use to market the product.\u00a0Those are three different types of protection for three separate types of intellectual property: brands, inventions, and artistic works.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n<h4><strong><span style=\"color: #000000;\">Copyright duration<\/span><br \/>\n<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p><strong>Patent<\/strong>\u00a0\u2014 Inventions \u2014 Patents last 28 years. The expiration of patent protections is why we have \u201cgeneric\u201d as opposed to brand-name drugs.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Trademark<\/strong>\u00a0\u2014 Brands \u2014 Registration usually lasts indefinitely. Trademark rules are enforced under the\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Lanham_Act\">Lanham Act<\/a>, which prevents infringement and false advertising.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Copyright<\/strong> \u00a0 Creative works \u2013 Registration is from 70 to 120 years, depending on the circumstances, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.copyright.gov\/circs\/circ15a.pdf\">according to the US Copyright Office.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>Individual works<\/strong> copyrighted after 1978 are protected for the life of the author plus 70 years.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Works for hire,<\/strong> that is, creations copyrighted by corporations, are protected 120 years from date of creation or 95 years from publication, whichever is shorter.A &#8220;work for hire&#8221; is when an employee creates copyrightable art, literature, music or other creative work and, under contract, assigns that work to the employer.\u00a0 Without a contract, the law assumes that the work belongs to the original creator.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Works copyrighted before 1978<\/strong>\u00a0 have a protection of 95 years. This means that works created before 1930 are in the public domain in 2025 and may be freely used for any purpose.\u00a0 Works created before 1931 are in the public domain in 2026. And so on.<\/li>\n<li>Fun Fact: Duke University hosts the\u00a0 <a href=\"https:\/\/web.law.duke.edu\/cspd\/8\">Center for the Study of the Public Domain<\/a>, a kind of retirement home for works whose copyright has expired.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/blockquote>\n<h4><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong><em>The limits of copyright\u00a0\u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Public_domain\"><strong>Public domain<\/strong>\u00a0<\/a>works are those that have fallen out of copyright over time or have never been copyrighted. They\u00a0 are free for anyone to use.\u00a0 Anything created before 1930 (or, 95 years ago, this being written in 2025) is in the public domain.\u00a0 All government documents,\u00a0 texts of laws, photos and images produced by the US (for example. NASA or the EPA) are in the public domain from the beginning.\u00a0 All state and federal legal codes in the US are in the public domain.*\u00a0 In the UK, all government documents fall under an <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/doc\/open-government-licence\/version\/3\/\">open government license.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n<p><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Creative_Commons_license\">Creative Commons License<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>or other open source licensing arrangements mean that an author is giving others permission to share and build on an otherwise copyrighted work. In many cases, this will mean that a work is available for non-profit uses with attribution.<\/p>\n<p><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Fair_use\">Fair use<\/a><\/strong> (US) \u00a0\u2014 Students, authors, pundits, educators and others are free to cite portions of a work under copyright for the purposes of discussion, debate or education so long as there is no commercial value in using portions of the works. Just how small a portion, and how little commercial value is still being worked out.\u00a0 (Some good examples of how Fair Use is determined may be found at the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.pbs.org\/standards\/media-law-101\/copyright-fair-use\/\">PBS Media Law 101 site<\/a>.)<\/p>\n<p>The four part test of fair use is described in the Copyright statute and also in court cases. \u00a0The\u00a0 test \u00a0involves:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>the purpose and character of the use, including whether the use is commercial or for nonprofit educational purposes;<\/li>\n<li>nature of material itself<\/li>\n<li>percentage used in relation to the work as a whole; and<\/li>\n<li>effect on the market for or value of the original works<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Fair_dealing\"><strong>Fair dealing<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0(UK &amp; Commonwealth nations) \u2014 \u00a0Very similar to \u201cfair use\u201d \u00a0in the US, but spelled out in more detail in the law. \u00a0Includes news reporting, research, criticism, and parody.<\/p>\n<p><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Right_to_quote\">Right to Quote\u00a0<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>(Europe) \u2014 Copyright law allows short excerpts from written works<\/p>\n<h4><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong><em>Copyright history and background\u00a0 \u00a0<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n<p><strong>Licensing of book printing<\/strong> began in Britain 1534 when the Stationers\u2019 Company was given a printing monopoly and the power to enforce actions against what was then unlawful competition.<\/p>\n<p>In 1710, first Copyright Act (called the Statute of Anne) introduced two new concepts \u2013 1) the author was the owner of copyright and 2) A fixed term of protection for published works. It was originally 14 years, renewable for another 14 years.<\/p>\n<p>The US Constitution of 1787 contained the power to grant copyrights and patents in Section 8, Clause 8. While <span style=\"color: #444444;\">the US Constitution protected American works, it did not protect works registered in other nations. Similarly, works published in Britain by American writers, or in France by German writers, were also unprotected from exploitation in other countries.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h4><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>Copyright controversy\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n<p>Immanuel Kant was one of the first to speak out against the &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.gutenberg.org\/cache\/epub\/46060\/pg46060-images.html\">Injustice of Counterfeiting Books<\/a>&#8221; in 1798. \u00a0Charles Dickens, the 19th century author of Christmas Carol and Tale of Two Cities, was outraged by the imitations and outright thefts of his work that appeared in print in America. Dickens and other authors demanded an international copyright treaty in the 1850s and 60s. Also\u00a0influential was Victor Hugo, author of Les Miserables and the Hunchback of Notre Dame, who helped organize an international association to protect copyright.<\/p>\n<p>Charles Dickens was not happy about copyright scofflaws, especially the Americans, who assumed that they should be able to absorb culture from Europe without a &#8220;tax on knowledge.&#8221; He said:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\" alignleft\" src=\"http:\/\/upload.wikimedia.org\/wikipedia\/commons\/thumb\/a\/aa\/Dickens_Gurney_head.jpg\/164px-Dickens_Gurney_head.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"150\" height=\"220\" \/>\u201cYou take the uncompleted books of living authors, fresh from their hands, wet from the press, cut, hack, and carve them \u2026 Now, show me the distinction between such pilfering as this, and picking a man\u2019s pocket in the street.\u201d \u2014 Charles Dickens in \u201cNicholas Nickleby\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Dickens\u2019 complaints were heard in Britain. In 1875, a Royal Commission on British copyright law advised a copyright treaty with the US to provide reciprocal protection of British and US authors.<\/p>\n<p>Meanwhile, European nations in 1886 formed an international copyright treaty,\u00a0 the <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Berne_Convention\">Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, also called the International Copyright Act.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n<div class=\"wp-caption alignleft\" style=\"width: 160px;\">\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"\" src=\"https:\/\/upload.wikimedia.org\/wikipedia\/commons\/0\/0c\/Mark_Twain_by_AF_Bradley.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"150\" height=\"192\" \/><\/p>\n<p class=\"wp-caption-text\">Mark Twain<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p><strong>Mark Twain<\/strong> (Samuel Clemens) thought copyright protection didn&#8217;t last long enough. In 1906 he<a href=\"http:\/\/www.thecapitol.net\/Publications\/testifyingbeforecongress_Twain.html\"> testified before a Congressional committee<\/a> that he thought copyright should last not 28 years, but forever:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p align=\"left\">I am aware, that copyright must have a term, must have a limit, because that is required by the Constitution of the United States, which sets aside the earlier constitution, which we call the Decalogue. The Decalogue says that you shall not take away from any man his property. I do not like to use the harsher term, \u201cThou shalt not steal.\u201d But the laws of England and America do take away property from the owner. They select out the people who create the literature of the land. Always talk handsomely about the literature of the land. Always say what a fine, a great monumental thing a great literature is. In the midst of their enthusiasm they turn around and do what they can to crush it, discourage it, and put it out of existence. I know that we must have that limit. But forty-two years is too much of a limit. I do not know why there should be a limit at all. I am quite unable to guess why there should be a limit to the possession of the product of a man\u2019s labor. There is no limit to real estate. As Doctor Hale has just suggested, you might just as well, after you had discovered a coal mine and worked it twenty-eight years, have the Government step in and take it away\u2013under what pretext!<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>Other Americans had a very different attitude about copyright.<\/p>\n<p><strong><a href=\"http:\/\/en.wikiquote.org\/wiki\/Woody_Guthrie\">Woody Guthrie<\/a>,<\/strong> the famous folk song singer of the 1930s \u2013 50s, \u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=PlgXghaJCK0\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">said:<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignright\" src=\"https:\/\/upload.wikimedia.org\/wikipedia\/commons\/e\/e0\/Woody_Guthrie_NYWTS.jpg\" width=\"201\" height=\"253\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>This song is Copyrighted in U.S., under Seal of Copyright #154085, for a period of 28 years, and anybody caught singin\u2019 it without our permission will be mighty good friends of ours, cause we don\u2019t give a darn. Publish it. Write it. Sing it. Swing to it. Yodel it. We wrote it, that\u2019s all we wanted to do.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Guthrie&#8217;s songs were first copyrighted in 1945 and, some argue, not renewed. Meanwhile, music copyright company \u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.woodyguthrie.org\/Lyrics\/Publisher_Contact.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Ludlow Music<\/a>\u00a0and the <a href=\"http:\/\/woodyguthrie.org\/index.htm\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Woody Guthrie Foundation <\/a>established\u00a0a copyright to Guthrie&#8217;s songs in the mid-1950s.<\/p>\n<p>One song in particular &#8212; <a href=\"http:\/\/memory.loc.gov\/diglib\/ihas\/loc.natlib.ihas.200000022\/default.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">This Land is Your Land<\/a> &#8212; has been a point of contention. The song was copyrighted in 1945 and the copyright was not renewed, so, some argue, it should be in the public domain. \u00a0But \u00a0the song was also copyrighted separately in 1955 by Ludlow, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?time_continue=62&amp;v=NZXryWhX33g\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">at a time when Guthrie was a vagrant and headed for psychiatric confinement<\/a>.\u00a0 \u00a0In 2004, Ludlow challenged a <a href=\"http:\/\/www.jibjab.com\/originals\/this_land\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">&#8220;Jib-Jab&#8221; satire \/ parody<\/a> of the 2004 election. The song is both parody and satire; while direct parody of a song is protected, satire may not be. \u00a0Ludlow and the Guthrie foundation decided not to pursue the lawsuit. In 2016, \u00a0a New York law firm Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman &amp; Herz, \u00a0challenged the copyright status of &#8220;This Land,&#8221; saying it belongs in the public domain. \u00a0 The challenge <a href=\"https:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2020\/02\/28\/arts\/music\/this-land-is-your-land-copyright.html\">failed in court<\/a> in 2020.<\/p>\n<div style=\"width: 160px\" class=\"wp-caption alignright\"><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Walt_Disney_Productions_v._Air_Pirates\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"\" src=\"https:\/\/upload.wikimedia.org\/wikipedia\/en\/5\/5b\/AirPiratesFunnies1971.jpg\" width=\"150\" height=\"220\" \/><\/a><p class=\"wp-caption-text\">1971 parody<\/p><\/div>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Walt_Disney_Productions_v._Air_Pirates\"><strong>Air Pirates,<\/strong> <\/a>a protest parody of\u00a0 Disney characters produced in 1971, is another example of controversy around copyright and fair use.\u00a0 A group of cartoonists in Berkeley, California were convinced that the Disney approach to media exemplified conformity and hypocrisy in American culture, and their attack on Disney was meant to end up in court where, they thought, fair use standards would prevail. The courts had a different idea, and in <a href=\"http:\/\/www2.tltc.ttu.edu\/Cochran\/Cases%20&amp;%20Readings\/Copyright-UNT\/airpirates.htm\">a 1978 federal district court decision<\/a>, Air Pirates were found to be infringing on Disney copyrights and trademarks.\u00a0 Disney settled the case after the Air Pirates crew promised not to continue with the parodies.\u00a0 The case helped encouraged Congress to explicitly define Fair\u00a0 Use in the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.copyright.gov\/fair-use\/\">1976 Copyright Act.<\/a><\/p>\n<h4><span style=\"color: #000000;\"><strong>International Copyright issues 20th century\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong><\/span><\/h4>\n<p>Some authors and publishers had problems with the difference in copyright laws between the US and Europe during most of the 20th century.\u00a0 Most of Europe had adopted\u00a0 the <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Berne_Convention#Adoption_and_implementation\">Berne copyright Convention<\/a>\u00a0as early as 1887 while the US fell back on the much weaker <a href=\"https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Universal_Copyright_Convention\">Universal Copyright Convention of 1952<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p><strong><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignright wp-image-2879\" src=\"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Tolkein-203x300.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"132\" height=\"195\" srcset=\"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Tolkein-203x300.jpg 203w, https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Tolkein.jpg 214w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 132px) 100vw, 132px\" \/><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignright wp-image-2881\" src=\"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Front.LOTR_-205x300.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"90\" height=\"132\" srcset=\"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Front.LOTR_-205x300.jpg 205w, https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Front.LOTR_-546x800.jpg 546w, https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/02\/Front.LOTR_.jpg 576w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 90px) 100vw, 90px\" \/>J.R.R. Tolkien&#8217;s books<\/strong>, including The Hobbit (first published in 1937) and The Lord of the Rings (first published in 1954-55)\u00a0 were at the center of the 1960s controversy over US law and international copyright.\u00a0 Ace Books, a pulp paperback publisher,\u00a0 had approached Tolkien over rights for a paperback in the US. Tolkien turned them down flat, mostly because he\u00a0 had a kind of scholarly disdain for paperbacks (as opposed to hardbacks), according to a\u00a0\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/blogs.loc.gov\/law\/2014\/11\/j-r-r-tolkien-paperbacks-and-copyright\/\">Library of Congress article<\/a> on the copyright fight.\u00a0At this time, only about 2,000 copies of a book printed in another\u00a0country could be imported into the US before it fell into the public domain.\u00a0 &#8220;Most laws on the books existed to protect domestic creations from foreign ones,&#8221;\u00a0 \u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.kirkusreviews.com\/features\/unauthorized-lord-rings\/\">wrote Andrew Liptak in a Kirkus Reviews article.<\/a> &#8220;As the (Tolkien) trilogy became incredibly popular, Houghton Mifflin was technically in violation of the law when they exceeded their import limits and failed to renew their interim copyright.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>In 1965, Ace Books went ahead with an edition of the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings.\u00a0 Tolkien and his publishers vigorously protested, but when the legal options ran out, US p<span style=\"color: #444444;\">ublisher Houghton Mifflin printed paperback editions of Tolkien&#8217;s books in 1973 and included this plea on the back cover:\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<blockquote><p>&#8220;This paperback edition and no other has been published with my consent and cooperation. Those who approve of courtesy (at least) to living authors will purchase it and no other.&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p><span style=\"color: #444444;\">The incidents went without much comment, even in the world of professional publishing, but provided an example of the convoluted US approach to copyright.\u00a0 Finally, in 1976, the US opened the door to international cooperation on copyright.\u00a0 But it was not until 1989 that the US<\/span><span style=\"color: #444444;\">\u00a0formally ratified the Berne Convention.\u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p>(Also see: Herbert Mitgang, &#8220;Publishing: A New Atlantic Alliance,&#8221;\u00a0 \u00a0New York Times, Mar 25, 1977; ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The New York Times pg. 72; and &#8220;In and Out of Books&#8221; by Lewis Nichols,\u00a0 New York Times Aug 8, 1965; ProQuest Historical Newspapers: The New York Times pg. BR8.)<\/p>\n<p><strong>For more about the history of copyright, see:<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.cbsnews.com\/news\/new-public-domain-works-2026\/\">Works in the public domain,<\/a> 2026 (CBS)<\/li>\n<li>Benjamin W. Rudd, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.copyright.gov\/history\/dates.pdf\">Notable Dates in American Copyright,<\/a> Library of Congress (pdf).<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"http:\/\/www.arl.org\/focus-areas\/copyright-ip\/2486-copyright-timeline\">A History of Copyright in the United States<\/a>, Association of Research Libraries.<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"http:\/\/www.c-spanvideo.org\/program\/WithoutCo\">CSPAN video <\/a>of Robert Spoo talking about his book \u201cWithout Copyrights.\u201d<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"http:\/\/papers.ssrn.com\/sol3\/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2611311\">Paper by Robert Brauneis,<\/a> &#8220;A brief illustrated chronicle of retroactive copyright term extension,&#8221; Social Science Network, May 27, 2015.<\/li>\n<li>&#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/www.peterirvinelaw.com\/pdf\/JibJab.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">This land belongs to all of us<\/a>,&#8221; \u00a0by Peter Irvine &amp; Kohel Haver<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=tXRLam5kfUU\">Dan O&#8217;Neill and the Air Pirates<\/a>, Chibson USA documentary\u00a0 (YouTube)<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/youtube.com\/shorts\/hX824LRsK7I?si=XR7MaFPBJSCxyfAj\">A spicy Disney comic &#8230;<\/a> Treehouse productions (YouTube)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The right of authors, artists and musicians to control who uses and profits from their work has been a source of controversy since the invention of the printing press. Today, an international treaty exists to protect these rights, but copyright &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/copyright\/copyright-history\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":603,"parent":86,"menu_order":2,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"full-width-page.php","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-88","page","type-page","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/88","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=88"}],"version-history":[{"count":7,"href":"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/88\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7007,"href":"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/88\/revisions\/7007"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/86"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/603"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/revolutionsincommunication.com\/law\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=88"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}