"Michael Black"  wrote:
> It's intent is to allow limited quoting and referencing.

Well you certainly are entitled to an opinion Mr. Black. I happen to 
disagree and might even take exception to your personal remark about me 
being confused but I allow that your confusion has confused you to the point 
that others who are not confused may seem confused. That would be my 
opinion. (Also the abbreviation "It's" is incorrectly used in your line 
quoted above, which to me is a clue as to the accuracy of the rest of your 
message:)

I am therefore weighing-in with another article to add to the confusion:)

BOOK CURSE

A book curse was the most widely-employed and effective method of 
discouraging the thievery of manuscripts during the medieval period. It was 
from these curses that modern copyright laws and penalties for plagiarism 
have descended. Many of these curses vowed that harsh repercussions, often 
to do with religion, would be inflicted on anyone who appropriated the work 
from its proper owner. One such example from a book in the monastery of San 
Pedro in Barcelona reads as follows:

"For him that stealeth, or borroweth and returneth not, this book from its 
owner, let it change into a serpent in his hand and rend him. Let him be 
struck with palsy, and all his members blasted. Let him languish in pain 
crying out for mercy, and let there be no surcease to his agony till he sing 
in dissolution. Let bookworms gnaw his entrails ... when at last he goeth to 
his final punishment, let the flames of Hell consume him forever."


The Evolution of Copyright

While governments had previously granted monopoly rights to publishers to 
sell printed works, the modern concept of limited duration copyright 
originated in 1709-1710 with the British Statute of Anne. This statute first 
accorded exclusive rights to authors (ie, creators) rather than publishers, 
and it included protections for consumers of printed work ensuring that 
publishers could not control their use after sale.

As room was not made for the authorized reproduction of copyrighted content 
within this newly formulated statutory right, the courts gradually created a 
doctrine of "fair abridgment", which later became "fair
use", that 
recognized the utility of such actions.

The Berne Convention in 1886 first settled the recognition of copyrights 
between sovereign nations. Under the Berne Convention the right of ownership 
(eigendomsrecht in Dutch) was automatically granted to every creative work. 
The author no longer needed to register the work, and was not required to 
apply for copyright coverage.

The Berne Convention is still in effect today. When a work is finished 
(defined as being written or recorded on a physical medium), the author 
automatically receives all exclusive rights for that work as well as 
derivatives, unless and until the author explicitly renounces those rights 
or the copyright expires.

The expiration time differs from country to country, but according to the 
Berne Convention the minimum time is the lifetime of the author plus 50 
years. In the Netherlands the term is 70 years after the death of the 
author.


Copyright and Software

Under international agreements, such as the WTO's TRIPs Agreement, any 
software written is automatically covered by copyright. This allows the 
owner to prevent another entity from directly copying the source code and 
there is generally no need to register code in order for it to be 
copyrighted. In fact, one of the most recent EPO decisions T 424/03 
clarifies the distinction, stating that software is patentable, because it 
is basically only a technical method executed on a computer, which is to be 
distinguished from the program itself for executing the method, the program 
being merely an expression of the method, and thus being copyrighted.

The World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty, abbreviated 
as the WIPO Copyright Treaty, is an international treaty on copyright law 
adopted by the member states of the World Intellectual Property Organization 
(WIPO) in 1996. It provides additional protections for copyright deemed 
necessary by knowledge monopoly dependent industries due to advances in 
information technology since the formation of previous copyright treaties 
before it.

There have been a variety of criticisms of this treaty, including that it is 
overbroad (for example in its prohibition of circumvention of technical 
protection measures, even where such circumvention is used in the pursuit of 
legal and fair use rights) and that it applies a 'one size fits all' 
standard to all signatory countries despite widely differing stages of 
economic development and knowledge industry.

It ensures that computer programs are protected as literary works in its 
fourth article, and that the arrangement and selection of material in 
databases is protected in its fifth.

It provides authors of works with control over their rental and distribution 
in Articles 6 to 8 which they may not have under the Berne Convention alone. 
It also prohibits circumvention of technological measures for the protection 
of works as stated in Article 11 and unauthorised modification of rights 
management information contained in works in Article 12.


Fair Use

The Berne three-step test is a clause that has been included in several 
international treaties on copyright. It imposes constraints on the possible 
limitations and exceptions to exclusive rights under national copyright 
laws.

It was first applied to the exclusive right of reproduction by Article 9(2) 
of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works in 
1967. Since then, it has been transplanted and extended into the TRIPs 
Agreement, the WIPO Copyright Treaty, the EU Copyright Directive and the 
WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty.

The most important version of the test is that included in Article 13 of 
TRIPs. It reads,

"Members shall confine limitations and exceptions to exclusive rights to 
certain special cases which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of 
the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the 
rights holder."


Trade Marks

In both the USA and Canada, enforcement of Trade Mark law is entirely a 
domestic civil rather than a criminal matter. It is up to the Trade Mark 
owner to file a private lawsuit in a civil court to stop Trade Mark 
infringement. If the Trade Mark owner does not file suit, failure to do so 
can result in a loss of protection of the Trade Mark.

This is different than Copyright law, which is International. Copyright 
infringements are criminal matters, but additionally, like Trademark 
infringement can also be enforced through private lawsuits to seek 
compensation for damages.

Canadian Trade Mark law is covered under the Canadian Trade-mark Act. It 
protects against violators who use the Trade Mark fraudulently.

A Trade Mark that has been registered gives the right to the owner to sue a 
violator. Under section 20 of the Act, the owner must have a) registered the 
mark in Canada, b) used the mark in Canada, and c) used it for the sale of 
identical wares or services in Canada.

A Trade Mark must be registerable in order to be protected under the Act.

Trade Marks that possess certain characteristics prohibited by the Act 
cannot be registered. Among the prohibited characteristics include a mark 
that is "clearly descriptive" or "deceptively misdescriptive".

Disclaimer

The preceeding notes on Copyright etc.are presented for general information 
and discussion only.

Bill Buckels has no warranty obligations or liability resulting from the use 
of ClipShop or any of the programs it came with in any way whatsoever. If 
you don't agree, remove ClipShop.Exe and all associated files from your 
computer now.


Some parts of this page are:
© Copyright Bill Buckels 1991-2007
All Rights Reserved.
The Other Parts are Fairly Used.

ClipShopT and Ye Olde Clip ShoppeT are trademarks of Bill Buckels.
Accept No Imitations.
--- SBBSecho 2.12-Win32