Everything about The Copyright Term Extension Act totally explained
The
Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA) of 1998 – alternatively known as the
Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act,
Sonny Bono Act, or
pejoratively as the
Mickey Mouse Protection Act – extended
copyright terms in the
United States by 20 years. Before the Act (under the
Copyright Act of 1976),
copyright would last for the life of the author plus 50 years, or 75 years for a work of
corporate authorship; the Act extended these terms to life of the author plus 70 years and for works of corporate authorship to 120 years after creation or 95 years after publication, whichever endpoint is earlier. The Act also affected copyright terms for copyrighted works published prior to
January 1,
1978, also increasing their term of protection by 20 years, to a total of 95 years from publication.
This law effectively 'froze' the advancement date of the
public domain in the United States for works covered by the older fixed term copyright rules. Under this Act, additional works made in 1923 or afterwards that were still copyrighted in 1998 won't enter the public domain until 2019 or afterwards (depending on the date of the product) unless the owner of the copyright releases them into the public domain prior to that or if the copyright gets extended again. Unlike copyright extension legislation in the
European Union, the Sonny Bono Act didn't revive copyrights that had already expired. The Act did extend the terms of protection set for works that were already copyrighted, and is retroactive in that sense. However, works created before
January 1,
1978 but not published or registered for copyright until recently are addressed in a special section and may remain protected until 2047. The Act became on
October 27,
1998.
Background
Under the
Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, the signatory states are required to provide copyright protection for a minimum term of the life of the author plus fifty years, but they're permitted to provide for a longer term of protection. Following the 1993
Directive on harmonising the term of copyright protection, member states of the
European Union implemented protection for a term of the author's life plus seventy years. The
United States didn't become a Berne signatory until 1988, but had previously provided for the minimum copyright term the convention required in the
Copyright Act of 1976.
Prior to the 1976 copyright act, many copyrighted
literary works,
movies and fictional characters were soon to pass into the public domain due to their 56 year maximum copyright terms. Some of these copyrighted items remained quite profitable for their copyright owners, including several characters owned by the
Walt Disney Company. With the passage of the 1976 copyright act, early
animated short films featuring
Mickey Mouse such as
Steamboat Willie and
Plane Crazy wouldn't enter the public domain until 2000 at the earliest due to their new 75 year copyright terms.
Mickey Mouse and other characters also have protection as
trade marks. In several countries (for example in
Russia, where the Berne convention wasn't applied retroactively)
Mickey Mouse and all other copyrighted works created before 1970 are now regarded as being in the public domain.
After the United States' accession to the Berne convention, a number of copyright owners successfully
lobbied the
U.S. Congress for another extension of the term of copyright, to provide for the same term of protection that exists in
Europe. The act was named after the late Congressman
Sonny Bono, who died nine months before the act became law. Bono, who, as a songwriter and filmmaker had his own interests in advancing copyright terms, had favored increasing them even before his entry into politics as the mayor of Palm Springs, California.
Both houses of the United States Congress passed the act as Public Law 105-298 with a
voice vote,
making it impossible to determine who voted for or against. President
Bill Clinton signed the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 on
October 27,
1998.
Political climate
Senate Report 104-315
The Senate Report gave the official reasons for passing copyright extension laws and was originally written in the context of the Copyright Term Extension Act of 1995, .
The authors of the report believed that extending copyright protection would help the United States by providing more protection for their works in foreign countries and by giving more incentive to digitize and preserve works since there was an exclusive right in them. The report also included minority opinions by
Herb Kohl and
Hank Brown, who believed that the term extensions were a financial windfall to current owners of copyrighted material at the expense of the public's use of the material.
Support
In addition to
Disney (whose extensive lobbying efforts inspired the nickname "The Mickey Mouse Protection Act"), California congresswoman
Mary Bono (
Sonny Bono's widow and Congressional successor) and the estate of composer
George Gershwin supported the act. Mary Bono, speaking on the floor of the
United States House of Representatives, said:
life expectancy of humans has risen dramatically since Congress passed the original
Copyright Act of 1790, that a difference in copyright terms between the United States and Europe would negatively affect the international operations of the
entertainment industry, and that media such as
VHS,
DVD,
Cable and
Satellite have increased the value and commercial life of movies and television series.
Proponents claim that copyright better preserves intellectual property like movies, music and television shows. Many different versions of the film were made and most if not all were in horrible condition. After underlying rights to the film were enforced, it was given a high quality restoration that was hailed by critics. In addition, proponents note that once a work falls into the public domain there's no guarantee that the work will be more widely available or cheaper. Suggesting that quality copies of public domain works are not widely available, they argue that one reason for a lack of availability may be because publishers' reluctance to publish a work that's in the public domain for fear that they won't be able to recoup their investment or earn enough profit. and thus artists are free to get ideas from copyrighted works as long as they don't
plagiarize. Works such as parody benefit from
fair use.
Proponents also question the idea that extended copyright is "corporate welfare."
Mark Twain once noted that when a work enters the public domain, the publisher is still able to profit from its exploitations and the creators are the only ones who cease to benefit from the work. They state that many opponents also have a stake in the case, claiming that those arguing against copyright term extension are mostly businesses that depend on distributing films and videos that have lost their copyright. The Bono Act is thus perceived to add an instability to commerce and investment, areas which have a much better legal theoretical basis than intellectual property, whose theory is of quite recent development and is often criticized as being a corporate chimera. Conceivably, if one had made such an investment and then produced a derivative work (or perhaps even re-released the work
in ipse), he could counter a suit made by the copyright holder by declaring that Congress had unconstitutionally made,
ex post facto, a restriction on the previously unrestricted.
Opponents also question the proponents' "new works wouldn't be created" argument by pointing out proponents' hidden presumption that the goal is to make the creation of new works possible, whereas the authors of the United States Constitution evidently thought that unnecessary and explicitly restricted the goal to merely "promot[ing] the progress of science and useful arts". In fact, some works created under time-limited copyright wouldn't be created under perpetual copyright because the creator of a distantly derivative work doesn't have the money and resources to find the owner of copyright in the original work and purchase a license, or the individual or privately held owner of copyright in the original work might refuse to license a use at any price (though a refusal to license may trigger a fair use safety valve).
Thus they argue that a rich, continually replenished, public domain is necessary for continued artistic creation. For example, the works of English playwright and poet
William Shakespeare and the Greek myths have been the basis for much of
Neil Gaiman's writing, which might well not have been created if the original works were still under copyright. Recent works that have entered the popular culture, and for which copyright is arguably not appropriate, include the
novels that created
Frankenstein and
Dracula, both originating in the 19th century. Most of the holy writings of major
religions are also in the public domain, which allows them to be adapted, translated, paraphrased and otherwise made suitable to modern audiences. If the
Roman Catholic Church had a perpetual copyright on the letters of the Apostle
Paul, the four Gospels, the Book of Revelation and the letters of James, Peter, John, Jude and the anonymous author of the Book of Hebrews, it could have refused to license them for translation, or for use by other churches. Even Walt Disney and Disney pictures, have used works from the public domain notably the brothers Grimm stories of which they've made several notable films.
Challenges
Publishers and librarians, among others, brought
Eldred v. Ashcroft to obtain an injunction on enforcement of the act. Oral arguments were heard by the
U.S. Supreme Court on
October 9,
2002, and on
January 15,
2003 the court held the CTEA constitutional by a 7-2 decision.
The plaintiffs in the
Eldred case have as of 2003 begun to shift their effort toward the U.S. Congress in support of a bill called the
Public Domain Enhancement Act that would make the provisions of the Bono Act apply only to copyrights that had been registered with the
Library of Congress.
Further Information
Get more info on 'Copyright Term Extension Act'.
|
External Link Exchanges
Do you know how hard it is to get a link from a large encyclopaedia? Well we're different and will prove it. To get a link from us just add the following HTML to your site on a relevant page:
<a href="http://copyright_term_extension_act.totallyexplained.com">Copyright Term Extension Act Totally Explained</a>
Then simply click through this link from your web page. Our crawlers will verify your link, extract the title of your web page and instantly add a link back to it. If you like you can remove the words Totally Explained and embed the link in article text.
As long as your link remains in place, we'll keep our link to you right here. Please play fair - our crawlers are watching. Your site must be closely related to this one's topic. Any kind of spamming, dubious practises or removing the link will result in your link from us being dropped and, potentially, your whole site being banned. |