Copyright law

Bobbi is engaged in publishing a collection of contributions, and someone raised the question of copyright.

Researcher to the rescue!

The short form of my findings is:

1. In the US when you write something what you write is automatically copyrighted. Like this, right here that I'm writing. It's copyrighted! Yes!! Even if I don't publish it. It's mine, all mine!
2. You don't have to display a copyright notice to preserve your copyright, though it has advantages.
3. If you produce a collective work, the copyright of the collection is independent of the copyrights of the contributors. If contributors have not specifically assigned their copyright to the collection, then it's assumed that they've given permission. Unless the collection has stolen their work, in which case they are not contributors to the collection but victims of the collection.

Examples of notices for collective works noted here:

"All stories, memoirs, and poems are copyright of their respective creators as indicated herein, and are reproduced here with permission. See Permissions on page XX for individual copyright information."

Copyright (C) 2013, XYZ LLC (of the collection)

Copyright (C) of each work belongs to the respective author or artist

OK, that's the unofficial summary. Now for some authoritative sources. We really do research here at Random S*&# I Learned Today.

Copyright.gov, the US Copyright office, has a summary document here. It says, in part:

U.S. law no longer requires the use of a copyright notice, although placing it on your work is often beneficial.

They also summarize contributions to a copyright work this way:

Under the present copyright law, the copyright in a separate contribution to a published collective work such as a periodical is distinct from the copyright in the collective work as a whole. In the absence of an express transfer from the author of the individual article, the copyright owner in the collective work is presumed to have acquired only the privilege of using the contribution in the collective work and in subsequent revisions and later editions of the collective work.

Now for the law itself: Chapter 1, Section 103 says:

103 . Subject matter of copyright: Compilations and derivative works

(a) The subject matter of copyright as specified by section 102 includes compilations and derivative works, but protection for a work employing preexisting material in which copyright subsists does not extend to any part of the work in which such material has been used unlawfully.

(b) The copyright in a compilation or derivative work extends only to the material contributed by the author of such work, as distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work, and does not imply any exclusive right in the preexisting material. The copyright in such work is independent of, and does not affect or enlarge the scope, duration, ownership, or subsistence of, any copyright protection in the preexisting material.

Chapter 2, Section 201 sez:

(c) Contributions to Collective Works. — Copyright in each separate contribution to a collective work is distinct from copyright in the collective work as a whole, and vests initially in the author of the contribution. In the absence of an express transfer of the copyright or of any rights under it, the owner of copyright in the collective work is presumed to have acquired only the privilege of reproducing and distributing the contribution as part of that particular collective work, any revision of that collective work, and any later collective work in the same series.

Examples of notices, gleaned from the web and cited here:

"All stories, memoirs, and poems are copyright of their respective creators as indicated herein, and are reproduced here with permission. See Permissions on page XX for individual copyright information."

Copyright (C) 2013, XYZ LLC (of the collection)

Copyright (C) of each work belongs to the respective author or artist