Klarinet Archive - Posting 000819.txt from 1998/10

From: Robin Black <shakspare@-----.com>
Subj: [kl] copyright
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 19:32:32 -0400

>>>Of course one should register ones work with the Library of Congress
but
>what about mailing a copy of your work to yourself by registered mail?
By
>definition registered mail is not tampered with. How does that stand
legally?

Very badly. If you send yourself registered mail with the flap unsealed
it would be very easy to then put something in it later - which is why
it isn't supported in court. That "mail" thing has way too many holes in
it for the devious - we honest people don't think of what an
unscrupulous person would do.<<<

I must differ with this a bit--when I mail myself anything, I do it
via registered mail, and the registration receipt is applied across
the flap of the envelope. There is, therefore, no way to argue that
this was mailed as an empty envelope, because the two green strips
from the registration receipt form a seal across the flap.

As far as implying that no writer who considers her work to be of
value would bother NOT to copyright it--well, that's a little unfair,
not to mention unrealistic. I send out many, many pieces one at a
time for publication to various editors. I don't have the luxury of
"saving up" a stack of articles and copyrighting them en masse; they
go out when they're requested, period. And as far as my legal
protection is concerned, I don't rely alone on mailed copies of
anything, which is something I'm rather surprised that none of the
attorneys on the list pointed out. If a matter ever reaches the point
where two parties are battling over authorship of a piece, ALL pieces
of evidence are considered--not just copyright certificates, but also
computer records, dated correspondence which references the work, etc.
So yes, I DO mail copies (but only of articles I deem likely to be
"stolen from") to myself, in envelopes that come back to me with a
"seal" from the registration card glued to the flap of the envelope
(there's no way to do this with an empty envelope and then go back
later and try to enclose a document; the
"seal" breaks as soon as you open the envelope). I would never count
on that alone to protect my work--AND DIDN'T INTENT TO SUGGEST
OTHERWISE--but being in a situation where I don't have the luxury or
opportunity to copyright every single piece I submit, I try to
establish extensive proof that I wrote the piece, then carefully
document and file everything that indicates the work came from me.

The discussion seems to have lost its focus of how to protect works of
music, as opposed to written pieces. While I still contend that
having a sealed, dated record of a piece has potential legal value to
me (and two patent attorney friends of mine have said that this
shouldn't be so summarily dismissed as PART--but obviously not all--of
the "trail of evidence" that shows proof of authorship), if I were to
write something as substantial as a piece of music, then I would
certainly go to the trouble to copyright it. The value of this in
proportion to, say, a short column for a magazine or newspaper isn't
at all comparable, and I'm afraid this very important point has been
lost somewhere along the line.

DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @-----.com

-------------------------------------------------------------------------