202 lines
10 KiB
Plaintext
202 lines
10 KiB
Plaintext
Copyright 1991 by S. Kitterman Jr. and the Las Vegas PC Users Group,
|
||
316 Bridger Avenue, Suite 240; Las Vegas, NV 89101. All rights reserved.
|
||
This file was originally printed in the December 1991 issue of The Bytes
|
||
of Las Vegas, a publication of the Las Vegas PC Users Group, and may be
|
||
reprinted only by nonprofit organizations.
|
||
Please give proper credit to the author and The Bytes of Las Vegas.
|
||
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
||
|
||
Copyrights and Computer Software: Part III
|
||
|
||
by Sam Kitterman, Jr., LVPCUG
|
||
|
||
[The purpose of these articles is to give general information
|
||
regarding copyrights and how they pertain to protection of
|
||
software. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor should
|
||
it be relief upon to address a particular situation since the tone
|
||
of these articles is general in nature.]
|
||
|
||
As discussed in last month's article, the Copyright Act
|
||
requires a protectible work to have been "original" to its author.
|
||
Yet, once a work has been created and a copyright registration is
|
||
being sought for that work, who owns the copyright? That is the
|
||
subject of this month's article.
|
||
The Copyright Act distinguishes between three types of
|
||
ownership of a copyrighted work, i.e.,
|
||
|
||
(a) Where the author is the sole creator of the work
|
||
and the work was NOT a work "made for hire", then
|
||
the author is also the owner of the work;
|
||
|
||
(b) Where there were joint authors of the work and
|
||
they had agreed that the work would be jointly-
|
||
owned, then the joint authors are the joint
|
||
owners of the work; and,
|
||
|
||
(c) Where the author(s) were creating the work as a
|
||
work "made for hire", then the author's employer
|
||
will become the owner of the work.
|
||
Perhaps the easiest of these situations to understand is (a),
|
||
i.e., single author is also the owner of the copyright in the work
|
||
if he or she created the work for themselves, not for another
|
||
party. 201(a) of the Copyright Act states this as follows:
|
||
|
||
Copyright in a work protected under this title
|
||
vests initially in the author or authors of
|
||
the work. The authors of a joint work are
|
||
coowners of copyright in the work.
|
||
The second of these situations to understand is that of joint
|
||
authorship - joint ownership. Although the above subsection seems
|
||
to be clear, the Copyright Act requires more than parties to have
|
||
been joint authors in order for joint ownership of the copyright to
|
||
be found.
|
||
101 of the Copyright Act (Definitions) states that a joint
|
||
work
|
||
|
||
is a work prepared by two or more authors
|
||
with the intention that their contributions
|
||
be merged into inseparable or interdependent
|
||
parts of a unitary whole.
|
||
As noted in the House Report on the 1976 Copyright Act, the
|
||
"touchstone" of a joint work
|
||
|
||
is the intention, at the time the writing was
|
||
done, that the parts be absorbed or combined
|
||
into an integrated unit, although the parts
|
||
themselves may be either 'inseparable' (as
|
||
[in] the case of a novel or painting or
|
||
'interdependent' (as in the case of a
|
||
motion picture, opera, or the words and music
|
||
of a song. The test of joint authorship under
|
||
the 1976 Act...[is] 'to constitute joint
|
||
authorship, there must be a common design.'
|
||
In summary, a "joint work" will be found where there are
|
||
multiple authors, they had agreed that the "Work" of their labors
|
||
would be one Work, and that they had further agreed that they
|
||
should be treated as joint authors/owners of that Work.
|
||
The third of these situations of ownership is that of a "work
|
||
made for hire". Once again, the Copyright Act itself gives us
|
||
a general framework for such works. As defined by the Act, a "work
|
||
made for hire" is---
|
||
|
||
(1) A work prepared by an employee within the scope
|
||
of his or her employment; or
|
||
|
||
(2) a work specially ordered or commissioned for
|
||
use as a contribution to a collective work, as a
|
||
part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work,
|
||
as a translation, as a supplementary work, as a
|
||
compilation, as an instructional text, as a test, as
|
||
answer material for a test, or as an atlas, if the
|
||
parties expressly agree in a written instrument
|
||
signed by them that the work shall be considered a
|
||
work made for hire. For the purpose of the
|
||
foregoing sentence, a "supplementary work" is a work
|
||
prepared for publication as a secondary adjunct to
|
||
a work by another author for the purpose of
|
||
introducing, concluding, illustrating, explaining,
|
||
revising, commenting upon, or assisting in the use
|
||
of the other work, such as forewords, afterwords,
|
||
pictorial illustrations, maps, charts, tables,
|
||
editorial notes, musical arrangements, answer
|
||
material for tests, bibliographies, appendixes, and
|
||
indexes, and an "instructional test" is a literary,
|
||
pictorial, or graphic work prepared for publication
|
||
and with the purpose of use in systematic
|
||
instructional activities.
|
||
17 U.S.C. 101.
|
||
Simplified, a "work made for hire" will be found either where
|
||
the work was done as a result of, and related to, your employment
|
||
or under those specific categories set forth above in "2" WHERE the
|
||
parties had specifically agreed in writing that such work would
|
||
constitute a "work made for hire".
|
||
Yet, what is employment? For example, what if you are an
|
||
independent contractor and there is no agreement between you and
|
||
the party who hired you concerning ownership of the copyright? Who
|
||
owns the copyright in the Work?
|
||
This issue was addressed by the United States Supreme Court in
|
||
the case of Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, 490
|
||
U.S.___, 109 S.Ct. 2166 (1989). In that case a non-profit
|
||
organization hired a sculpter to do a sculpture concerning the
|
||
plight of the homeless. There was no language in the contract
|
||
concerning who would own the copyright in the Work. After the work
|
||
had been completed, the parties began arguing about control of the
|
||
piece and subsequently sued each other. Although the local court
|
||
ruled the organization owned the copyright because it was a "work
|
||
made for hire", the Supreme Court upheld the reversal of that
|
||
decision, a decision holding that the independent contractor owned
|
||
the copyright in the work.
|
||
In so ruling, the Supreme Court focused on three issues:
|
||
|
||
(1) The nature of the employment relationship between
|
||
the organization and the sculpter, i.e.,
|
||
what is called "master-servant" in the law;
|
||
|
||
(2) Whether the organization meaninfully exercised
|
||
any control over the sculpter's work; and,
|
||
|
||
(3) Whether the organization treated the sculpter as
|
||
an employee for purposes of benefits and taxes.
|
||
Although much of that decision is beyond the scope of this
|
||
article, what must be remembered when you are doing work for
|
||
someone else is the following:
|
||
(a) Are you an employee?
|
||
(b) Is the work you are doing something that falls
|
||
within the scope of your normal duties for your
|
||
employer?
|
||
(c) Does your employer supervise the work?
|
||
|
||
If the answers to all three of the above questions are yes,
|
||
then the work is most likely a work made for hire and your
|
||
employer, not you, owns rights in that work.
|
||
|
||
(a) Are you an independent contractor?
|
||
(b) Do you have a written agreement wherein ownership
|
||
of the "Work" is given to your employer?
|
||
|
||
If the answers to the above two questions are yes, then your
|
||
employer will be the owner of the work.
|
||
|
||
(a) Are you an independent contractor and there is no
|
||
written agreement concerning copyright ownership of
|
||
the Work?
|
||
(b) How much control does your employer exercise over
|
||
your work?
|
||
(c) How are you treated by your employer concerning
|
||
benefits and taxes?
|
||
|
||
Again, if you are an independent contractor, acting
|
||
mostly on your own with some input from your employer,
|
||
and you receive no benefits/tax considerations from
|
||
the employer, then you will most likely be the owner
|
||
of the copyright in the work, not your employer.
|
||
|
||
On the other hand, if your employer takes a very
|
||
active role in supervising your work, exercises active
|
||
control over your operations, and treats you as an
|
||
inside employee for purposes of benefits and taxes, then
|
||
your employer, not you, will most likely own the
|
||
copyright in the work.
|
||
|
||
This may seem to be complicated. It is! Yet, the impact of
|
||
determining who owns the copyright in a work can be great. For
|
||
example, if you own a graphics arts studio and are hired to create
|
||
a coin design, the question of ownership of the copyright in that
|
||
coin design must be considered. Indeed, it can be a means of
|
||
ensuring that you, as an independent contractor, are paid for the
|
||
work you do for others. So remember, if you're going to create a
|
||
work, make sure you know who is going to own the copyright in it!
|
||
|
||
----------------------------------
|
||
Copyright 1991--S. Kitterman Jr.
|
||
|
||
[Sam Kitterman, a member of the Las Vegas PC Users Group is an attorney
|
||
with the firm of Quirk, Tratos & Rothel; he specializes in issues
|
||
related to computer software. This is the third of a series
|
||
of articles Sam is writing for The Bytes of Las Vegas.
|
||
It was originally published in the December 1991 issue of The Bytes of Las
|
||
Vegas, the official newsletter of the Las Vegas PC Users Group.]
|
||
|
||
|
||
Downloaded From P-80 International Information Systems 304-744-2253
|