No, I don’t think it is significant. This is an international forum, and this particular question is specific to the US, so many people are simply not in a position to comment. It is interesting to read a thread like this, but it isn’t relevant to the copyright position elsewhere.
Unless the law has changed since I last paid any attention to this area (perfectly possible), there is no obligation on a UK author to register copyright in the UK, because copyright is an automatic right; the same situation exists in most other countries. We should add a copyright notice to our work, but the copyright is still ours even if we don’t. Once upon a time (before 1911, I think), it was necessary to register UK literary works with the Stationer’s Office, or some such government body, but that has not been the case for nearly a century. I know that the US is different, and that some form of official registration is necessary for subsequent legal action, but here in the UK, it is irrelevant. Yes, you can lodge copies with a bank or solicitor, or post a copy (sealed and witnessed) by recorded delivery to prove date of creation, or register your work with a commercial enterprise designed to profit from the paranoia of wannabe authors – but why? Why would a proper publisher or agent steal your work? Any subsequent publicity would be damaging to them, and potentially very useful (commercially) to you. All you need to do is hang onto your rejection letters to prove when they had your version in their sticky fingers. And why would you send your work to a “not proper” publisher or agent?
Straight word-for-word plagiarism aside, I imagine that the hardest part of copyright defence lies not in proving whose version was produced first, but in proving that your work was truly original in the first place and that nobody else could have produced it (inspired or influenced by the same books or culture). In the UK, Jacqi’s “friend-of-a-friend” problem would not be solved by registering copyright with an external body, because that in itself is not evidence of original ownership; there is no obligation on any party to register, so you would still have to prove that your version came first, and that the friend-of-a-friend’s version constitutes a later copyright infringement.
(And, yes, I have been “professionally published”. Although I can’t see why anyone should think that relevant in a topic related to legal process.)
I find that a highly relevant revelation. Your word has more value in the context of value to experience than mine. Should some less obnoxious person than I post a comment in disagreement or counter to the statements of you, or druid or any other acknowledged “paid for their work” member of the scriverati they would need to prove their right to be considered legitimate. Meaning when it comes to making money with the pen, don’t listen to the likes of me. Heck, I don’t listen to me very much, why should anyone else.
Druid’s point is well made if somewhat one sided. Folks who use scrivener to stay fed are likely to find the antics of a few of us who do not eat based on our ability to write a tad frustrating. Particularly those who use tools like RSS to optimize their workflow.
I am mindful, Jaysen, of the many times you have helped others work around tech problems, like the recent OO import problem. Have your fun and don’t mind my occasionally dour pronouncements. Druids get grouchy in the season when trees lose their leaves.
A dangerous assumption, surely? There is published writing, and there is published writing… and the act of publication neither confers wisdom nor definitively proves competence. The fact that I have published stuff does not validate my views on copyright law (which stands outside the opinion or experience of any individual), and my very modest background in the backwaters of non-fiction does not give me credibility in other fields of writing. A lot of publishing success is down to luck and timing, if you ask me, and serendipity can’t make somebody right or shelter them from disagreement. Even best-selling authors are not immune from being mad or mistaken, and the “great unpublished” can be capable of insight and good judgment.
Which is a long-winded way of saying that I don’t believe “trial by publication” to be a proof of legitimacy of opinion, nor do I believe such proof to be necessary in the first place. Opinion is free, and we are all capable of judging it for ourselves. Over time, we learn whose opinion to trust – and as you know, Jaysen, your generosity with time/expertise does not go unremarked in this respect! Don’t do yourself down so much.
The situation is likewise, here. It has not been necessary to actively seek out official copyright status for your work since 1989. Yes, it took this backwards, corporation driven country nearly 100 years to see the light. The only use for services like this is to help enforce a copyright, should it ever come to litigation. In the US, you can officially register after infringement, with a slight reduction to legal flexibility. That is the only service things such as these could facilitate.
The only registration I ever do is with Creative Commons, and that is for the purpose of reducing my automatic protections. For most things I use a licence which lets others use the work non-commercially and with attribution in whatever way they please. For other things I use the Founders’ Copyright, which fully protects the work, but only for 14–28 years, after which it goes into the public domain. I see absolutely no reason for the current copyright laws in this country and their centuries-long protections. All that does is restrict creativity and promote an environment of creative paranoia, reducing the societal palette for decade after decade, even long after the original artist is dead, and maybe even their children too.
Copyright is a great thing, but it’s been turned into a monster by industrial interests.
It’s true that here in the US, we automatically have property rights in the works we create. Official copyright registration just gives us and our heirs the right to beat the daylights out of an infringer in federal court, for at least the length of our lives plus another 75 years. Otherwise, an author has to sue under state laws for “conversion.” So, copyright registration just makes the whole enforcement process a lot easier, and it creates more of a deterrence against infringement (because federal court can be a scarily expensive place).
My intention was to suggest a relation more along the lines of the following: given my “proof” of expertise folks are more likely to trust my suggestions regarding compute systems than the advice of say vic-k or Molly’s mum. Not because the are wrong in a given instance, but because I have a commercial and anecdotal evidence of my abilities.
Much in the same way, if I were to seek advice on writing and/or publishing, much as Molly’s mum has, I would give Druid, Ahab, Lord Lightening, you, and other published authors advice more weight than say vic-k’s advice. This is not a view to “correct or incorrect” as much as a view of “more likely correct or more likely incorrect”.
I do agree with you that everyone has an opportunity to be wrong. Some of us just seem to avail ourselves of the opportunity more often than others.
Gotta say I agree, though I’d like to survive more than 28 years. I do think there’s little point in passing along copyrights to inheritors. A lot of inheritance is a crock, anyway. Look at the Jackson family, squabbling over Michael’s millions. Better to put the money into schools, especially in upstate New York.
The amount of sanctimonious condescension you can impress in one word is just breathtaking Linda. I shall certainly look out for all your future posts - such laconic superiority deserves a loyal following.
Careful there tiger!! Consider this: Matador (1986) Almodóvar’s subsequent films deepened his exploration of sexual desire and the sometimes brutal laws governing it. Matador is a dark, complex story that centers on the relationship between a former bullfighter and a murderous female lawyer, both of whom can only experience sexual fulfillment in conjunction with killing. The film offered up desire as a bridge between sexual attraction and death.
She stabs her victims, at the peak of orgasm!! Hers!!
Dont say y haven`t been warned!! Just be careful where you tread, Romeo.
Fluff
“Come into my parlour”, said the Black Widow size=50[/size], to the willy waggling fly.
Chatting up, strange women on line can be as dangerous as chatting`em up down the pub.
Behave yourself, Lothario.
That! We know full well brave Celt! But when willy rules the noodle, good men flounder on the rocks of lust. The more wicked the woman, the more fatal the attraction!!
What’s with all this “willy rules the noodle” nonsense? And as for the “rocks of lust”, I’ve not congered off to that plaice since my dab at being a monk did flounder without a ray of tope… No, I can’t go on. This is no red herring, just a bit of a cod piece. Nothing fishy about it at all!
(It’s okay Vic… you can stop whaling now.)
Thats exactly what I was talking about when I said,"Priceless". Pure drivel...but priceless :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: Get yself sat down, and get the bottle out. I have
Shhhh Dont make a noise. Little Lindys gone bobos youtube.com/watch?v=lG-PpAZV … re=related
Vic
The only use for services like this is to help enforce a copyright, should it ever come to litigation. In the US, you can officially register after infringement, with a slight reduction to legal flexibility. That is the only service things such as these could facilitate.
Consider this: 
