référence : http://listes.cru.fr/arc/mascarene/1995-01/msg00024.html
     Chronologie       
     Conversation       

internet et droit d'auteur USA (fwd) BOURASSA ANDRE G



Message de Christian Levac:
>
> Bonne annee a tous!
>
>       J'aimerais vous soumettre ce message que j'ai recu
> dernierement. Je serais curieux d'avoir des commentaires
> a ce sujet. Qu'en pensez-vous?
>
> Merci,
>
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > Date: Wed, 28 Dec 1994 17:05:55 EST
> > From: Ralph Mathisen (LT-ANTIQ) <N330009%UNIVSCVM.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu>
> > To: Multiple recipients of list LT-ANTIQ
> >      <LT-ANTIQ%UNIVSCVM.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu>
> > Subject: Email copyright
> >
> > A general topic that should be of interest to many from another list. RM
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Date: Mon, 26 Dec 1994 15:21:23 -0800
> > From: Larry W Peterson <peterson@brahms.udel.edu>
> > ***********************************************************************
> >                         MUSDISC BULLETIN #7
> > ***********************************************************************
> >
> >                 Some Thoughts on E-Mail and Copyright
> >
> > Since it remains for the courts to determine exactly how e-mail
> > transmissions fit copyright laws, I asked a lawyer to provide some
> > information that may prove useful in the interim.  What follows are his
> > thoughts that he considers helpful:
> >
> > 1. If you wish to protect by copyright information you transmit via
> > e-mail, you should include the word "copyright" and the date of
> > trasmission on it. This will put others on notice that the information is
> > protected (at least in the mind of the author).
> >
> > 2. Also, for the record it may help to keep a printed copy of the message
> > since the law clearly protects any tangible medium of expression from
> > which it can be perceived either directly or with the aid of some
> > instrument for more than a "transitory duration." <ed. see second
> > paragraph of item 4 below. This aspect is probably open to interpretation
> > at the moment.> According to federal law, "In order for an original work
> > of authorship to be entitled to copyright protection, it must be fixed in
> > any TANGIBLE MEDIUM OF EXPRESSION, NOW KNOWN OR LATER DEVELOPED, <ed.
> > caps mine> from which it can be perceived, reproduced or otherwise
> > communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.  A
> > work is 'fixed' in any tangible medium of expression when its embodiment
> > is sufficently permanent or stable to permit it to be perceived,
> > REPRODUCED, <ed. caps mine> or otherwise communicated for a period of more
> > than transitory duration.  The purpose of this broad definition was to
> > overrule the former doctrine that copies, in order to be entitled to
> > copyright protection, must be visually perceptible, that is, capable of
> > being seen and understood by the naked eye."  Observation: Under the
> > Copyright Act of 1976, it makes no difference what the form, manner or
> > medium of fixation may be, whether it is in words, numbers, notes, sounds,
> > pictures, or any other graphic or symbolic indicia, whether embodied in a
> > physical object in written, printed, photographic sculptural, punched,
> > magnetic, or any other stable form, and whether it is capable of
> > perception directly or by means of any machine or device now known or
> > later developed.
> >
> > 3. To be suitable for copyright protection a work must be original in the
> > sense that it is created by the author's own skill and judgment.
> >
> > 4. Under the Copyright Act of 1976, fixation has replaced "publication"
> > as the trigger mechanism which begins statutory protection.  Thus, an
> > unfixed work of authorship, such as an improvisation or an unrecorded
> > choreographic work, performance or broadcast, is not eligible for federal
> > copyright until "fixed."  In view of the definition of "fixation",
> > statutory protection is not afforded to purely evanescent or transient
> > reproductions such as those projected briefly on the screen, shown
> > electronically on a television or cathode-ray tube, or captured
> > momentarily IN THE MEMORY OF A COMPUTER. <ed. caps mine> But the images in
> > an audiovisual game have been held to be "fixed" in view of the fact that
> > the new images generated or created by the video game each time it is
> > played are identical or substantially identical to the earlier ones.
> >
> > A special provision is included in the statute in order to protect live
> > broadcasts that are transmitted to the public in unfixed form, such as
> > news coverage, sporting events or other live performances.  The statutory
> > provision states that a work consisting of sound, images, or both that are
> > being transmitted is "fixed" IF A FIXATION OF THE WORK IS BEING MADE
> > SIMULTANEOUSLY WITH ITS TRANSMISSION. <ed. caps mine> Therefore, if a live
> > radio or television broadcast is simultaneously recorded (taped), it is
> > "fixed" and the statute protects such live broadcasts.  <ed. thus, the
> > suggestion in item 2, at the beginning.>
> >
> > I hope the above information sheds some light on concerns about copyright
> > and its application to e-mail transmissions.
> >
> > Larry Peterson, editor
> > MusDisc News/MusDisc Network
> > University of Delaware
> > 302 831-8134
> > peterson@strauss.udel.edu
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ======================================================================
>
>                                       Christian Levac
>                                       Maitrise Archeologie Medievale
>                                       Auxiliaire DESI/FAS
>
>
>