Who owns the copyright on personal correspondence?

[Yuwipi Woman]

Sounds like a best seller!

You didn't want to hear that did you?

I've been reading the Letters of Lord Byron. Surely some highly entertaining reading, but I doubt if story slept with her half-sister, most of the serving staff, and debauched all of southern Europe. (And if she did, I want to party with her!)

 

[story]

Good luck with this person. I've unfortunately had the bad luck to have to deal with someone who meets your description and it certainly isn't much fun

.


Well that's the thing.

I want nothing whatsoever to do with this person, ever.

They've been out of my life for a good long while, and that's great. And now they've popped up to write a fucking memoir about the time when I was in their life.

I was told/warned yesterday that this project is already happening, and to expect some contact in order to get permission for publication of these letters.

I really don't want to get into, or add to, or initiate any kind of Thing with them. I was hoping that I could simply and quietly refuse to comply, and that would be the end. It looks like refusing would add fuel to the fire. But I really really don't want to just roll over and say Yes.

Refuse and have them publish anyway? This would give them added impetus and add all sorts of yummy drama for them.

Or agree and then they can interpret and re-interpret to their hearts desire.


The really amusing thing about it is that if/when this memoir is published, my version of events suddenly becomes far more fascinating than it would otherwise have been

 

[story]

Sounds like a best seller!

You didn't want to hear that did you?

Oh I have no doubt that it will be a fucking blockbuster

 

[rioted]

The boss sent me a disciplinary letter. It was headed "private and confidential". I pinned it on the staff noticeboard.

 

[Yuwipi Woman]

.

The really amusing thing about it is that if/when this memoir is published, my version of events suddenly becomes far more fascinating than it would otherwise have been

Perhaps you should write your own memoir?

It sounds like you're well rid of this person. I hope you've found better people around you since.

 

[story]

Thanks Yuwipi Woman

I have. It's all good.

That's the point - it's all in the past, I want it to stay there.

 

[laptop]

And does this all apply to a trans-Atlantic correspondence?

Yes.

The US is signed up to the Berne Convention, whose "principle of national treatment" demands that it afford residents of other Convention countries (incl. UK) the same protection it serves its own citizens.

The problem, of course, is that those "in principles" get a lot dimmer due to the cost of suing in the US.

On the other hand, if they're in the US there is a US-specific wrinkle.

Pay (from memory) $35 to register your letter with the US Register of Copyrights (a charming woman called Marybeth Peters) - before they publish - and a US court can award you up to $30,000 "statutory damages" at its discretion, without you having to prove actual damages.

http://www.copyright.gov/register/literary.html

Doing so would of course help get a no-win no-fee lawyer to take the case. E2A: It would also be a massive token of seriousness in the letter you then send them:

I have registered my correspondence with the US Register of Copyrights.

I do not grant and shall not grant you any license to use any part of my correspondence.

You should be aware that, if you were to breach my copyright, a US court could award me $30,000 statutory damages and that in the case of flagrant breaches the award could be higher.

CC: emotionally disabled person's publisher

It would also mean that you could recover your legal costs from them, when you win, which you cannot do in respect of unregistered works illegally used in the US.

For the avoidance of misunderstanding in future posts: this whole thing about registration applies to the US and nowhere else that I know of.



E2A again: Registration involves sending copies; I'm still looking to see whether these copies are available to anyone visiting Marybeth in DC.

E2A3: I am in no sense an expert in US law concerning unpublished works

 

[story]

That's great stuff, laptop, and I really appreciate the time and attention you've given to this.

Of course I can only register the letters of which I have copies of, right? Presumably I cannot register any letters that were hand-written and sent off years ago without keeping any copies.

I could register any letters that are lurking in my hard drive, I suppose.

Or could I register a set of correspondence between Year Dot and Year Dash?

I suppose I should contact the charming Marybeth Peters and ask her.

 

[Nemo]

.


Well that's the thing.

I want nothing whatsoever to do with this person, ever.

They've been out of my life for a good long while, and that's great. And now they've popped up to write a fucking memoir about the time when I was in their life.

I was told/warned yesterday that this project is already happening, and to expect some contact in order to get permission for publication of these letters.

I really don't want to get into, or add to, or initiate any kind of Thing with them. I was hoping that I could simply and quietly refuse to comply, and that would be the end. It looks like refusing would add fuel to the fire. But I really really don't want to just roll over and say Yes.

Refuse and have them publish anyway? This would give them added impetus and add all sorts of yummy drama for them.

Or agree and then they can interpret and re-interpret to their hearts desire.


The really amusing thing about it is that if/when this memoir is published, my version of events suddenly becomes far more fascinating than it would otherwise have been

Do you know who's publishing their memoir? Could be you could have your content expunged by writing to the publishers or getting a lawyer to do so for you.

 

[story]

Do you know who's publishing their memoir? Could be you could have your content expunged by writing to the publishers or getting a lawyer to do so for you.

No, I don't....

I presume it's their usual publisher....

Could I be expunged entirely....? That's an interesting approach. They've denied my existence in interviews in the past, so...







Oh this whole wretched issue has given me a headache.

 

[laptop]

Of course I can only register the letters of which I have copies of, right? Presumably I cannot register any letters that were hand-written and sent off years ago without keeping any copies.

I'm afraid I don't know the answer to that. I'm about a year overdue writing a guide for non-USians to US registration

Have a poke around that link and tell us what you find

I could register any letters that are lurking in my hard drive, I suppose.

Definitely. And the thing about the threat to the publisher is, they don't necessarily know which you've registered, because...

Or could I register a set of correspondence between Year Dot and Year Dash?

I believe so - or at least "correspondence in the year Dash", "...the year Dash+1" etc. Last time I tried finding the form to do this, I failed.

I suppose I should contact the charming Marybeth Peters and ask her.

Probably.

If I run into her at my EU meeting next week I'll ask for you

 

[story]

Bless you, laptop

 

[cybertect]

The US is signed up to the Berne Convention, whose "principle of national treatment" demands that it afford residents of other Convention countries (incl. UK) the same protection it serves its own citizens.

As a, possibly relevant, aside, while it's signed up to the Berne Convention, the US doesn't recognise Article 6bis which confers "moral rights" upon the author, which protect him or her against the work being mutilated or distorted in a way that would prejudice the author's reputation. In this respect, you'd be in a better position in Europe.

http://www.rbs2.com/moral.htm

 

[laptop]

As a, possibly relevant, aside, while it's signed up to the Berne Convention, the US doesn't recognise Article 6bis which confers "moral rights" upon the author, which protect him or her against the work being mutilated or distorted in a way that would prejudice the author's reputation. In this respect, you'd be in a better position in Europe.

http://www.rbs2.com/moral.htm

Indeed.


I didn't say it complied with Berne

 

[mhendo]

Technically speaking you might be able to do something if they're publishing the full letters verbatim, without any other justification. If they're quoting from them for some purpose that would probably end up as fair use, and there are other things they could do. Revealing the informational contents is not breach of copyright. It's a bit hard to say.

In terms of whether or not the information is made public, FridgeMagnet's post here gets right to the heart of the matter.

Even if you assert copyright over the letter, and you express a willingness to take the issue to court, this still does not prevent the person in possession of the letter from reporting the substance of its contents.

For example, if your letter contains a long paragraph about how you used to get high and spend the night with hookers on a regular basis, they might not be able to quote the whole letter, but they would still be able to report on your drug-fuelled hooker nights. They would also be able to quote portions of the letter as evidence. How much they can quote would, as FridgeMagnet suggests, fall under the Fair Use section of Title 17 in the United States.

There are four considerations taken into account when evaluating the question of Fair use:

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

There are no hard and fast rules for this; each case needs to be evaluated individually. But if they summarized the substance of your letter, and used a few quotations to support their account, it's very unlikely that they would be found in violation of fair use rules.

ETA:

Here is an excellent summary of Fair Use rules in the United States. Particularly interesting for your own case are the examples cited here.

 

[laptop]

Even if you assert copyright over the letter, and you express a willingness to take the issue to court, this still does not prevent the person in possession of the letter from reporting the substance of its contents.

True, and the rest is a decent summary of "fair use" (=~ "fair dealing" in British law).

But book publishers tend to be pretty wary.

Which can be a pain if you're writing a book and have to clear every last line quoted) with its author (or other owner).

And even more of a pain if you're writing a book and the publisher insists that you agree to pay the costs of any resulting court case as a condition of publishing

 

[story]

Lots of good stuff here.... will mull it over carefully.

Many thanks to all.

 

[mhendo]

But book publishers tend to be pretty wary.

Which can be a pain if you're writing a book and have to clear every last line quoted) with its author (or other owner).

Publishers' lawyers do tend to err on the side of caution with this stuff, but i've never heard of one that asks the author to clear every single quotation.

I've been the primary research assistant on three US-published books now, and in two of those cases my research involved considerable work in unpublished letters and manuscript collections, and in all three cases i also did research in secondary sources such as books and scholarly articles. We were never asked to confirm every single quote; as long as it was clear to the publisher that the quotations were relevant to the overall argument or story of the book, and that they constituted a relatively small portion of the whole source, there were no problems. The books were published by academic presses; it could be that trade press publishers are more anal about this stuff.

The area in which i've found publishers to be much more picky, well beyond necessity, is in reproducing images such as photographs or artwork. the worst publishers require permissions or waivers for all artwork, even stuff that is well out of copyright. For example, some will require permissions from a holding library for a work produced in the 19th century, even though such a work is well out of copyright and can be legally reproduced at will. It's really ridiculous, because it undermines the whole purpose of the copyright law.

And even more of a pain if you're writing a book and the publisher insists that you agree to pay the costs of any resulting court case as a condition of publishing

I believe that's not an unusual clause in book contracts nowadays. It certainly means that you have to be careful.

 

[wangstrel]

Isn't this more an invasion of privacy issue? Don't know the law in the US but in the UK you could get an injunction to prevent the publication of private information (about you/your relationships etc) contained in the letter.

 

[bigbry]

They were sent with no intention for them ever to be seen by any other person.

It was private correspondence.

Same goes for the letters I received from that person.

You should have marked it 'Strictly Private' or something similar.