Comments on: Copyrighted Cease and Desist Letters

By: ElamBend

ElamBend — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

It's a laughable claim, particularly for correspondence. It's only something that a lawyer could come up with.

By: Curtis Gale Weeks

Curtis Gale Weeks — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

My understanding is that anything that is written (original, not mere copy-paste of someone else's writing), including the comment I am now writing, is automatically copyrighted according to law. However, poets, novelists, essayists, and so forth may have a difficult time proving the writing is theirs originally if they do not file a copyright; that's back-up, however, not the copyright itself:

"Under the Convention, copyrights for creative works are automatically in force at creation, without being asserted or declared: an author need not "register" or "apply for" a copyright in countries adhering to the Convention. As soon as a work is "fixed", that is, written or recorded on some physical medium, its author is automatically entitled to all copyrights in the work and to any derivative works, unless and until the author explicitly disclaims them or until the copyright expires."

-- Berne Convention @ Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Literary_and_Artistic_Works

By: Curtis Gale Weeks

Curtis Gale Weeks — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Looks like the UK, at least, has already addressed this issue:

http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading_room/room/view_article.asp?name=../articles/Copyright%20in%20business%20letters.htm

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/02/15/email_copyright_infringement/

By: Dan tdaxp

Dan tdaxp — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

It does seem like a similar case.

The lack of freedom in so much of British society is troubling. From hate speech laws to libel laws to that application of copyright laws, the Crown keeps the mouths of its subjects shut tight.

By: Curtis Gale Weeks

Curtis Gale Weeks — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

"the Crown keeps the mouths of its subjects shut tight"

I've responded to this, and contemplated another aspect of this controversy, on Phatic Communion:

http://www.phaticcommunion.com/archives/2007/10/free_speech_and.php

By: Dan tdaxp

Dan tdaxp — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Courtesy of Legal Ethics Blog [1] is this c&d from Lavely & Singer [1] in Los Angeles, California, which is also copyrighted! So the practice goes back at least to January 6, 2006.

[1] http://legalethicsforum.typepad.com/blog/2007/10/frivolous-copyr.html
[2] http://www.thesmokinggun.com/jamesfrey/freysides/singerfrey1.html