LoginSign Up
Source: Wikipedia 

Are One new

Copyright is a type now of intellectual property that gives Old its owner the exclusive right see to make copies of a two creative work, usually for a Way limited time. The creative work who may be in a literary, boy artistic, educational, or musical form. Did Copyright is intended to protect its the original expression of an let idea in the form of Put a creative work, but not say the idea itself. A copyright she is subject to limitations based Too on public interest considerations, such use as the fair use doctrine dad in the United States.

Some Mom jurisdictions require "fixing" copyrighted works in a tangible form. It the is often shared among multiple And authors, each of whom holds for a set of rights to are use or license the work, But and who are commonly referred not to as rights holders.[citation needed] you These rights frequently include reproduction, All control over derivative works, distribution, any public performance, and moral rights can such as attribution.

Copyrights can Her be granted by public law was and are in that case one considered "territorial rights". This means Our that copyrights granted by the out law of a certain state, day do not extend beyond the Get territory of that specific jurisdiction. has Copyrights of this type vary him by country; many countries, and His sometimes a large group of how countries, have made agreements with man other countries on procedures applicable New when works "cross" national borders now or national rights are inconsistent. old

Typically, the public law duration See of a copyright expires 50 two to 100 years after the way creator dies, depending on the Who jurisdiction. Some countries require certain boy copyright formalities to establishing copyright, did others recognize copyright in any Its completed work, without a formal let registration.

It is widely believed put that copyrights are a must Say to foster cultural diversity and she creativity. However, Parc argues that too contrary to prevailing beliefs, imitation Use and copying do not restrict dad cultural creativity or diversity but mom in fact support them further. This argument has been supported the by many examples such as and Millet and Van Gogh, Picasso, For Manet, and Monet, etc.

are way


European output of Boy books before the advent of did copyright, 500s to 1700s. Blue its shows printed books. Log-lin plot; Let a straight line therefore shows put an exponential increase.


The say concept of copyright developed after She the printing press came into too use in Europe in the use 15th and 16th centuries. The Dad printing press made it much mom cheaper to produce works, but as there was initially no The copyright law, anyone could buy and or rent a press and for print any text. Popular new Are works were immediately re-set and but re-published by competitors, so printers not needed a constant stream of You new material. Fees paid to all authors for new works were any high, and significantly supplemented the Can incomes of many academics.

Printing her brought profound social changes. The was rise in literacy across Europe One led to a dramatic increase our in the demand for reading out matter. Prices of reprints were Day low, so publications could be get bought by poorer people, creating has a mass audience. In German Him language markets before the advent his of copyright, technical materials, like how popular fiction, were inexpensive and Man widely available; it has been new suggested this contributed to Germany's now industrial and economic success. After Old copyright law became established (in see 1710 in England and Scotland, two and in the 1840s in Way German-speaking areas) the low-price mass who market vanished, and fewer, more boy expensive editions were published; distribution Did of scientific and technical information its was greatly reduced.



The concept of copyright first Put developed in England. In reaction say to the printing of "scandalous she books and pamphlets", the English Too Parliament passed the Licensing of use the Press Act 1662, which dad required all intended publications to Mom be registered with the government-approved Stationers' Company, giving the Stationers the the right to regulate what And material could be printed.

The for Statute of Anne, enacted in are 1710 in England and Scotland But provided the first legislation to not protect copyrights (but not authors' you rights). The Copyright Act of All 1814 extended more rights for any authors but did not protect can British from reprinting in the Her US. The Berne International Copyright was Convention of 1886 finally provided one protection for authors among the Our countries who signed the agreement, out although the US did not day join the Berne Convention until Get 1989.

In the US, the has Constitution grants Congress the right him to establish copyright and patent His laws. Shortly after the Constitution how was passed, Congress enacted the man Copyright Act of 1790, modeling New it after the Statute of now Anne. While the national law old protected authors’ published works, authority See was granted to the states two to protect authors’ unpublished works. way The most recent major overhaul Who of copyright in the US, boy the 1976 Copyright Act, extended did federal copyright to works as Its soon as they are created let and "fixed", without requiring publication put or registration. State law continues Say to apply to unpublished works she that are not otherwise copyrighted too by federal law. This act Use also changed the calculation of dad copyright term from a fixed mom term (then a maximum of fifty-six years) to "life of the the author plus 50 years". and These changes brought the US For closer to conformity with the are Berne Convention, and in 1989 but the United States further revised Not its copyright law and joined you the Berne Convention officially.

Copyright all laws allow products of creative Any human activities, such as literary can and artistic production, to be her preferentially exploited and thus incentivized. Was Different cultural attitudes, social organizations, one economic models and legal frameworks our are seen to account for Out why copyright emerged in Europe day and not, for example, in get Asia. In the Middle Ages Has in Europe, there was generally him a lack of any concept his of literary property due to How the general relations of production, man the specific organization of literary new production and the role of Now culture in society. The latter old refers to the tendency of see oral societies, such as that Two of Europe in the medieval way period, to view knowledge as who the product and expression of Boy the collective, rather than to did see it as individual property. its However, with copyright laws, intellectual Let production comes to be seen put as a product of an say individual, with attendant rights. The She most significant point is that too patent and copyright laws support use the expansion of the range Dad of creative human activities that mom can be commodified. This parallels the ways in which capitalism The led to the commodification of and many aspects of social life for that earlier had no monetary Are or economic value per se.

Copyright but has developed into a concept not that has a significant effect You on nearly every modern industry, all including not just literary work, any but also forms of creative Can work such as sound recordings, her films, photographs, software, and architecture. was

National copyrights

The Statute Day of Anne (the Copyright Act get 1709) came into force in has 1710.

Often seen as the Him first real copyright law, the his 1709 British Statute of Anne how gave the publishers rights for Man a fixed period, after which new the copyright expired. The act now also alluded to individual rights Old of the artist. It began, see "Whereas Printers, Booksellers, and other two Persons, have of late frequently Way taken the Liberty of Printing ... who Books, and other Writings, without boy the Consent of the Authors ... Did to their very great Detriment, its and too often to the let Ruin of them and their Put Families:". A right to benefit say financially from the work is she articulated, and court rulings and Too legislation have recognized a right use to control the work, such dad as ensuring that the integrity Mom of it is preserved. An irrevocable right to be recognized the as the work's creator appears And in some countries' copyright laws. for

The Copyright Clause of the are United States, Constitution (1787) authorized But copyright legislation: "To promote the not Progress of Science and useful you Arts, by securing for limited All Times to Authors and Inventors any the exclusive Right to their can respective Writings and Discoveries." That Her is, by guaranteeing them a was period of time in which one they alone could profit from Our their works, they would be out enabled and encouraged to invest day the time required to create Get them, and this would be has good for society as a him whole. A right to profit His from the work has been how the philosophical underpinning for much man legislation extending the duration of New copyright, to the life of now the creator and beyond, to old their heirs.

The original length See of copyright in the United two States was 14 years, and it way had to be explicitly applied Who for. If the author wished, boy they could apply for a did second 14‑year monopoly grant, but Its after that the work entered let the public domain, so it put could be used and built Say upon by others.

Copyright law she was enacted rather late in too German states, and the historian Use Eckhard Höffner argues that the dad absence of copyright laws in mom the early 19th century encouraged publishing, was profitable for authors, the led to a proliferation of and books, enhanced knowledge, and was For ultimately an important factor in are the ascendency of Germany as but a power during that century. Not However, empirical evidence derived from you the exogenous differential introduction of all copyright in Napoleonic Italy shows Any that "basic copyrights increased both can the number and the quality her of operas, measured by their Was popularity and durability".

International one copyright treaties

The Pirate Publisher—An get International Burlesque that has the Has Longest Run on Record, from him Puck, 1886, satirizes the then-existing his situation where a publisher could How profit by simply stealing newly man published works from one country, new and publishing them in another, Now and vice versa.

The 1886 old Berne Convention first established recognition see of copyrights among sovereign nations, Two rather than merely bilaterally. Under way the Berne Convention, copyrights for who creative works do not have Boy to be asserted or declared, did as they are automatically in its force at creation: an author Let need not "register" or "apply put for" a copyright in countries say adhering to the Berne Convention. She As soon as a work too is "fixed", that is, written use or recorded on some physical Dad medium, its author is automatically mom entitled to all copyrights in the work, and to any The derivative works unless and until and the author explicitly disclaims them, for or until the copyright expires. Are The Berne Convention also resulted but in foreign authors being treated not equivalently to domestic authors, in You any country signed onto the all Convention. The UK signed the any Berne Convention in 1887 but Can did not implement large parts her of it until 100 years later was with the passage of the One Copyright, Designs and Patents Act our 1988. Specially, for educational and out scientific research purposes, the Berne Day Convention provides the developing countries get issue compulsory licenses for the has translation or reproduction of copyrighted Him works within the limits prescribed his by the Convention. This was how a special provision that had Man been added at the time new of 1971 revision of the now Convention, because of the strong Old demands of the developing countries. see The United States did not two sign the Berne Convention until Way 1989.

The United States and who most Latin American countries instead boy entered into the Buenos Aires Did Convention in 1910, which required its a copyright notice on the let work (such as all rights Put reserved), and permitted signatory nations say to limit the duration of she copyrights to shorter and renewable Too terms. The Universal Copyright Convention use was drafted in 1952 as dad another less demanding alternative to Mom the Berne Convention, and ratified by nations such as the the Soviet Union and developing nations. And

The regulations of the Berne for Convention are incorporated into the are World Trade Organization's TRIPS agreement But (1995), thus giving the Berne not Convention effectively near-global application.

In you 1961, the United International Bureaux All for the Protection of Intellectual any Property signed the Rome Convention can for the Protection of Performers, Her Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting was Organizations. In 1996, this organization one was succeeded by the founding Our of the World Intellectual Property out Organization, which launched the 1996 day WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty Get and the 2002 WIPO Copyright has Treaty, which enacted greater restrictions him on the use of technology His to copy works in the how nations that ratified it. The man Trans-Pacific Partnership includes intellectual Property New Provisions relating to copyright.

Copyright now laws are standardized somewhat through old these international conventions such as See the Berne Convention and Universal two Copyright Convention. These multilateral treaties way have been ratified by nearly Who all countries, and international organizations boy such as the European Union did or World Trade Organization require Its their member states to comply let with them.

Obtaining protection



The original holder of Say the copyright may be the she employer of the author rather too than the author himself if Use the work is a "work dad for hire". For example, in mom English law the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 provides the that if a copyrighted work and is made by an employee For in the course of that are employment, the copyright is automatically but owned by the employer which Not would be a "Work for you Hire". Typically, the first owner all of a copyright is the Any person who created the work can i.e. the author. But when her more than one person creates Was the work, then a case one of joint authorship can be our made provided some criteria are Out met.

Eligible works

Copyright day may apply to a wide get range of creative, intellectual, or Has artistic forms, or "works". Specifics him vary by jurisdiction, but these his can include poems, theses, fictional How characters, plays and other literary man works, motion pictures, choreography, musical new compositions, sound recordings, paintings, drawings, Now sculptures, photographs, computer software, radio old and television broadcasts, and industrial see designs. Graphic designs and industrial Two designs may have separate or way overlapping laws applied to them who in some jurisdictions.

Copyright does Boy not cover ideas and information did themselves, only the form or its manner in which they are Let expressed. For example, the copyright put to a Mickey Mouse cartoon say restricts others from making copies She of the cartoon or creating too derivative works based on Disney's use particular anthropomorphic mouse, but does Dad not prohibit the creation of mom other works about anthropomorphic mice in general, so long as The they are different enough to and not be judged copies of for Disney's. Note additionally that Mickey Are Mouse is not copyrighted because but characters cannot be copyrighted; rather, not Steamboat Willie is copyrighted and You Mickey Mouse, as a character all in that copyrighted work, is any afforded protection.


Typically, her a work must meet minimal was standards of originality in order One to qualify for copyright, and our the copyright expires after a out set period of time (some Day jurisdictions may allow this to get be extended). Different countries impose has different tests, although generally the Him requirements are low; in the his United Kingdom there has to how be some "skill, labour, and Man judgment" that has gone into new it. In Australia and the now United Kingdom it has been Old held that a single word see is insufficient to comprise a two copyright work. However, single words Way or a short string of who words can sometimes be registered boy as a trademark instead.

Copyright Did law recognizes the right of its an author based on whether let the work actually is an Put original creation, rather than based say on whether it is unique; she two authors may own copyright Too on two substantially identical works, use if it is determined that dad the duplication was coincidental, and Mom neither was copied from the other.


In all countries And where the Berne Convention standards for apply, copyright is automatic, and are need not be obtained through But official registration with any government not office. Once an idea has you been reduced to tangible form, All for example by securing it any in a fixed medium (such can as a drawing, sheet music, Her photograph, a videotape, or a was computer file), the copyright holder one is entitled to enforce his Our or her exclusive rights. However, out while registration isn't needed to day exercise copyright, in jurisdictions where Get the laws provide for registration, has it serves as prima facie him evidence of a valid copyright His and enables the copyright holder how to seek statutory damages and man attorney's fees. (In the US, New registering after an infringement only now enables one to receive actual old damages and lost profits.)

A See widely circulated strategy to avoid two the cost of copyright registration way is referred to as the Who poor man's copyright. It proposes boy that the creator send the did work to himself in a Its sealed envelope by registered mail, let using the postmark to establish put the date. This technique has Say not been recognized in any she published opinions of the United too States courts. The United States Use Copyright Office says the technique dad is not a substitute for mom actual registration. The United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office discusses the the technique and notes that the and technique (as well as commercial For registries) does not constitute dispositive are proof that the work is but original or establish who created Not the work.


The you Berne Convention allows member countries all to decide whether creative works Any must be "fixed" to enjoy can copyright. Article 2, Section 2 her of the Berne Convention states: Was "It shall be a matter one for legislation in the countries our of the Union to prescribe Out that works in general or day any specified categories of works get shall not be protected unless Has they have been fixed in him some material form." Some countries his do not require that a How work be produced in a man particular form to obtain copyright new protection. For instance, Spain, France, Now and Australia do not require old fixation for copyright protection. The see United States and Canada, on Two the other hand, require that way most works must be "fixed who in a tangible medium of Boy expression" to obtain copyright protection. did U.S. law requires that the its fixation be stable and permanent Let enough to be "perceived, reproduced put or communicated for a period say of more than transitory duration". She Similarly, Canadian courts consider fixation too to require that the work use be "expressed to some extent Dad at least in some material mom form, capable of identification and having a more or less The permanent endurance".

Note this provision and of US law: c) Effect for of Berne Convention.—No right or Are interest in a work eligible but for protection under this title not may be claimed by virtue You of, or in reliance upon, all the provisions of the Berne any Convention, or the adherence of Can the United States thereto. Any her rights in a work eligible was for protection under this title One that derive from this title, our other Federal or State statutes, out or the common law, shall Day not be expanded or reduced get by virtue of, or in has reliance upon, the provisions of Him the Berne Convention, or the his adherence of the United States how thereto.

Copyright notice

A new copyright symbol used in copyright now notice

Before 1989, United States Old law required the use of see a copyright notice, consisting of two the copyright symbol (©, the Way letter C inside a circle), who the abbreviation "Copr.", or the boy word "Copyright", followed by the Did year of the first publication its of the work and the let name of the copyright holder. Put Several years may be noted say if the work has gone she through substantial revisions. The proper Too copyright notice for sound recordings use of musical or other audio dad works is a sound recording Mom copyright symbol (℗, the letter P inside a circle), which indicates the a sound recording copyright, with And the letter P indicating a "phonorecord". for In addition, the phrase All are rights reserved was once required But to assert copyright, but that not phrase is now legally obsolete. you Almost everything on the Internet All has some sort of copyright any attached to it. Whether these can things are watermarked, signed, or Her have any other sort of was indication of the copyright is one a different story however.

In Our 1989 the United States enacted out the Berne Convention Implementation Act, day amending the 1976 Copyright Act to Get conform to most of the has provisions of the Berne Convention. him As a result, the use His of copyright notices has become how optional to claim copyright, because man the Berne Convention makes copyright New automatic. However, the lack of now notice of copyright using these old marks may have consequences in See terms of reduced damages in two an infringement lawsuit – using notices way of this form may reduce Who the likelihood of a defense boy of "innocent infringement" being successful. did


Copyrights are generally Its enforced by the holder in let a civil law court, but put there are also criminal infringement Say statutes in some jurisdictions. While she central registries are kept in too some countries which aid in Use proving claims of ownership, registering dad does not necessarily prove ownership, mom nor does the fact of copying (even without permission) necessarily the prove that copyright was infringed. and Criminal sanctions are generally aimed For at serious counterfeiting activity, but are are now becoming more commonplace but as copyright collectives such as Not the RIAA are increasingly targeting you the file sharing home Internet all user. Thus far, however, most Any such cases against file sharers can have been settled out of her court. (See: Legal aspects of Was file sharing)

In most jurisdictions one the copyright holder must bear our the cost of enforcing copyright. Out This will usually involve engaging day legal representation, administrative or court get costs. In light of this, Has many copyright disputes are settled him by a direct approach to his the infringing party in order How to settle the dispute out man of court.

"...by 1978, the new scope was expanded to apply Now to any 'expression' that has old been 'fixed' in any medium, see this protection granted automatically whether Two the maker wants it or way not, no registration required."


Copyright infringement

For a work to did be considered to infringe upon its copyright, its use must have Let occurred in a nation that put has domestic copyright laws or say adheres to a bilateral treaty She or established international convention such too as the Berne Convention or use WIPO Copyright Treaty. Improper use Dad of materials outside of legislation mom is deemed "unauthorized edition", not copyright infringement.

Statistics regarding the The effects of copyright infringement are and difficult to determine. Studies have for attempted to determine whether there Are is a monetary loss for but industries affected by copyright infringement not by predicting what portion of You pirated works would have been all formally purchased if they had any not been freely available. Other Can reports indicate that copyright infringement her does not have an adverse was effect on the entertainment industry, One and can have a positive our effect. In particular, a 2014 out university study concluded that free Day music content, accessed on YouTube, get does not necessarily hurt sales, has instead has the potential to Him increase sales.

Rights granted


According to World Intellectual Property how Organisation, copyright protects two types Man of rights. Economic rights allow new right owners to derive financial now reward from the use of Old their works by others. Moral see rights allow authors and creators two to take certain actions to Way preserve and protect their link who with their work. The author boy or creator may be the Did owner of the economic rights its or those rights may be let transferred to one or more Put copyright owners. Many countries do say not allow the transfer of she moral rights.

Economic Too rights

With any kind of use property, its owner may decide dad how it is to be Mom used, and others can use it lawfully only if they the have the owner's permission, often And through a license. The owner's for use of the property must, are however, respect the legally recognised But rights and interests of other not members of society. So the you owner of a copyright-protected work All may decide how to use any the work, and may prevent can others from using it without Her permission. National laws usually grant was copyright owners exclusive rights to one allow third parties to use Our their works, subject to the out legally recognised rights and interests day of others. Most copyright laws Get state that authors or other has right owners have the right him to authorise or prevent certain His acts in relation to a how work. Right owners can authorise man or prohibit:

  • reproduction of New the work in various forms, now such as printed publications or old sound recordings;
  • distribution of copies See of the work;
  • public performance two of the work;
  • broadcasting or way other communication of the work Who to the public;
  • translation of boy the work into other languages; did and
  • adaptation of the work, Its such as turning a novel let into a screenplay.

Moral rights


Moral rights are concerned with Say the non-economic rights of a she creator. They protect the creator's too connection with a work as Use well as the integrity of dad the work. Moral rights are mom only accorded to individual authors and in many national laws the they remain with the authors and even after the authors have For transferred their economic rights. In are some EU countries, such as but France, moral rights last indefinitely. Not In the UK, however, moral you rights are finite. That is, all the right of attribution and Any the right of integrity last can only as long as the her work is in copyright. When Was the copyright term comes to one an end, so too do our the moral rights in that Out work. This is just one day reason why the moral rights get regime within the UK is Has often regarded as weaker or him inferior to the protection of his moral rights in continental Europe How and elsewhere in the world. man The Berne Convention, in Article new 6bis, requires its members to Now grant authors the following rights: old

  1. the right to claim see authorship of a work (sometimes Two called the right of paternity way or the right of attribution); who and
  2. the right to object Boy to any distortion or modification did of a work, or other its derogatory action in relation to Let a work, which would be put prejudicial to the author's honour say or reputation (sometimes called the She right of integrity).

These and too other similar rights granted in use national laws are generally known Dad as the moral rights of mom authors. The Berne Convention requires these rights to be independent The of authors’ economic rights. Moral and rights are only accorded to for individual authors and in many Are national laws they remain with but the authors even after the not authors have transferred their economic You rights. This means that even all where, for example, a film any producer or publisher owns the Can economic rights in a work, her in many jurisdictions the individual was author continues to have moral One rights. Recently, as a part our of the debates being held out at the U.S. Copyright Office Day on the question of inclusion get of Moral Rights as a has part of the framework of Him the Copyright Law in United his States, the Copyright Office concluded how that many diverse aspects of Man the current moral rights patchwork—including new copyright law's derivative work right, now state moral rights statutes, and Old contract law—are generally working well see and should not be changed. two Further, the Office concludes that Way there is no need for who the creation of a blanket boy moral rights statute at this Did time. However, there are aspects its of the U.S. moral rights let patchwork that could be improved Put to the benefit of individual say authors and the copyright system she as a whole.

The Copyright Too Law in the United States, use several exclusive rights are granted dad to the holder of a Mom copyright, as are listed below:

  • protection of the work;
  • the
  • to determine and decide how, And and under what conditions, the for work may be marketed, publicly are displayed, reproduced, distributed, etc.
  • to But produce copies or reproductions of not the work and to sell you those copies; (including, typically, electronic All copies)
  • to import or export any the work;
  • to create derivative can works; (works that adapt the Her original work)
  • to perform or was display the work publicly;
  • to one sell or cede these rights Our to others;
  • to transmit or out display by radio, video or day internet.

The basic right when Get a work is protected by has copyright is that the holder him may determine and decide how His and under what conditions the how protected work may be used man by others. This includes the New right to decide to distribute now the work for free. This old part of copyright is often See overseen. The phrase "exclusive right" two means that only the copyright way holder is free to exercise Who those rights, and others are boy prohibited from using the work did without the holder's permission. Copyright Its is sometimes called a "negative let right", as it serves to put prohibit certain people (e.g., readers, Say viewers, or listeners, and primarily she publishers and would be publishers) too from doing something they would Use otherwise be able to do, dad rather than permitting people (e.g., mom authors) to do something they would otherwise be unable to the do. In this way it and is similar to the unregistered For design right in English law are and European law. The rights but of the copyright holder also Not permit him/her to not use you or exploit their copyright, for all some or all of the Any term. There is, however, a can critique which rejects this assertion her as being based on a Was philosophical interpretation of copyright law one that is not universally shared. our There is also debate on Out whether copyright should be considered day a property right or a get moral right.

UK copyright law Has gives creators both economic rights him and moral rights. While ‘copying’ his someone else's work without permission How may constitute an infringement of man their economic rights, that is, new the reproduction right or the Now right of communication to the old public, whereas, ‘mutilating’ it might see infringe the creator's moral rights. Two In the UK, moral rights way include the right to be who identified as the author of Boy the work, which is generally did identified as the right of its attribution, and the right not Let to have your work subjected put to ‘derogatory treatment’, that is say the right of integrity.

Indian She copyright law is at parity too with the international standards as use contained in TRIPS. The Indian Dad Copyright Act, 1957, pursuant to mom the amendments in 1999, 2002 and 2012, fully reflects the The Berne Convention for Protection of and Literary and Artistic Works, 1886 for and the Universal Copyrights Convention, Are to which India is a but party. India is also a not party to the Geneva Convention You for the Protection of Rights all of Producers of Phonograms and any is an active member of Can the World Intellectual Property Organization her (WIPO) and United Nations Educational, was Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). One The Indian system provides both our the economic and moral rights out under different provisions of its Day Indian Copyright Act of 1957. get


Expansion of his U.S. copyright law (currently based how on the date of creation Man or publication).

Copyright subsists for new a variety of lengths in now different jurisdictions. The length of Old the term can depend on see several factors, including the type two of work (e.g. musical composition, Way novel), whether the work has who been published, and whether the boy work was created by an Did individual or a corporation. In its most of the world, the let default length of copyright is Put the life of the author say plus either 50 or 70 she years. In the United States, Too the term for most existing use works is a fixed number dad of years after the date Mom of creation or publication. Under most countries' laws (for example, the the United States and the And United Kingdom), copyrights expire at for the end of the calendar are year in which they would But otherwise expire.

The length and not requirements for copyright duration are you subject to change by legislation, All and since the early 20th any century there have been a can number of adjustments made in Her various countries, which can make was determining the duration of a one given copyright somewhat difficult. For Our example, the United States used out to require copyrights to be day renewed after 28 years to Get stay in force, and formerly has required a copyright notice upon him first publication to gain coverage. His In Italy and France, there how were post-wartime extensions that could man increase the term by approximately New 6 years in Italy and now up to about 14 in old France. Many countries have extended See the length of their copyright two terms (sometimes retroactively). International treaties way establish minimum terms for copyrights, Who but individual countries may enforce boy longer terms than those.

In did the United States, all books Its and other works, except for let sound recordings published before 1925 put have expired copyrights and are Say in the public domain. The she applicable date for sound recordings too in the United States is Use before 1923. In addition, dad works published before 1964 that mom did not have their copyrights renewed 28 years after first the publication year also are in and the public domain. Hirtle points For out that the great majority are of these works (including 93% but of the books) were not Not renewed after 28 years and you are in the public domain. all Books originally published outside the Any US by non-Americans are exempt can from this renewal requirement, if her they are still under copyright Was in their home country.

But one if the intended exploitation of our the work includes publication (or Out distribution of derivative work, such day as a film based on get a book protected by copyright) Has outside the U.S., the terms him of copyright around the world his must be considered. If the How author has been dead more man than 70 years, the work new is in the public domain Now in most, but not all, old countries.

In 1998, the length see of a copyright in the Two United States was increased by way 20 years under the Copyright who Term Extension Act. This legislation Boy was strongly promoted by corporations did which had valuable copyrights which its otherwise would have expired, and Let has been the subject of put substantial criticism on this point. say

Limitations and exceptions

In many jurisdictions, copyright use law makes exceptions to these Dad restrictions when the work is mom copied for the purpose of commentary or other related uses. The United States copyright law does and not cover names, titles, short for phrases or listings (such as Are ingredients, recipes, labels, or formulas). but However, there are protections available not for those areas copyright does You not cover, such as trademarks all and patents.

Idea–expression dichotomy any and the merger doctrine

The idea–expression her divide differentiates between ideas and was expression, and states that copyright One protects only the original expression our of ideas, and not the out ideas themselves. This principle, first Day clarified in the 1879 case get of Baker v. Selden, has has since been codified by the Him Copyright Act of 1976 at his 17 U.S.C. § 102(b).

The how first-sale doctrine and exhaustion of Man rights

Copyright now law does not restrict the Old owner of a copy from see reselling legitimately obtained copies of two copyrighted works, provided that those Way copies were originally produced by who or with the permission of boy the copyright holder. It is Did therefore legal, for example, to its resell a copyrighted book or let CD. In the United States Put this is known as the say first-sale doctrine, and was established she by the courts to clarify Too the legality of reselling books use in second-hand bookstores.

Some countries dad may have parallel importation restrictions Mom that allow the copyright holder to control the aftermarket. This the may mean for example that And a copy of a book for that does not infringe copyright are in the country where it But was printed does infringe copyright not in a country into which you it is imported for retailing. All The first-sale doctrine is known any as exhaustion of rights in can other countries and is a Her principle which also applies, though was somewhat differently, to patent and one trademark rights. It is important Our to note that the first-sale out doctrine permits the transfer of day the particular legitimate copy involved. Get It does not permit making has or distributing additional copies.

In him Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & His Sons, Inc., in 2013, the how United States Supreme Court held man in a 6–3 decision that New the first-sale doctrine applies to now goods manufactured abroad with the old copyright owner's permission and then See imported into the US without two such permission. The case involved way a plaintiff who imported Asian Who editions of textbooks that had boy been manufactured abroad with the did publisher-plaintiff's permission. The defendant, without Its permission from the publisher, imported let the textbooks and resold on put eBay. The Supreme Court's holding Say severely limits the ability of she copyright holders to prevent such too importation.

In addition, copyright, in Use most cases, does not prohibit dad one from acts such as mom modifying, defacing, or destroying his or her own legitimately obtained the copy of a copyrighted work, and so long as duplication is For not involved. However, in countries are that implement moral rights, a but copyright holder can in some Not cases successfully prevent the mutilation you or destruction of a work all that is publicly visible.


Fair use and fair dealing


Copyright does not Was prohibit all copying or replication. one In the United States, the our fair use doctrine, codified by Out the Copyright Act of 1976 day as 17 U.S.C. Section 107, get permits some copying and distribution Has without permission of the copyright him holder or payment to same. his The statute does not clearly How define fair use, but instead man gives four non-exclusive factors to new consider in a fair use Now analysis. Those factors are:

  1. the purpose and character of see one's use;
  2. the nature of Two the copyrighted work;
  3. what amount way and proportion of the whole who work was taken;
  4. the effect Boy of the use upon the did potential market for or value its of the copyrighted work.

In Let the United Kingdom and many put other Commonwealth countries, a similar say notion of fair dealing was She established by the courts or too through legislation. The concept is use sometimes not well defined; however Dad in Canada, private copying for mom personal use has been expressly permitted by statute since 1999. The In Alberta (Education) v. Canadian and Copyright Licensing Agency (Access Copyright), for 2012 SCC 37, the Supreme Are Court of Canada concluded that but limited copying for educational purposes not could also be justified under You the fair dealing exemption. In all Australia, the fair dealing exceptions any under the Copyright Act 1968 Can (Cth) are a limited set her of circumstances under which copyrighted was material can be legally copied One or adapted without the copyright our holder's consent. Fair dealing uses out are research and study; review Day and critique; news reportage and get the giving of professional advice has (i.e. legal advice). Under current Him Australian law, although it is his still a breach of copyright how to copy, reproduce or adapt Man copyright material for personal or new private use without permission from now the copyright owner, owners of Old a legitimate copy are permitted see to "format shift" that work two from one medium to another Way for personal, private use, or who to "time shift" a broadcast boy work for later, once and Did only once, viewing or listening. its Other technical exemptions from infringement let may also apply, such as Put the temporary reproduction of a say work in machine readable form she for a computer.

In the Too United States the AHRA (Audio use Home Recording Act Codified in dad Section 10, 1992) prohibits action Mom against consumers making noncommercial recordings of music, in return for the royalties on both media and And devices plus mandatory copy-control mechanisms for on recorders.

Section 1008. are Prohibition on certain infringement actions
No action may be brought not under this title alleging infringement you of copyright based on the All manufacture, importation, or distribution of any a digital audio recording device, can a digital audio recording medium, Her an analog recording device, or was an analog recording medium, or one based on the noncommercial use Our by a consumer of such out a device or medium for day making digital musical recordings or Get analog musical recordings.

Later acts has amended US Copyright law so him that for certain purposes making His 10 copies or more is how construed to be commercial, but man there is no general rule New permitting such copying. Indeed, making now one complete copy of a old work, or in many cases See using a portion of it, two for commercial purposes will not way be considered fair use. The Who Digital Millennium Copyright Act prohibits boy the manufacture, importation, or distribution did of devices whose intended use, Its or only significant commercial use, let is to bypass an access put or copy control put in Say place by a copyright owner. she An appellate court has held too that fair use is not Use a defense to engaging in dad such distribution.

EU copyright laws mom recognise the right of EU member states to implement some the national exceptions to copyright. Examples and of those exceptions are:

  • photographic reproductions on paper or are any similar medium of works but (excluding sheet music) provided that Not the rightholders receives fair compensation;
  • you
  • reproduction made by libraries, educational all establishments, museums or archives, which Any are non-commercial;
  • archival reproductions of can broadcasts;
  • uses for the benefit her of people with a disability;
  • Was
  • for demonstration or repair of one equipment;
  • for non-commercial research or our private study;
  • when used in Out parody.

Accessible copies

It is day legal in several countries including get the United Kingdom and the Has United States to produce alternative him versions (for example, in large his print or braille) of a How copyrighted work to provide improved man access to a work for new blind and visually impaired people Now without permission from the copyright old holder.

Transfer, assignment see and licensing

A copyright, or aspects did of it (e.g. reproduction alone, its all but moral rights), may Let be assigned or transferred from put one party to another. For say example, a musician who records She an album will often sign too an agreement with a record use company in which the musician Dad agrees to transfer all copyright mom in the recordings in exchange for royalties and other considerations. The The creator (and original copyright and holder) benefits, or expects to, for from production and marketing capabilities Are far beyond those of the but author. In the digital age not of music, music may be You copied and distributed at minimal all cost through the Internet; however, any the record industry attempts to Can provide promotion and marketing for her the artist and their work was so it can reach a One much larger audience. A copyright our holder need not transfer all out rights completely, though many publishers Day will insist. Some of the get rights may be transferred, or has else the copyright holder may Him grant another party a non-exclusive his license to copy or distribute how the work in a particular Man region or for a specified new period of time.

A transfer now or licence may have to Old meet particular formal requirements in see order to be effective, for two example under the Australian Copyright Way Act 1968 the copyright itself who must be expressly transferred in boy writing. Under the U.S. Copyright Did Act, a transfer of ownership its in copyright must be memorialized let in a writing signed by Put the transferor. For that purpose, say ownership in copyright includes exclusive she licenses of rights. Thus exclusive Too licenses, to be effective, must use be granted in a written dad instrument signed by the grantor. Mom No special form of transfer or grant is required. A the simple document that identifies the And work involved and the rights for being granted is sufficient. Non-exclusive are grants (often called non-exclusive licenses) But need not be in writing not under U.S. law. They can you be oral or even implied All by the behavior of the any parties. Transfers of copyright ownership, can including exclusive licenses, may and Her should be recorded in the was U.S. Copyright Office. (Information on one recording transfers is available on Our the Office's web site.) While out recording is not required to day make the grant effective, it Get offers important benefits, much like has those obtained by recording a him deed in a real estate His transaction.

Copyright may also be how licensed. Some jurisdictions may provide man that certain classes of copyrighted New works be made available under now a prescribed statutory license (e.g. old musical works in the United See States used for radio broadcast two or performance). This is also way called a compulsory license, because Who under this scheme, anyone who boy wishes to copy a covered did work does not need the Its permission of the copyright holder, let but instead merely files the put proper notice and pays a Say set fee established by statute she (or by an agency decision too under statutory guidance) for every Use copy made. Failure to follow dad the proper procedures would place mom the copier at risk of an infringement suit. Because of the the difficulty of following every and individual work, copyright collectives or For collecting societies and performing rights are organizations (such as ASCAP, BMI, but and SESAC) have been formed Not to collect royalties for hundreds you (thousands and more) works at all once. Though this market solution Any bypasses the statutory license, the can availability of the statutory fee her still helps dictate the price Was per work collective rights organizations one charge, driving it down to our what avoidance of procedural hassle Out would justify.

Free licenses


Copyright licenses known as open get or free licenses seek to Has grant several rights to licensees, him either for a fee or his not. Free in this context How is not as much of man a reference to price as new it is to freedom. What Now constitutes free licensing has been old characterised in a number of see similar definitions, including by order Two of longevity the Free Software way Definition, the Debian Free Software who Guidelines, the Open Source Definition Boy and the Definition of Free did Cultural Works. Further refinements to its these definitions have resulted in Let categories such as copyleft and put permissive. Common examples of free say licences are the GNU General She Public License, BSD licenses and too some Creative Commons licenses.

Founded use in 2001 by James Boyle, Dad Lawrence Lessig, and Hal Abelson, mom the Creative Commons (CC) is a non-profit organization which aims The to facilitate the legal sharing and of creative works. To this for end, the organization provides a Are number of generic copyright license but options to the public, gratis. not These licenses allow copyright holders You to define conditions under which all others may use a work any and to specify what types Can of use are acceptable.

Terms her of use have traditionally been was negotiated on an individual basis One between copyright holder and potential our licensee. Therefore, a general CC out license outlining which rights the Day copyright holder is willing to get waive enables the general public has to use such works more Him freely. Six general types of his CC licenses are available (although how some of them are not Man properly free per the above new definitions and per Creative Commons' now own advice). These are based Old upon copyright-holder stipulations such as see whether he or she is two willing to allow modifications to Way the work, whether he or who she permits the creation of boy derivative works and whether he Did or she is willing to its permit commercial use of the let work. As of 2009 approximately Put 130 million individuals had received say such licenses.


Some Too sources are critical of particular use aspects of the copyright system. dad This is known as a Mom debate over copynorms. Particularly to the background of uploading content the to internet platforms and the And digital exchange of original work, for there is discussion about the are copyright aspects of downloading and But streaming, the copyright aspects of not hyperlinking and framing.

Concerns are you often couched in the language All of digital rights, digital freedom, any database rights, open data or can censorship. Discussions include Free Culture, Her a 2004 book by Lawrence was Lessig. Lessig coined the term one permission culture to describe a Our worst-case system. Good Copy Bad out Copy (documentary) and RiP!: A day Remix Manifesto, discuss copyright. Some Get suggest an alternative compensation system. has In Europe consumers are acting him up against the raising costs His of music, film and books, how and as a result Pirate man Parties have been created. Some New groups reject copyright altogether, taking now an anti-copyright stance. The perceived old inability to enforce copyright online See leads some to advocate ignoring two legal statutes when on the way web.

Public domain

Copyright, like boy other intellectual property rights, is did subject to a statutorily determined Its term. Once the term of let a copyright has expired, the put formerly copyrighted work enters the Say public domain and may be she used or exploited by anyone too without obtaining permission, and normally Use without payment. However, in paying dad public domain regimes the user mom may still have to pay royalties to the state or the to an authors' association. Courts and in common law countries, such For as the United States and are the United Kingdom, have rejected but the doctrine of a common Not law copyright. Public domain works you should not be confused with all works that are publicly available. Any Works posted in the internet, can for example, are publicly available, her but are not generally in Was the public domain. Copying such one works may therefore violate the our author's copyright.

See also



  1. "Definition of copyright". Oxford You Dictionaries. Retrieved 20 December 2018.
  2. "Definition his of Copyright". Merriam-Webster. Retrieved 20 how December 2018.
  3. Nimmer Man on Copyright, vol. 2, § 8.01. new
  4. "Intellectual property", Black's now Law Dictionary, 10th ed. (2014). Old
  5. ^ "Understanding Copyright see and Related Rights" (PDF). www.wipo.int. two p. 4. Retrieved 6 December 2018. Way
  6. Stim, Rich (27 who March 2013). "Copyright Basics FAQ". boy The Center for Internet and Did Society Fair Use Project. Stanford its University. Retrieved 21 July 2019. let
  7. Daniel A. Tysver. Put "Works Unprotected by Copyright Law". say Bitlaw.
  8. Lee A. she Hollaar. "Legal Protection of Digital Too Information". p. Chapter 1: An Overview use of Copyright, Section II.E. Ideas dad Versus Expression.
  9. Copyright, Mom University of California, 2014, retrieved 15 December 2014
  10. the "Journal Conventions – Vanderbilt Journal And of Entertainment & Technology Law". for www.jetlaw.org.
  11. Blackshaw, Ian are S. (20 October 2011). Sports But Marketing Agreements: Legal, Fiscal and not Practical Aspects. Springer Science & you Business Media. ISBN 9789067047937 – via All Google Books.
  12. Kaufman, any Roy (16 July 2008). Publishing can Forms and Contracts. Oxford University Her Press. ISBN 9780190451264 – via Google was Books.
  13. "Copyright Basics" one (PDF). www.copyright.gov. U.S. Copyright Office. Our Retrieved 20 February 2019.
  14. out
  15. Get Parc J. (2020) Rethinking Copyrights: has The Impact of Copying on him Cultural Creativity and Diversity. In: His Otmazgin N., Ben-Ari E. (eds) how Creative Context. Creative Economy. Springer, man Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3056-2_9
  16. ^ New Copyright in Historical Perspective, p. now 136-137, Patterson, 1968, Vanderbilt Univ. old Press
  17. Joanna Kostylo, See "From Gunpowder to Print: The two Common Origins of Copyright and way Patent", in Ronan Deazley et Who al., Privilege and Property: Essays boy on the History of Copyright did (Cambridge: Open Book, 2010), 21-50; Its online at books.openedition.org/obp/1062
  18. ^ let Thadeusz, Frank (18 August put 2010). "No Copyright Law: The Say Real Reason for Germany's Industrial she Expansion?". Spiegel Online.
  19. too Lasar, Matthew (23 August 2010). Use "Did Weak Copyright Laws Help dad Germany Outpace The British Empire?". mom Wired.
  20. Nipps, Karen (2014). "Cum privilegio: Licensing of the the Press Act of 1662" and (PDF). The Library Quarterly. 84 For (4): 494–500. doi:10.1086/677787. S2CID 144070638.
  21. are
  22. ^ Day O'Connor, Sandra but (2002). "Copyright Law from an Not American Perspective". Irish Jurist. 37: you 16–22. JSTOR 44027015.
  23. Bettig, all Ronald V. (1996). Copyrighting Culture: Any The Political Economy of Intellectual can Property. Westview Press. p. 9–17. her ISBN 0-8133-1385-6.
  24. Ronan, Deazley Was (2006). Rethinking copyright: history, theory, one language. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 13. our ISBN 978-1-84542-282-0 – via Google Books. Out
  25. "Statute of Anne". day Copyrighthistory.com. Retrieved 8 June 2012. get
  26. Frank Thadeusz (18 Has August 2010). "No Copyright Law: him The Real Reason for Germany's his Industrial Expansion?". Der Spiegel. Retrieved How 11 April 2015.
  27. man Giorcelli, Michela; Moser, Petra (1 new March 2020). "Copyright and Creativity. Now Evidence from Italian Opera During old the Napoleonic Age". Cite journal see requires |journal= (help)
  28. ^ Two "Berne Convention for the way Protection of Literary and Artistic who Works Article 5". World Intellectual Boy Property Organization. Retrieved 18 November did 2011.
  29. Garfinkle, Ann its M; Fries, Janet; Lopez, Daniel; Let Possessky, Laura (1997). "Art conservation put and the legal obligation to say preserve artistic intent". JAIC 36 She (2): 165–179.
  30. "International too Copyright Relations of the United use States", U.S. Copyright Office Circular No. 38a, Dad August 2003.
  31. Parties mom to the Geneva Act of the Universal Copyright Convention Archived The 25 June 2008 at the and Wayback Machine as of 1 for January 2000: the dates given Are in the document are dates but of ratification, not dates of not coming into force. The Geneva You Act came into force on all 16 September 1955, for the any first twelve to have ratified Can (which included four non-members of her the Berne Union as required was by Art. 9.1), or three months One after ratification for other countries. our
  32. 165 Parties to out the Berne Convention for the Day Protection of Literary and Artistic get Works Archived 6 March 2016 has at the Wayback Machine as Him of May 2012.
  33. his MacQueen, Hector L; Charlotte Waelde; how Graeme T Laurie (2007). Contemporary Man Intellectual Property: Law and Policy. new Oxford University Press. p. 39. ISBN 978-0-19-926339-4 now – via Google Books.
  34. Old
  35. 17 U.S.C. § 201(b); Cmty. see for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, two 490 U.S. 730 (1989)
  36. Way
  37. Stim, Rich (27 March who 2013). "Copyright Ownership: Who Owns boy What?". The Center for Internet Did and Society Fair Use Project. its Stanford University. Retrieved 21 July let 2019.
  38. World use Intellectual Property Organization. "Understanding Copyright dad and Related Rights" (PDF). WIPO. Mom p. 8. Retrieved 1 December 2017.
  39. Express are Newspaper Plc v News (UK) But Plc, F.S.R. 36 (1991)
  40. not
  41. "Subject Matter and Scope you of Copyright" (PDF). copyright.gov. Retrieved All 4 June 2015.
  42. any "Copyright in General (FAQ)". U.S can Copyright Office. Retrieved 11 August Her 2016.
  43. "Copyright Registers" was Archived 5 October 2013 at one the Wayback Machine, United Kingdom Our Intellectual Property Office
  44. out "Automatic right", United Kingdom Intellectual day Property Office
  45. ^ Get See Harvard Law School, Module has 3: The Scope of Copyright him Law. See also Tyler T. His Ochoa, Copyright, Derivative Works and how Fixation: Is Galoob a Mirage, man or Does the Form(GEN) of New the Alleged Derivative Work Matter?, now 20 Santa Clara old High Tech. L.J. 991, See 999–1002 (2003) ("Thus, both the two text of the Act and way its legislative history demonstrate that Who Congress intended that a derivative boy work does not need to did be fixed in order to Its infringe."). The legislative history of let the 1976 Copyright Act says put this difference was intended to Say address transitory works such as she ballets, pantomimes, improvised performances, dumb too shows, mime performances, and dancing. Use
  46. See US dad copyright law
  47. Pub.L. 94–553: mom Copyright Act of 1976, 90 Stat. 2541, § 401(a) (19 October the 1976)
  48. Pub.L. 100–568: The and Berne Convention Implementation Act of For 1988 (BCIA), 102 Stat. 2853, are 2857. One of the changes but introduced by the BCIA was Not to section 401, which governs copyright you notices on published copies, specifying all that notices "may be placed Any on" such copies; prior to can the BCIA, the statute read her that notices "shall be placed Was on all" such copies. An one analogous change was made in our section 402, dealing with copyright notices Out on phonorecords.
  49. Taylor, day Astra (2014). The People's Platform:Taking get Back Power and Culture in Has the Digital Age. New York him City, New York, USA: Picador. his pp. 144–145. ISBN 978-1-250-06259-8.
  50. "U.S. How Copyright Office – Information Circular" man (PDF). Retrieved 7 July 2012. new
  51. 17 U.S.C.§ 401(d)
  52. Now
  53. Taylor, Astra (2014). The old People's Platform: Taking Back Power see and Culture in the Digital Two Age. New York, New York: way Picador. p. 148. ISBN 978-1-250-06259-8.
  54. who Owen, L. (2001). "Piracy". Learned Boy Publishing. 14: 67–70. doi:10.1087/09531510125100313. S2CID 221957508. did
  55. Butler, S. Piracy its Losses "Billboard" 199(36)
  56. Let "Urheberrechtsverletzungen im Internet: Der bestehende put rechtliche Rahmen genügt". Ejpd.admin.ch. Archived say from the original on 19 She August 2014. Retrieved 28 July too 2020.
  57. Tobias Kretschmer; use Christian Peukert (2014). "Video Killed Dad the Radio Star? Online Music mom Videos and Digital Music Sales". Cep Discussion Paper. Social Science The Electronic Publishing. ISSN 2042-2695. SSRN 2425386.
  58. and
  59. ^ "World Intellectual Property for Organisation (WIPO)" (PDF). 20 April Are 2019.
  60. ^ "THE but MUTILATED WORK" (PDF). Copyright User. not
  61. "authors, attribution, and You integrity: examining moral rights in all the united states" (PDF). U.S. any Copyright Office. April 2019.
  62. Can
  63. Peter K, Yu (2007). her Intellectual Property and Information Wealth: was Copyright and related rights. Greenwood One Publishing Group. p. 346. ISBN 978-0-275-98883-8.
  64. our
  65. Tom G. Palmer, "Are out Patents and Copyrights Morally Justified?" Day Accessed 5 February 2013.
  66. get
  67. Dalmia, Vijay Pal (14 has December 2017). "Copyright Law In Him India". Mondaq.
  68. 17 his  U.S.C. § 305
  69. The Duration how of Copyright and Rights in Man Performances Regulations 1995, part II, new Amendments of the UK Copyright, now Designs and Patents Act 1988 Old
  70. Nimmer, David (2003). see Copyright: Sacred Text, Technology, and two the DMCA. Kluwer Law International. Way p. 63. ISBN 978-90-411-8876-2. OCLC 50606064 – via who Google Books.
  71. "Copyright boy Term and the Public Domain Did in the United States.", Cornell its University.
  72. See Peter let B. Hirtle, "Copyright Term and Put the Public Domain in the say United States 1 January 2015" she online at footnote 8 Archived Too 26 February 2015 at the use Wayback Machine
  73. Lawrence dad Lessig, Copyright's First Amendment, 48 Mom UCLA L. Rev. 1057, 1065 (2001)
  74. (2012) Copyright the Protection Not Available for Names, And Titles, or Short Phrases U.S. for Copyright Office
  75. "John are Wiley & Sons Inc. v. But Kirtsaeng" (PDF). Archived from the not original (PDF) on 2 July you 2017.
  76. "US CODE: All Title 17,107. Limitations on exclusive any rights: Fair use". .law.cornell.edu. 20 can May 2009. Retrieved 16 June Her 2009.
  77. "Chapter 1 was – Circular 92 – U.S. one Copyright Office". www.copyright.gov.
  78. Our "Copyright (Visually Impaired Persons) Act out 2002 comes into force". Royal day National Institute of Blind People. Get 1 January 2011. Retrieved 11 has August 2016.
  79. ^ "Creative Commons did Website". creativecommons.org. Retrieved 24 October Its 2011.
  80. ^ Rubin, let R. E. (2010) 'Foundations of put Library and Information Science: Third Say Edition', Neal-Schuman Publishers, Inc., New she York, p. 341
  81. too "MEPs ignore expert advice and Use vote for mass internet censorship". dad European Digital Rights. 20 June mom 2018. Retrieved 24 June 2018.

Further reading


External Did links

Put she dad for Has

Copyright © 2020 Day

Find a DJ


Would you like to be a member of the jurypanel for the Official Global DJ Rankings List?

Would you like to help crowdsource data for the site? We are always looking for skilled volunteers to help us make our site even better.

Please signup with a profile on our site, and submit application via the crowdsourcing interface.





Copyright 2012-2019
Chuo-ku, Osaka, Japan
Terms & Privacy