Shattering A Few Myths About Copyright
It is unfortunate that people don’t know as much as they should about intellectual property rights. One day recently I briefly checked in to Twitter to see a discussion on the matter — a discussion that was propagating misinformed ideas. You might see copyright as a topic that’s only relevant to artists and engineers, but the truth is that this isn’t called the information age for nothing and intellectual property laws affect everybody.
Here’s a quick and dirty primer to your copyrights. It is by no means extensive or legal advice and is merely the result of some rigorous study I applied myself to a few years ago as an individual who trades in intellectual property. As with anything, the right thing to do is check the facts by reading the acts so that you’re certain of your rights.
Fixed Tangible Expressions
How do you know when something you’ve created has become copyrighted? The prevailing answer that most people will provide is, upon creation. That’s right and wrong depending on how you define creation. Does creation include conception? That’s the popular view and that’s not correct.
Something is copyrighted when it is a fixed tangible expression. That means it is out of your head and written on paper, painted on canvas, recorded in your home studio or otherwise made tangible.
So when are your conceptions and creations not copyrighted? That brings me to…
You Can’t Copyright Ideas and Names
You cannot copyright ideas. While you can copyright a fixed tangible expression of an idea, you can’t copyright the idea itself even once it has been expressed. Others are able to take that idea and express it themselves, and as long as that expression isn’t too similar to yours, it can’t be contested. Obviously we’re talking about copyright here — trade secrets and patents are different things entirely.
You also can’t copyright a name. Copyright law covers works, trademarks cover names. Trademarks are expensive and there are pretty stringent requirements on registering them. In other words, the names of the characters in your story are not yours, unless you take the unlikely step of trademarking them.
A story, a picture, and a letter to a friend are all fixed tangible expressions. Even a list and the order of the items on the list (but not the names themselves) can be copyrighted. But if you send an idea for an episode to the producer of your favorite show, it is theirs to create a script (which is, you guessed it, a fixed tangible expression of the general idea, though the description of the idea itself as you worded it would remain yours).
Poor Man’s Copyright is a Poor Man’s Myth
There is an idea floating around that mailing something you created to yourself is an alternative to registering copyright for the item. The truth is that you have the copyrights to your work once you’ve created the work, but if there’s ever legal trouble having the work registered will be helpful. This poor man’s copyright trick is a myth and does not provide the legal backup that registration does; you may as well save the money you would spend on envelopes and postage stamps.
Work-for-Hire
f you intend to do business as someone who creates intellectual property, you should be careful. Some people are more than happy to sell the copyright to works they create and some will expect it from you. In some industries, this is the norm, such as with web design. In other industries — for example, if a song is commissioned from a band — a license is typically sold, whether it’s an exclusive commercial license or some form of limited license that gives the buyer certain rights to the intellectual property.
Clever sellers of intellectual property will retain the rights. Clever purchasers of intellectual property will only buy the rights. It gets a little tense when a clever seller meets a clever purchaser!
Here’s the important thing to remember:
In many jurisdictions, unless you specifically stipulate in a contract between yourself and the client or employer, all intellectual property you create for a client or for your employer is their intellectual property. In most places this is called work-for-hire.
The Six Exclusive Copyrights
My mentor in intellectual property forced me to memorize the six copyrights that are granted exclusively to the creator (or creators) of a work. It is wise to do so if you deal in IP yourself. You have the right to:
- Produce copies and reproductions of the work and sell them,
- Import or export the work,
- Create derivative works,
- Perform or display the work publicly,
- Sell or assign these rights to others,
- Transmit or display by radio or video
Nobody else can do these things with your work. Memorize them so that you can easily tell if someone is an admirer or an offender disenfranchising you of your legal rights.
WRITER'S BIOGRAPHY
Joel Falconer
Offering a unique perspective and insight on productivity based on his experience as a writer, musician, family man and manager, Joel Falconer has been published online and off, and brings to Lifehack's readers practical advice you can use to be more efficient and effective.
ARTICLES BY THIS WRITER »

Comments
Jesús Pérez Serna says on April 6th, 2009 at 11:26 am
But, nothing about alternatives to copyright?
You say: “Nobody else can do these things with your work.” Are you sure this is best way? I prefer to share. Take a look at this: http://creativecommons.org/
Daryl [WhiteHatBlackBox] says on April 6th, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Very informational post, especially since most people here are probably creating something in one form or another.
A couple finer points might also be useful if you ever decide to do an “advanced” version:
- Copyrights expire
- Copyrights are usually defined by the relevant domain (the country you are in)
- Having the copyright vs. proving you have the copyright
- Fairuse and infringement
On a side note, I can’t post comments in Firefox and have to switch to IE. Does anyone else have that problem?
Just another Moron in a Hurry says on April 6th, 2009 at 1:21 pm
The 6 Exclusive Copyrights seems to forget about Fair Use, which dictates that in some cases, you are not the exclusive owner of these rights.
Alex Schleber says on April 6th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
In this new attention economy, I would argue that worrying about antiquated notions such as copyright in regards to your own work will largely only slow you down. Except for the most egregious of rip-offs, your mission should be to spread your ideas as far and wide as you can, by any means necessary, so that you can brand yourself alongside of your content/ideas/etc.
Be first, be fast, be loudest. Why is it that the likes of Gary Vaynerchuck and Mashable are garnering so much attention even tough their stuff is being talked about by many, sliced, diced, and repackaged all over the blogosphere (often without attribution)? Because they are loud and/or relentless:
They simply emit the highest number of signals! Same for Scoble & TechCrunch/Arrington. Thought leadership is not established by stopping at every turn to worry about copyright. By the time you get around to resolving a case (and remember that’d just be one, do you really think you can keep up with the internet?), the information you are trying to claim as your own has very likely become worthless/outdated, or at least less valuable.
Thought leadership at this point is an EMERGENT property of your voice rising above the din. And to make that happen, you need to be in the game. Lawyering is a different game.
Unless you have the money to keep a copyright attorney on retainer/staff, I would forget all about “playing business” in this regard (a term I first learned from Internet Marketing guru Eben Pagan).
Even if you do have the money, it is likely better spent elsewhere…
BTW, I wrote a piece a while back on how shortsightedness/fearfulness in regards to copyrights has been costing Old Media in more ways than they know:
http://businessmindhacks.com/p.....by-piranha
Melvin Durable says on April 6th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
I have just non-copyrighted my email!
Melvin Durable
melvindurable@gmail.com
timgray says on April 6th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
Copyrights also have major problems. You have what amounts to an unlimited copyright due to the horrible work that Senator Sonny Bono did. Artists can “copyright” a statue and sue anyone taking photos of it. For example the chrome blob in Millennium park in Chicago. The artist sues anyone taking photos of it and publishing it. You cant take a photo of the Empire state building and publish it, the building is “copyrighted” in any and all imagery of it.
Copyright is fundamentally broken. It was designed to help foster creativity and has become a monster that hinders it.
Entire music genres exist to violate copyright… Hip-Hop and Rap use sampling to create something new, yet copyright makes what they do “illegal” if they dont pay a huge sum to the RIAA and other record companies that they sample from.
Copyright has a use, but it’s current form today is a ugly mess that only hurts society as a whole. copyright on a new movie makes sense. Copyright on a 40 year old movie does not.
paraic hegarty says on April 7th, 2009 at 4:20 am
Flawed? Yes. Antiquated? Perhaps. But coyright has the advantage of existing on national and international law. Unless and until something better comes along, this is what there is. Alll the other monetization ideas are just that – ideas.
Fink About It says on April 12th, 2009 at 7:21 am
There is a mistake in your list: It is allowed to create derivative works of something. So you can set up a collage of articles for example. When you attribute the copyright for the content to their authors YOU still have copyright for setting up the collection anyway.
Read more about copyright theft