The Ludwig Wittgenstein Project

Project:The copyright status of Wittgenstein’s works: Difference between revisions

Project page Discussion

Project:The copyright status of Wittgenstein’s works (view source)

Revision as of 11:51, 31 December 2022

196 bytes removed ,  1 year ago
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 195: Line 195:


== The Creative Commons licences ==
== The Creative Commons licences ==
Before moving on, it is now appropriate to provide a very short introduction to Creative Commons Licences. This is for three reasons:
Before moving on, it is now appropriate to provide a very short introduction to the Creative Commons licences. This is for three reasons:


* as it was claimed in the previous section of this essay, they are probably the most meaningful innovation in the field of intellectual property since the advent of the internet;
* as it was claimed in the previous section of this essay, they are probably the most meaningful innovation in the field of intellectual property since the advent of the internet;
Line 201: Line 201:
* the Ludwig Wittgenstein Project releases all its original content under Creative Commons licences.
* the Ludwig Wittgenstein Project releases all its original content under Creative Commons licences.


Creative Commons licences provide a simple solution for creators to publish their works under terms that, on the one hand, allow others to use them for free and, on the other hand, require the party who uses the content to meet a variable set of conditions, based on the creator’s own choice. Their introduction was prompted by the realisation that, given the ease of sharing texts, pictures and multimedia files brought about by the web, an increasing number of people would be happy to publish their creative works outside of a commercial logic, i.e., without the hope or even the intention of making money out of their sale, but would still want to reserve some rights.
Creative Commons licences provide a simple solution for creators to publish their works under terms that, on the one hand, allow others to use the content for free and, on the other hand, require the party who uses the content to meet a variable set of conditions, based on the creator’s own choice. The introduction of the Creative Commons licences was prompted by the realisation that, given the ease of sharing texts, pictures and multimedia files brought about by the web, an increasing number of people would be happy to publish their creative works outside of a commercial logic—i.e., without the hope or even the intention of making money out of their sale—but would still want to reserve some rights.


Devised by a team of legal experts led by Lawrence Lessig and first released in 2002, the six Creative Commons licences are based on the recognition of three freedoms and four constraints.<ref>For more information, see the relevant page of the Creative Commons website: {{plainlink|[https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Creative Commons Licenses]}}.</ref> The three freedoms are:
Devised by a team of legal experts led by Lawrence Lessig and first released in 2002, the six Creative Commons licences are based on the recognition of three freedoms and four constraints.<ref>For more information, see the relevant page of the Creative Commons website: {{plainlink|[https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Creative Commons Licenses]}}.</ref> The three freedoms are:
Line 216: Line 216:
* the prohibition to ''remix'' the work, meaning that no works can be derived from it.
* the prohibition to ''remix'' the work, meaning that no works can be derived from it.


The combinations of these freedoms and constraints generates the six licences, listed below from the “most free” to the “least free”:
The combinations of these freedoms and constraints generate the six licences, listed below from the “most free” to the “least free”:


* Creative Commons Zero (CC0): a waiver equivalent to the public domain, where the author grants permission to use the work for all purposes without any limitations, not even requiring attribution; it should be noted that CC0 is not strictly speaking a licence, but is rather referred to as a “tool” for relinquishing one’s rights;
* Creative Commons Zero (CC0): a waiver equivalent to the public domain, where the author grants permission to use the work for all purposes without any limitations, not even requiring attribution; it should be noted that CC0 is not strictly speaking a licence, but is rather referred to as a “tool” for relinquishing one’s rights;
Line 235: Line 235:


=== Review of P. Coffey, “The Science of Logic” ===
=== Review of P. Coffey, “The Science of Logic” ===
The ''Review of P. Coffey, “The Science of Logic”'' was first published in the British journal ''The Cambridge Review'', vol. 34, no. 853, 6 Mar. 1913, p. 351.
The ''Review of P. Coffey, “The Science of Logic”'' was first published in the British journal ''The Cambridge Review'', vol. 34, no. 853, 6 March 1913, p. 351.


Its country of origin is the United Kingdom. This work is in the public domain there, as well as in Italy, because the copyright term for literary works in both countries is 70 years P.M.A.<ref>Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, section 12 (2).</ref><ref>''Legge 633/1941,'' article 25.</ref> and the author died before 1952.
Its country of origin is the United Kingdom. This work is in the public domain there, as well as in Italy, because the copyright term for literary works in both countries is 70 years P.M.A.<ref>Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, section 12 (2).</ref><ref>''Legge 633/1941,'' article 25.</ref> and the author died before 1952.
Line 246: Line 246:
Their country of origin is the US.<ref name="simultaneous">According to the Berne Convention, “The country of origin shall be considered to be: (a) in the case of works first published in a country of the Union, that country; in the case of works published simultaneously in several countries of the Union which grant different terms of protection, the country whose legislation grants the shortest term of protection [...]” (art. 5, par. 4). The definition of “simultaneous publication” is publication in multiple countries within 30 days (see art. 3, par. 4). We haven’t been able to prove that in the 1950s the ''Journal of Philosophy'' consistently reached its Canadian or European subscribers within 30 days of the publication in the US, but we haven’t been able to conclusively rule it out either. If it were possible to prove that this was the case in at least one country with a 50 or 70 years P.M.A. copyright term, then the ''Notes on Logic'' would count as simultaneously published in the US and in that country; therefore, per the Berne Convention, they would have that country as their country of origin; therefore, per the copyright laws of that country, they would now be in the public domain in their country of origin.</ref> In order to determine the copyright status of a work which has the US as its country of origin, knowledge of the date of the author’s death is not sufficient. Per the {{Plainlink|[https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Hirtle_chart Hirtle chart]}},<ref name="hirtle-chart"/> the current copyright status of a work first published in the US between 1927 and 1964 depends on whether or not it was published with a copyright notice (which we should assume was the case) and, if it was, on whether or not copyright was renewed before its expiry, the term of which was then 28 years: if copyright was renewed, the text is still copyrighted in the US; if it wasn’t, the text is now in the public domain in the US. Lacking further information, it should be assumed that the copyright on this text was renewed. Assuming that it was indeed renewed, then the duration of its copyright term is 95 years from the publication date, meaning that it will enter the public domain the US on 1 January 2053.<ref name="hirtle-chart" />
Their country of origin is the US.<ref name="simultaneous">According to the Berne Convention, “The country of origin shall be considered to be: (a) in the case of works first published in a country of the Union, that country; in the case of works published simultaneously in several countries of the Union which grant different terms of protection, the country whose legislation grants the shortest term of protection [...]” (art. 5, par. 4). The definition of “simultaneous publication” is publication in multiple countries within 30 days (see art. 3, par. 4). We haven’t been able to prove that in the 1950s the ''Journal of Philosophy'' consistently reached its Canadian or European subscribers within 30 days of the publication in the US, but we haven’t been able to conclusively rule it out either. If it were possible to prove that this was the case in at least one country with a 50 or 70 years P.M.A. copyright term, then the ''Notes on Logic'' would count as simultaneously published in the US and in that country; therefore, per the Berne Convention, they would have that country as their country of origin; therefore, per the copyright laws of that country, they would now be in the public domain in their country of origin.</ref> In order to determine the copyright status of a work which has the US as its country of origin, knowledge of the date of the author’s death is not sufficient. Per the {{Plainlink|[https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Hirtle_chart Hirtle chart]}},<ref name="hirtle-chart"/> the current copyright status of a work first published in the US between 1927 and 1964 depends on whether or not it was published with a copyright notice (which we should assume was the case) and, if it was, on whether or not copyright was renewed before its expiry, the term of which was then 28 years: if copyright was renewed, the text is still copyrighted in the US; if it wasn’t, the text is now in the public domain in the US. Lacking further information, it should be assumed that the copyright on this text was renewed. Assuming that it was indeed renewed, then the duration of its copyright term is 95 years from the publication date, meaning that it will enter the public domain the US on 1 January 2053.<ref name="hirtle-chart" />


However, in February 2017 Wittgenstein’s Ts-201a1 and Ts-201a2, containing the text of the ''Notes on Logic'', were released by the copyright holders—The Master and Fellows of Trinity College, Cambridge; Bertrand Russell Archives at McMaster University Library, Hamilton, Ontario; University of Bergen, Bergen—under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution – NonCommercial 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC). Therefore, the text should be regarded as being in the public domain in countries where the copyright term is 70 years P.M.A. and licenced under CC BY-NC 4.0 International in the US. As was discussed above in this essay (see [[#Copyright in the age of the internet|§ Copyright in the age of the internet]]), a work being in the public domain in its country of origin is not a requirement for it to be freely reusable, remixable, etc. elsewhere, but rather a generally accepted good practice when the work is to be published on the internet; because of the internet’s lack of national boundaries, in other words, we consider it a good compromise to always make sure that we abide by the rules both of a work’s country of origin and of the country where the work is used, remixed, etc. The situation is similar when a work is not in the public domain in its country of origin but rather is licenced under the terms of a Creative Commons licence: we always want to abide by the rules both of a work’s country of origin and of the country where the work is used, remixed, etc. In this case, this means treating the work (Wittgenstein’s original text) as though it was also licenced under CC BY-NC in Italy, where the work is in the public domain because the copyright term for literary works is 70 years P.M.A.<ref>Italian copyright law only has a specific provision for posthumously published works if the posthumous work is first published after the expiry of copyright. In Wittgenstein’s case, this would only be relevant to writings unpublished as of 1 January 2022. See ''Legge 633/1941,'' article 31 and 85(3).</ref> Now, CC BY-NC does not prohibit derivative works (for it does not include the “ND”, “NoDerivatives” clause), nor does it require derivative works to be licenced under the same terms (for it does not include the “SA”, “ShareAlike” clause). Therefore, the Ludwig Wittgenstein Project’s Italian translation of this text was published under CC BY-SA.
However, in February 2017 Wittgenstein’s Ts-201a1 and Ts-201a2, containing the text of the ''Notes on Logic'', were released by the copyright holders under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution – NonCommercial 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC). Therefore, the text should be regarded as being in the public domain in countries where the copyright term is 70 years P.M.A. and licenced under CC BY-NC 4.0 International in the US. As was discussed above in this essay (see [[#Copyright in the age of the internet|§ Copyright in the age of the internet]]), a work being in the public domain in its country of origin is not a requirement for it to be freely reusable, remixable, etc. elsewhere, but rather a generally accepted good practice when the work is to be published on the internet; because of the internet’s lack of national boundaries, in other words, we consider it a good compromise to always make sure that we abide by the rules both of a work’s country of origin and of the country where the work is used, remixed, etc. The situation is similar when a work is not in the public domain in its country of origin but rather is licenced under the terms of a Creative Commons licence: we always want to abide by the rules both of a work’s country of origin and of the country where the work is used, remixed, etc. In this case, this means treating the work (Wittgenstein’s original text) as though it was also licenced under CC BY-NC in Italy, where the work is in the public domain because the copyright term for literary works is 70 years P.M.A.<ref>Italian copyright law only has a specific provision for posthumously published works if the posthumous work is first published after the expiry of copyright. In Wittgenstein’s case, this would only be relevant to writings unpublished as of 1 January 2022. See ''Legge 633/1941,'' article 31 and 85(3).</ref> Now, CC BY-NC does not prohibit derivative works (for it does not include the “ND”, “NoDerivatives” clause), nor does it require derivative works to be licenced under the same terms (for it does not include the “SA”, “ShareAlike” clause). Therefore, the Ludwig Wittgenstein Project’s Italian translation of this text was lawfully published under CC BY-SA.


=== Notes Dictated to G.E. Moore in Norway ===
=== Notes Dictated to G.E. Moore in Norway ===
Line 280: Line 280:


=== Lecture on Ethics ===
=== Lecture on Ethics ===
The ''Lecture on Ethics'' was first published in the United States of America, in the journal ''The Philosophical Review'', vol. 74, no. 1, Jan. 1965, pp. 3–12.
The ''Lecture on Ethics'' was first published in the United States of America, in the journal ''The Philosophical Review'', vol. 74, no. 1, January 1965, pp. 3–12.


Its country of origin is the US.<ref name="simultaneous"/>
Its country of origin is the US.<ref name="simultaneous"/>


However, in February 2017 the text of Wittgenstein’s Ts-207 was released by the copyright holders—The Master and Fellows of Trinity College, Cambridge and the University of Bergen, Bergen—under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution – NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. The text of the ''Lecture on Ethics'' that was published in the ''Philosophical Review'' in 1965 only differs from the text of Ts-207 for very few spelling variants and punctuation marks; the two must thus be considered to be the same text and to share the same copyright status. Therefore, the text should be regarded as being in the public domain in countries where the copyright term is 70 years PMA and licenced under CC BY-NC 4.0 International in the US. See above, [[#Notes on Logic|§ ''Notes on Logic'']], for more details.
However, in February 2017 the text of Wittgenstein’s Ts-207 was released by the copyright holders under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution – NonCommercial 4.0 International licence. The text of the ''Lecture on Ethics'' that was published in the ''Philosophical Review'' in 1965 only differs from the text of Ts-207 for very few spelling variants and punctuation marks; the two must thus be considered to be the same text and to share the same copyright status. Therefore, the text should be regarded as being in the public domain in countries where the copyright term is 70 years PMA and licenced under CC BY-NC 4.0 International in the US. See above, [[#Notes on Logic|§ ''Notes on Logic'']], for more details.


=== Bemerkungen über Frazers “The Golden Bough” ===
=== Bemerkungen über Frazers “The Golden Bough” ===
The ''Bemerkungen über Frazers “The Golden Bough”'' were first published in the Dutch journal ''Synthese'', vol. 17, no. 3, Sep. 1967, pp. 233–253.
The ''Bemerkungen über Frazers “The Golden Bough”'' were first published in the Dutch journal ''Synthese'', vol. 17, no. 3, September 1967, pp. 233–253.


Their country of origin are the Netherlands. This work is in the public domain there, as well as in Italy, because the copyright term for literary works in both countries is 70 years P.M.A.<ref>''Wet van 23 september 1912, houdende nieuwe regeling van het auteursrecht (Auteurswet 1912, tekst geldend op: 01-09-2017)'', articles 37(1). Dutch copyright law has a specific provision for posthumously published works, whereby posthumously published works that appeared before 1995 are copyrighted until 50 years after the publication date or until 70 years after the author’s death, whichever term expires the latest. In the case of the ''Bemerkungen über Frazers “The Golden Bough”'', this does not extend the copyright term beyond 1 January 2022. See ''Wet van 23 september 1912, houdende nieuwe regeling van het auteursrecht (Auteurswet 1912, tekst geldend op: 01-09-2017)'', articles 37 and 51.</ref> and the author died before 1952.
Their country of origin are the Netherlands. This work is in the public domain there, as well as in Italy, because the copyright term for literary works in both countries is 70 years P.M.A.<ref>''Wet van 23 september 1912, houdende nieuwe regeling van het auteursrecht (Auteurswet 1912, tekst geldend op: 01-09-2017)'', articles 37(1). Dutch copyright law has a specific provision for posthumously published works, whereby posthumously published works that appeared before 1995 are copyrighted until 50 years after the publication date or until 70 years after the author’s death, whichever term expires the latest. In the case of the ''Bemerkungen über Frazers “The Golden Bough”'', this does not extend the copyright term beyond 1 January 2022. See ''Wet van 23 september 1912, houdende nieuwe regeling van het auteursrecht (Auteurswet 1912, tekst geldend op: 01-09-2017)'', articles 37 and 51.</ref> and the author died before 1952.
Line 294: Line 294:
The ''Blue Book'' and the ''Brown Book'' were first published in the United Kingdom in the volume ''Preliminary Studies for the “Philosophical Investigations”. Generally Known as The Blue and Brown Books'', Blackwell, Oxford 1958.
The ''Blue Book'' and the ''Brown Book'' were first published in the United Kingdom in the volume ''Preliminary Studies for the “Philosophical Investigations”. Generally Known as The Blue and Brown Books'', Blackwell, Oxford 1958.


Their country of origin is the United Kingdom. These works are in the public domain there because copyright on posthumously published literary works that were created before 1989 and first published less than 20 years after the author’s death expires 70 years after the author’s death, and the author died before 1952.<ref>In the UK, as a general rule, copyright expires 70 years P.M.A. However, poshumously published works are subject to complex provisions. For authors, like Wittgenstein, who died before 1969, three scenarios may be applicable: (a) if the work was published before 1 August 1989 and the author died less than 20 years before the date of publication, then copyright expires 70 years after the author’s death; (b) if the work was published before 1 August 1989 and the author died more than 20 years before the date of publication, then copyright expires 50 years after the date of publication; (c) if the work was unpublished as of 1 August 1989, its copyright will expire on 31 December 1989. See Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, Schedule 1 – Copyright: Transitional Provisions And Savings, section 12. For a more readable document, see ''{{plainlink|[https://cdn.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/information-management/non-crown-copyright-flowchart.pdf Duration of Copyright (excluding Crown copyright)]}}'', The National Archives, retrieved 8 August 2022 ({{plainlink|[https://web.archive.org/web/20220421222606/https://cdn.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/information-management/non-crown-copyright-flowchart.pdf archived URL]}}). These clauses do not affect Wittgenstein’s posthumous texts that are available on the Ludwig Wittgenstein Project’s website, because all those that have the UK as their country of origin were published within 20 years of Wittgenstein’s death. However, among Wittgenstein’s writings that were first published more than 20 years after the author’s death, those that fall under the scope of scenario (b) may still be copyrighted in the UK, and those that fall under the scope of scenario (c) certainly are.</ref> It is also in the public domain in Italy, because the copyright term for literary works there is 70 years P.M.A. and the author died before 1952.
Their country of origin is the United Kingdom. These works are in the public domain there because copyright on posthumously published literary works that were created before 1989 and first published less than 20 years after the author’s death expires 70 years after the author’s death, and the author died before 1952.<ref>In the UK, as a general rule, copyright expires 70 years P.M.A. However, posthumously published works are subject to complex provisions. For authors, like Wittgenstein, who died before 1969, three scenarios may be applicable: (a) if the work was published before 1 August 1989 and the author died less than 20 years before the date of publication, then copyright expires 70 years after the author’s death; (b) if the work was published before 1 August 1989 and the author died more than 20 years before the date of publication, then copyright expires 50 years after the date of publication; (c) if the work was unpublished as of 1 August 1989, its copyright will expire on 31 December 1989. See Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, Schedule 1 – Copyright: Transitional Provisions And Savings, section 12. For a more readable document, see ''{{plainlink|[https://cdn.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/information-management/non-crown-copyright-flowchart.pdf Duration of Copyright (excluding Crown copyright)]}}'', The National Archives, retrieved 8 August 2022 ({{plainlink|[https://web.archive.org/web/20220421222606/https://cdn.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documents/information-management/non-crown-copyright-flowchart.pdf archived URL]}}). These clauses do not affect Wittgenstein’s posthumous texts that are available on the Ludwig Wittgenstein Project’s website, because all those that have the UK as their country of origin were published within 20 years of Wittgenstein’s death. However, among Wittgenstein’s writings that were first published more than 20 years after the author’s death, those that fall under the scope of scenario (b) may still be copyrighted in the UK, and those that fall under the scope of scenario (c) certainly are.</ref> It is also in the public domain in Italy, because the copyright term for literary works there is 70 years P.M.A. and the author died before 1952.


=== Philosophische Untersuchungen ===
=== Philosophische Untersuchungen ===
Retrieved from "https://www.wittgensteinproject.org/w/index.php/Special:MobileDiff/8929"