Public domain film
Encyclopedia
A public domain film is a film
that was released to public domain
by its author or because its copyright
has expired.
Due to the U.S. Copyright Term Extension Act
, no more films will automatically enter public domain in the United States
until January 1, 2019, when the copyright will expire on films released in 1923 (and in 2020 films from 1924, and so on).
Another issue specific to the U.S. nonetheless impacts world copyright. The Uruguay Round agreements on copyright led to the U.S. Congress re-imposing copyright on some items which had fallen into the public domain (in section 514 of the URAA Act), as of 1996.
In the course of changes made to both U.S. domestic law and international copyright agreements in the last two decades, some works which had fallen in the public domain had copyright restored in the U.S. This was challenged on the grounds that works once in the public domain could not revert to copyright protection - a constitutional question. The see-saw course of court decisions on the matter have caused confusion, with many significant works (such as The Third Man
) changing status several times in a short period.
Specifically, from a holding published on 3 April 2009 to a reversal on 21 June 2010, re-imposition of copyright was not permitted. That brief period came after the 2001 American case Golan v. Gonzales was reconsidered as Golan v. Holder. Since the Supreme Court of the U.S. has granted certiorari, we may expect a definitive answer on point soon; meanwhile, re-imposition of copyright stands.
Initially, Judge Babcock held that the First Amendment
was not applicable to resurrecting foreign copyright claims. This holding followed tradition in that the First Amendment (which protects against suppression of free speech by government) has always been held not to prevail against the earlier copyright clause (copyrights are generally held by persons, not the U.S. government).
Subsequently, Babcock reversed himself on advice by a higher court that such an act by an arm of government (Congress) changed the traditional interpretation of copyright and should be subject to First Amendment scrutiny. That reversal was itself reversed on appeal and summary judgement granted for the government.
Babcock's holding - that "In the United States, that body of law includes the bedrock principle that works in the public domain remain in the public domain. Removing works from the public domain violated Plaintiffs’ vested First Amendment interests" - therefore no longer applies. Unless and until review is complete by SCOTUS, public domain works can have copyright re-imposed by international treaty and the First Amendment will not prevent it.
Note that restored
, subtitled
, and dubbed
versions of films can themselves be subject to copyright
, even if other elements of the film are in the public domain. Thus even if a film dates from 1915 and as such is ineligible for copyright in the United States of America, a 2004 version with new visual or audio elements (including the addition of a new recording of the score of a silent film) may be itself eligible for a 2004 copyright to those new elements. Special features and packaging are themselves subject to copyright protection.
The question of whether restored films like the most recent version of Metropolis can be copyrighted will not be clear till after the SCOTUS review is complete. That is because the SCOTUS review examines both the First Amendment issue, affecting a version which existed in 1996, and also the much more fundamental question whether Congress has the right to remove works from the public domain at all. There is also a legal question in the U.S. whether a restored print, as a copy of a public domain work, is not original - so does not qualify for copyright protection.
Film
A film, also called a movie or motion picture, is a series of still or moving images. It is produced by recording photographic images with cameras, or by creating images using animation techniques or visual effects...
that was released to public domain
Public domain
Works are in the public domain if the intellectual property rights have expired, if the intellectual property rights are forfeited, or if they are not covered by intellectual property rights at all...
by its author or because its copyright
Copyright
Copyright is a legal concept, enacted by most governments, giving the creator of an original work exclusive rights to it, usually for a limited time...
has expired.
Public domain film by country
Many pre-1954 Japanese films have passed into public domain in Japan. See Japanese Films copyright timeline.Due to the U.S. Copyright Term Extension Act
Copyright Term Extension Act
The Copyright Term Extension Act of 1998 extended copyright terms in the United States by 20 years. Since the Copyright Act of 1976, copyright would last for the life of the author plus 50 years, or 75 years for a work of corporate authorship...
, no more films will automatically enter public domain in the United States
Public domain in the United States
Works are in the public domain if they are not covered by intellectual property rights, such as copyright, at all, or if the intellectual property rights to the works has expired.- Public domain in copyrighted works in the United States :...
until January 1, 2019, when the copyright will expire on films released in 1923 (and in 2020 films from 1924, and so on).
Another issue specific to the U.S. nonetheless impacts world copyright. The Uruguay Round agreements on copyright led to the U.S. Congress re-imposing copyright on some items which had fallen into the public domain (in section 514 of the URAA Act), as of 1996.
In the course of changes made to both U.S. domestic law and international copyright agreements in the last two decades, some works which had fallen in the public domain had copyright restored in the U.S. This was challenged on the grounds that works once in the public domain could not revert to copyright protection - a constitutional question. The see-saw course of court decisions on the matter have caused confusion, with many significant works (such as The Third Man
The Third Man
The Third Man is a 1949 British film noir, directed by Carol Reed and starring Joseph Cotten, Alida Valli, Orson Welles, and Trevor Howard. Many critics rank it as a masterpiece, particularly remembered for its atmospheric cinematography, performances, and unique musical score...
) changing status several times in a short period.
Specifically, from a holding published on 3 April 2009 to a reversal on 21 June 2010, re-imposition of copyright was not permitted. That brief period came after the 2001 American case Golan v. Gonzales was reconsidered as Golan v. Holder. Since the Supreme Court of the U.S. has granted certiorari, we may expect a definitive answer on point soon; meanwhile, re-imposition of copyright stands.
Initially, Judge Babcock held that the First Amendment
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering...
was not applicable to resurrecting foreign copyright claims. This holding followed tradition in that the First Amendment (which protects against suppression of free speech by government) has always been held not to prevail against the earlier copyright clause (copyrights are generally held by persons, not the U.S. government).
Subsequently, Babcock reversed himself on advice by a higher court that such an act by an arm of government (Congress) changed the traditional interpretation of copyright and should be subject to First Amendment scrutiny. That reversal was itself reversed on appeal and summary judgement granted for the government.
Babcock's holding - that "In the United States, that body of law includes the bedrock principle that works in the public domain remain in the public domain. Removing works from the public domain violated Plaintiffs’ vested First Amendment interests" - therefore no longer applies. Unless and until review is complete by SCOTUS, public domain works can have copyright re-imposed by international treaty and the First Amendment will not prevent it.
Note that restored
Photo restoration
Photo restoration is the practice of restoring a photograph which has been damaged or affected by age.- Digital photo restoration :Digital photo restoration uses digital image editing techniques to remove visible damage and aging effects from photographs...
, subtitled
Subtitle (captioning)
Subtitles are textual versions of the dialog in films and television programs, usually displayed at the bottom of the screen. They can either be a form of written translation of a dialog in a foreign language, or a written rendering of the dialog in the same language, with or without added...
, and dubbed
Dubbing (filmmaking)
Dubbing is the post-production process of recording and replacing voices on a motion picture or television soundtrack subsequent to the original shooting. The term most commonly refers to the substitution of the voices of the actors shown on the screen by those of different performers, who may be...
versions of films can themselves be subject to copyright
Copyright
Copyright is a legal concept, enacted by most governments, giving the creator of an original work exclusive rights to it, usually for a limited time...
, even if other elements of the film are in the public domain. Thus even if a film dates from 1915 and as such is ineligible for copyright in the United States of America, a 2004 version with new visual or audio elements (including the addition of a new recording of the score of a silent film) may be itself eligible for a 2004 copyright to those new elements. Special features and packaging are themselves subject to copyright protection.
The question of whether restored films like the most recent version of Metropolis can be copyrighted will not be clear till after the SCOTUS review is complete. That is because the SCOTUS review examines both the First Amendment issue, affecting a version which existed in 1996, and also the much more fundamental question whether Congress has the right to remove works from the public domain at all. There is also a legal question in the U.S. whether a restored print, as a copy of a public domain work, is not original - so does not qualify for copyright protection.