[E-trademarks] Off Topic Copyright Question New Version vs Derivative Work

[Sam Castree]

Yeah, I do a lot of video game copyrights, and I usually give a single
blanket statement like "pre-existing software tools" to cover a bunch of
different things like the game engine, recycled software tools, third-party
fonts, and whatever else.

Cheers,

Sam Castree, III

*Sam Castree Law, LLC\*
*3421 W. Elm St.*
*McHenry, IL 60050*
*(815) 344-6300*



On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 7:45 PM Laura Geyer via E-trademarks <
e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:

> Concur - I do these regularly. You just specify what’s covered and there’s
> a spot where you identify generally what isn’t covered usually you can say
> something as simple as pre-existing written material or similar.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Feb 1, 2024, at 16:44, Stacey Friends via E-trademarks <
> e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
>
> 
>
>
>
> Hi, Richard, I do not recall there being any such requirement.  I agree
> with Sam, there is just  a space where you  disclaim previously existing or
> registered material.
>
>
>
>
> *From:* E-trademarks <e-trademarks-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> *On Behalf
> Of *Sam Castree via E-trademarks
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 1, 2024 3:43 PM
> *To:* For trademark practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek
> legal advice. <e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com>
> *Cc:* Sam Castree <sam at castreelaw.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [E-trademarks] Off Topic Copyright Question New Version vs
> Derivative Work
>
>
>
> Dear Richard,
>
>
>
> I don't specifically remember there being anything in the online copyright
> registration form about whether something is a derivative work.  There is a
> page in which you disclaim any prior registrations and other preexisting
> material that isn't being registered, so the previous registration number
> would be included there.  But I don't think that you have to specify
> anything about derivative works.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sam Castree, III
>
> *Sam Castree Law, LLC*
> *3421 W. Elm St.*
> *McHenry, IL 60050*
> *(815) 344-6300*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2024 at 2:30 PM Richard Straussman via E-trademarks <
> e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
>
> Colleagues who do lots of copyright registrations:
>
> (I thought that there was a separate Copyright list, but can't seem to
> find any past messages in my Inbox).
>
>     I am trying to discern, for purposes of filing for copyright
> registration, whether the following (somewhat fictitious, but analogous)
> fact pattern would represent filing for registration of a "new version" or
> merely a derivative work (I know that a new version IS ITSELF a derivative
> work).
>
>     Assume a person created and published an 8 page research paper 5 years
> ago and at the time person got a copyright registration for it as a
> published work.  Now, the person creates an 80 page booklet that includes,
> substantially *verbatim* scattered throughout, about 5 pages of text from
> their copyrighted work, albeit not necessarily always contiguous.  All of
> the rest (for which they would now seek registration as an unpublished
> work) is new and original to them and the rest would be properly identified
> as subject to the prior copyright.
>
>     My question is:  Is the new work specifically to be identified as a
> "new version" or merely as a derivative work?  As a practical matter, does
> it make a difference with respect to validity in any way if we call it a
> derivative work and it really is a "new version" or vice versa?
>
>     I know that the Copyright Office can get pedantic about trivial things
> (cue sarcasm - unlike the USPTO), so I would like to be correct on this
> point, since the bulletins from the Copyright Office make a distinction,
> there must be SOME reason.
>
>     Thanks in advance!!
>
> --
> *Richard Straussman*
>
>
> * Senior Counsel Registered Patent Attorney *Member NY, NJ & CT Bars
> *. . . . . . . . . . . . . .*
> *Weitzman Law Offices, LLC*
> *Intellectual Property Law*
> 425 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 401 (PLEASE NOTE THE SUITE CHANGE)
> Roseland, NJ 07068
> *direct line* 973.403.9943
> *main* 973.403.9940
> *fax* 973.403.9944
> *e-mail* rstraussman at weitzmanip.com
>
> *http://www.weitzmanip.com
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.weitzmanip.com_&d=DwMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=QAp6_lclwF49MzEk9QDGFhRB6BXlzbS1Stv1o64oJmE&m=kuJAR1tuGuiRoo073xz223AXp313z29qVTkJfanHuuM2ORtZ4DkvUnJms5o6q8zg&s=GZGMVXo3bxt1pQCuQ178wOLpEhxK-2d1irrQ6gLuylE&e=>*
>
>
>
> --
> E-trademarks mailing list
> E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__oppedahl-2Dlists.com_mailman_listinfo_e-2Dtrademarks-5Foppedahl-2Dlists.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=euGZstcaTDllvimEN8b7jXrwqOf-v5A_CdpgnVfiiMM&r=QAp6_lclwF49MzEk9QDGFhRB6BXlzbS1Stv1o64oJmE&m=kuJAR1tuGuiRoo073xz223AXp313z29qVTkJfanHuuM2ORtZ4DkvUnJms5o6q8zg&s=oav88CNSdAUkseDnMjBZ8KM_lwxOQ3M_P2i3XKGjBoQ&e=>
>
> --
E-trademarks mailing list
E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com
http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com
-- 
E-trademarks mailing list
E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com
http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240202/6a84733c/attachment.htm>