In case it wasn’t clear before, I am talking only about US copyright law, following from this post:
In the United States, the images of the Rider Waite deck are in public domain (Europe in 2027). What is still in copyright are the versions published by US Games Systems. So far there hasn't been a case of USG prosecuting various private card creators using images from the deck or creating derivations. If they do attempt it and are successful, well...there goes all those private Kickstarter decks.
Since I and USG are both located in the United States, that is where a lawsuit against me (in the hypothetical situation where I actually wanted to make a deck with these images) would need to be brought.
US Games will send a cease and desist notice as soon as they find out about someone producing a deck that is very close to the RWS. I know this from a friend, who produced a few facsimile Pam-A decks for some friends. US Games found out and send out a cease and desist.
USG do enforce with monotonous regularity - someone here wanted to use the images in a book - black and white yet - and the bill was going to be terrifying - even though it was a reprint of a book for which he had purchased a licence for the first print run. He ended up using a different deck. USG - while I recognise their value to the tarot community - do seem determined to do everything they can to continue to enforce "their"copyright.
This is why I included the recent court ruling and settlement regarding the Happy Birthday song. Warner was doing both of these things. Other creators who wanted to use the song went along with it for a long time. But when it was finally challenged in court, Warner did not prevail. I will also note that it took a class action to proceed because it is not worth it for any individual to mount an extensive and expensive legal challenge, even if they are in the right. This is especially true for someone who is just making a few copies for friends.
There are many threads about this -
here;
here;
here
and there's
this website.
Everything I see in these actually confirms my original opinion. For example:
Various people have various opinions, but nothing can be said for certain unless there is a court decision. Within that ambiguity you need to form your own judgement about the risks.
The US generally recognizes the EU copyright, but not for works with original publication prior to 1923. Most of the rest of the world recognizes the EU copyright.
US Games has sued various entities and won, mostly in the 1970s. None of those cases were recent enough to refer to/clarify the reasoning they are currently depending on for their copyright claim.
To me is seems fairly clear that there is a good argument that the US copyright expired long ago, and in fact that's what the text I reinstated says. It's equally obvious that the UK/EU copyright is, a) determined by the date of Colman-Smith's death, and b) is thus still in force until the end of 2021.
All that said, it was only when looking closely today at how the 1911 Act deals with pre-existing commissioned works that I realised that it is probable that any copyright assigned to Waite in 1910 actually reverted to Colman-Smith's estate in 1952. On that basis, while US Games/Stuart Kaplan may be correct in asserting that the UK/EU copyright is still in force, they would probably have a tough time proving that they themselves are actually entitled to exploit it.
and SOMEONE has been enthusiastically editing
wikipedia to say that it still holds up. And it seems to me that not long ago someone here pointed to a recent interview with Kaplan, who was saying EXACTLY how long he believed the copyright held up - adn there was no suggestion it had expired.
Anyone can update Wikipedia, just like anyone can send a cease and desist letter. Kaplan has an interest in promoting the idea that copyright is still enforceable. He is not an unbiased source.
And from Mary Greer's newsletter AGES ago:
MKG herself said,
PKT and the RWS deck is out of copyright in the US (published before 1923). However, any work that re-prints this material cannot be sold in parts of the world that have different copyright laws that extend copyright - i.e., the UK, EU, etc. <snip> Random House bought out Rider & Co. They, along with Waite's heirs, assigned the copyright to USGames to uphold. I'm not sure about Smith's heirs - if there are any.
So if USG want to enforce copyright on the basis of when PCS died and that she still owned the rights, they will need to prove that they obtained the rights from her heirs or her estate. Does anyone believe they did, and that they can prove it?
There's also an article by Holly Voley, discussing it in passing in an 2009 Tarosophy magazine.
http://www.tarotassociation.net/magazine/TarosophistIntv1i5.pdf
I skimmed Holly’s article, but I didn’t see a discussion of copyright. Can you point me to the relevant portion?
***
Whew! After all that, I think we need a fun little break. This is not related to tarot, but an amusing, informative, and relatively short video arguing for why limiting the length of copyright terms is a good thing.
Copyright: Forever Less One Day
Edit: And sorry for hijacking the thread! I did make a copy of this post in case it gets deleted for being off-topic