2 ms·

No, legal derivative works can only be made with the authorization of the copyright holder[1]. The question was specifically about an unauthorized derivation.

No, legal derivative works can only be made with the authorization of the copyright holder[1]. The question was specifically about an unauthorized derivation. Creating any unauthorized derivative work is illegal and thus ineligible for copyright protection, including the preparation of unauthorized translations (other than under fair use exemptions such as for news reporting, research, or scholarly purposes).[2] [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106 [2] http://www.unc.edu/~unclng/copy-corner73.htm http://www.unc.edu/~unclng/copy-corner73.htm

detaro 10y ago
Just saw your other comment and edited, apparently I didn't check thoroughly enough for the US (Here in Germany the permission isn't needed in most cases. Without permission you can't do much with your derivative work afterwards of course)
dragonwriter 10y ago
As I understand it, there are two different issues, copyright in the derivative work, and legality of the act of creating the derivative work. Copyright of a derivative work that itself meets the standard for copyrightability rests with the creator of the derivative, because, under law, any copyrightable work has a copyright that belongs to the creator at the moment it is created. A derivative created without proper permission is also a violation of the copyright of the original, but that's a separate issue.
logicallee 10y ago
how can people do these kinds of work on a speculative basis then? surely their work is protected by copyright even though if they were to reproduce it, it would be infringing. I am sure it's in their copyright when they try to sell it to the company they've derived it from. otherwise how could anyone do spec work! EDIT: I mean unsolicited spec work - the company they're pitching doesn't even know they're pitching them until they send their pitch. Surely their pitch is still protected by copyright, even though as it's unauthorized the person producing it wouldn't have the right to publish their pitch without approval (if it's a derivative of the company's assets)?

detaro 10y ago

Just saw your other comment and edited, apparently I didn't check thoroughly enough for the US (Here in Germany the permission isn't needed in most cases. Without permission you can't do much with your derivative work afterwards of course)

dragonwriter 10y ago

As I understand it, there are two different issues, copyright in the derivative work, and legality of the act of creating the derivative work. Copyright of a derivative work that itself meets the standard for copyrightability rests with the creator of the derivative, because, under law, any copyrightable work has a copyright that belongs to the creator at the moment it is created. A derivative created without proper permission is also a violation of the copyright of the original, but that's a separate issue.

logicallee 10y ago

how can people do these kinds of work on a speculative basis then? surely their work is protected by copyright even though if they were to reproduce it, it would be infringing. I am sure it's in their copyright when they try to sell it to the company they've derived it from. otherwise how could anyone do spec work! EDIT: I mean unsolicited spec work - the company they're pitching doesn't even know they're pitching them until they send their pitch. Surely their pitch is still protected by copyright, even though as it's unauthorized the person producing it wouldn't have the right to publish their pitch without approval (if it's a derivative of the company's assets)?