From: John Cowan (
Date: Tue May 16 2000 - 13:06:24 EDT

Antoine Leca wrote:

> Certainly (I like "agreement" above, because it conveys a meaning of
> exchange of common values). And as a legal term, it has same status
> as the Copyright sign (unless I am missing something).

Not at all. The COPYRIGHT SYMBOL is defined by international agreements
as a part of copyright notices; however, it is equivalent to use
the strings "Copyright" or "Copr." irrespective of the language of the
copyrighted work, if any. Note that "(C)" which one sometimes
sees in software is *not* legally equivalent.
> More to the point, Copyright is a law of the United States of America,
> that have nothing to do with my own law.

Under the controlling Berne Treaty, a document is not in the public domain
simply because a proper copyright notice is omitted. However, the presence
of a copyright notice means that an infringer cannot claim to be innocent
by reason of not knowing the document is copyrighted.

Both France and the U.S. (along with essentially every other country)
are signatories to this treaty.

> The summum is reached by TM. This symbol holds no meaning in France
> (as far as I know), but as it conveys an American symbolism, it is
> perceived as modern.

TM is not of legal effect in the U.S. either. The REGISTERED SYMBOL is
of legal effect in the U.S., and indicates a trademark registered by the
U.S. (Patent and) Trademark Office.

> That's said, I have nothing against (or pro) the inclusion of American
> legal symbols in Unicode. The only point is that it have been done in
> the past.

The proposed COPYLEFT SYMBOL, however, has no legal effect anywhere.


Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! || John Cowan <> Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau, || Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau, || Und trank die Milch vom Paradies. -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:02 EDT