Originally Posted By: Mike Halloran
Quote:
To my knowledge, that has never been tested in a courtroom so we have no way of knowing.


Of course it's been tried. The best summary I can find is this one at Justia.com.

How will courts handle a poor man's Copyright?

In each of these instances, the courts sidestepped the issue, finding additional reasons to deny the claim but one did address the self-interest issue directly.

Also note that some of the information in the opinions is no longer correct regarding filing and the need to do so. No doubt they were correct when the opinions were written but there were many changes to this between 2020–2022.




The first example is someone who is quite obviously a fraudster and a forger while the second is an individual who is quite obviously mentally unstable and delusional.

Hell, in the first case, Mr. Smith couldn't produce the alleged documents or any witnesses.

Neither case really addressed the issue.

Of the third, no relevant details are given.

All in all, a rather shoddy analysis if you ask me. Still doesn't look like it has been tested.

I still have my doubts as to the efficacy of the alleged "poor man's copyright." The US Copyright Office's opinion does not support the idea and appears to negate the claims of these third-party services as well.

https://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-general.html

Byron Dickens

BIAB. CbB. Mixbus 32C 8 HP Envy. Intel core i7. 16GB RAM W10. Focusrite Scarlett 18i 20. Various instruments played with varying degrees of proficiency.

https://soundcloud.com/athanorsoundlabs