Story dates

I do think that the date that a story was published has a value, and when an author supplies this with the story, it ought to be preserved in the archived version. For one think, it allows a reader to follow the development of the author's work, should the reader so choose.

I generally include as a closing line my name or initials and the date the story was written or "published" i.e initially posted to the net. I would wish this to be preserved in archived copies.

Moreover, a proper, legal copyright notice must, under US law, include a year. Not every author provides such a notice, but I always do, and my posting conditions normally specify that copyright notice and byline be UNALTERED.

I see at least two of my verses here that are not co-authored, and that do not have the original copyright notices intact.

I for one would strongly prefer that such notices be retained in the form that I post them.

-Don A. Landhill

The database table that holds the submission details does not include a value for the initial date of publication as in the majority of cases we have been unaware of it and at this stage it's not practical to start recording it.

As far as the law is concerned I'm not sure that the US law is applicable. The site offers 2 possibilities as far as copyright notices are concerned. One is to have the default copyright message displayed, the other is to have a set of words specified by the author displayed. We don't, however, have a facility to have a different copyright notice on each submission, nor any plans to.

With a facility such as this, with around 20,000 items, it is far easier to manage if some degree of commonality can be maintained and to date the way we do things appears to have been acceptable to everyone. We only have 2 items of yours that are not co-authored (at least I assume they weren't co-authored as strictly speaking we should only have the co-authored works) but if you'd like us to remove them please just drop us a note to that effect via email and we'll take care of it right away.

The US has signed on with the Berne Convention (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Convention_for_the_Protection_of_Literary_and_Art istic_Works ) and as such even such trivial writings as this post are theoretically copyrighted in the US the moment they are typed.

But the US seems to have a 'weak' copyright (e.g. the one effecting this post) and a "strong" one called registered copyright. This page
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/
gives details on that process.


And from that page:
When is my work protected?
Your work is under copyright protection the moment it is created and fixed in a tangible form that it is perceptible either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.

Why should I register my work if copyright protection is automatic?
Registration is recommended for a number of reasons. Many choose to register their works because they wish to have the facts of their copyright on the public record and have a certificate of registration. Registered works may be eligible for statutory damages and attorney's fees in successful litigation. Finally, if registration occurs within 5 years of publication, it is considered prima facie evidence in a court of law. See Circular 1, Copyright Basics, section "Copyright Registration" and Circular 38b, Highlights of Copyright Amendments Contained in the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA), on non-U.S. works.

---
I hope this helps!

Goodgulf

I should also add that we take a great deal of effort in ensuring the copyright of author's works. It's one thing debating the minutiae of the copyright message but of course the average copyright violator isn't going to pay any heed anyway. I'm sure Rollin will confirm the fact then when one of his articles in Wellred Weekly was recently reproduced uncredited and without his permission, on a number of sites (about 8 or 9 as I recall) on tumblr I personally contacted each tumblr site owner to request its removal. On top of that I further submitted 3 DMCA takedown requests when one of the site owners refused to remove it.

Goodgulf has provided a good summary of US copyright law. I have a few words about practicalities. There are 3 things to consider: existence, enforcement, and recovery. As to existence, that's the easy one. I won't repeat Goodgulf's definition which is absolutely correct, only to say that copyright attaches automatically as soon as the work is created in a tangible medium of expression (not when it's just banging around in your head). Enforcement, however, requires registration. Copyrights are enforced only in US District Court and you must plead the actual registration or your suit will be dismissed. Finally, recovery. If the infringement began after registration or you registered within 90 days of first publication, you may recover statutory damages and attorney's fees. In other words, you do not have to prove ACTUAL damages. Let's take my 9 Plots article. Had I sued post infringement, I'd get only actual damages. What might those be? Well, since I published on a free board, not much. I didn't lose money because someone took it and republished, it's just annoying. How about if I had registered in time? Aha! I get anywhere between $750 and $150,000 PLUS ATTORNEYS FEES. And folks, I cannot emphasize enough the importance of that last part. So be forewarned. If you are concerned about copyright infringement, there is only one word and that word is REGISTER (within 90 days of first publication).

Goodgulf and Rollin have fairly accurately stated the US copyright law. They are also correct that a copyright suit over a spanking verse or short story that was never commercially published is unlikely -- even if the author did register the copyright in a timely way the legal expense would quite likely be too high for the probable damages.

It should be mentioned, however, that a complete copyright notice eliminates the defense of innocent infringement, the "but I didn't know it was copyrighted" defense. A complete notice consists of :
a) The symbol © (the letter C in a circle), or the word "Copyright," or the abbreviation "Copr."; and
b) The year of first publication of the work; and
c) The name of the owner of copyright in the work, or an abbreviation by which the name can be recognized, or a generally known alternative designation of the owner.

Example: © 2011 John Doe

All that said, the copyright notice is not my primary concern, and i should not have written my initial post to suggest that it was. While a complete copyright notice is IMO worth having, more important is the publication date itself, in one form or another. This puts the work in the context of the world when it was written, it also puts it in the time context of the author's career. Being able to go through an author's works in order of publication can be quite interesting and rewarding. This is particularly true on a site like this that is likely to receive submissions long after publication and not in publication order.

My basic argument is that copyrights and copyright notices quite aside, the year of publication is a basic item of metadata for any publication. You call this a Library, not a forum -- pretty much all libraries list the publication dates of their contents.

I have worked on database-driven projects before (including one with well over 100,000 entries in the major table and several other tables with 10-50,000 entries). I do understand the cost of introducing a new field in an existing table, with a need to populate it for existing records, and a need to change procedures.

You already have a "date first listed" field. You could, if you choose, clone that as "publication date" and then for those new and (perhaps) existing items where the author provides you with a pub date, use that to update the field. I am not for a moment suggesting that the LSF staff attempt to research a pub date when the author does not provide one.


More simply, with no changes to the database structure at all, you could allow the existing Author Note field to contain a pub date and/or a dated copyright notice to supplement your auto-generated notice (not
replace it) for any items where the author provided this and requested you use it. That would take no more effort than any author note. I don't see much of a downside to permitting such info in author notes, but perhaps I have failed to understand the issue.


I am not trying to make this a confrontation, and I am sorry if it sounded as if I was.

I do like and approve of the LSF, and i think you for the large amount of work that i can see has gone into it. This is a relatively minor proposed change, and the world, even the LSF, will not stand or fall by its being made, or not, in my view.

AS to the two works of mine mentioned above, I am sure you loaded what was sent to you, and I am not angry about it, nor do I plan to ask you to pull the items. Indeed I have submitted and plan to submit for inclusion multiple additional items: stories and verse.

I do request that at least my stated date of publication, and if possible my copyright notice as given in the originals, be included in the author notes. Or that a "signature" such as "-DAL Jan 2001" be allowed to remain at the wend of an item. If this is not acceptable, I ask that I be permitted to include such info in an author comment. But I am NOT threatening to "pick up my bat and ball" -- or my stories -- and storm off if you do not accept my views. That would be childish, and at least deserving of a spanking.

-Don A Landhill

The fact that the site is called Library of Spanking Fiction in no way implies we are intended to be the virtual equivalent of an actual library, nor has that been suggested anywhere to the best of my knowledge. It's simply easier to say 'Library of Spanking Fiction', than 'a website containing items of spanking fiction with a degree of organization'. In fact the whole library concept is nothing more than a bit of fun (as illustrated by items such as the library card) which ultimately is what the site is about. It was created for a number of reasons but primarily simply to allow people to easily find works of spanking fiction they might enjoy reading without the usual frustration that tends to result from trying to locate things on forums. And nothing more than that.

As for the 'date authored' field I am fully aware of a number of ways that such an item could be introduced but I'm also sure you'll be aware that just because something can be added to a software module or database is not a valid reason for doing so, especially as ultimately it's going to mean yet more work for a number of people.

I thought I recalled a staff post or page making the distinction between a Library and a Forum with some emphasis in regard to a demand for at least a minimum level of quality in both writing and formatting. This seemed to me to go with that, but it is at best an analogy or a metaphor, and does not dictate decisions.


That is surely true. It is always a balancing act and a judgement call. I attempted to provide some reasons why this might be worth doing, but of course that is not my decision. I merely ask that you consider it.

You don't mention my suggestion of allowing an author who so chooses to include the publication date in the Author Note, or in the body of the story. It doesn't seem to me as if permitting this would involve any extra work for the LSF staff. Would this be acceptable?

-Don L.

It does seem to me that these learned discourses on copyright law mean we are straying on to lawyers' territory. God forbid we should have to enlist the services of the local "Sue, Grabbit & Run."

The library is essentially a fun organisation where readers and authors with common interests can enjoy each others works. I personally don't give a damn if my humble efforts are copied or posted elsewhere, and none of us (I hope) are in it for the money.

The answer is simple. The three librarians have set this library up at their own expense and considerable effort and are entitled to run things as they see fit. If any of us don't like this, the answer is simple: go elsewhere!

Although I remain to be convinced that publication date is of general interest to the majority I've made a couple of minor changes such that if the date of publication is included in brackets at the end of the synopsis text it will get added to the end of the copyright statement when the item is viewed.