Copyright issues
short version and long version.
short version:
Is the Berne Convention retroactive to works published in Viet Nam
before that country signed the convention in 1994?
Has publication of canonical Vietnamese modernists by overseas presses
(since 1975 in the US ; since 1900 in France ) establish copyright for the
Vietnamese authors?
long version:
Under the Berne convention, literary works remain under copyright for
seventy-five years after the death of the author.
So, most of literary modernism worldwide is owned by somebody, and will
remain intellectual property here as long as the United States remains a
party to the Berne Convention and the estate of the modernist Walt
Disney has anything to say about about US copyright law.
So, the works of Vu Trong Phung (d. 1939) and Pham Quynh (d. 1945) to
say nothing of Nhat Linh (d. 1963) likely belong to somebody.
If Viet Nam signature to Berne is retroactive, the case is
straightforward. If not, it seems to me that the widespread publication
of the canon of Vietnamese modernism by such publishers as Song Moi in
Arkansas from 1975, and by publishers in France extending nearly a
century before, would also establish US copyright.
In whose name? Publishers? Heirs? It is a mare's nest, one that has
intimidated me since 1989. Since I am now publishing such people again,
I have to start sorting it out.
The question of intellectual property is deeply involved with questions
of literary canon. The estates of Eliot and Pound and Frost are still
very much involved in what critics can quote, translators can translate,
and students can read.
So this is an important question for the establishment of Vietnamese
Studies as a normal field in the United States . I suspect lawyers don't
have an answer yet, so I need to get the facts straight before I start
paying them or asking them for pro bono hours.
Do I have the right angle on this? Am I missing something?
Dan