January 1, 2003: The Birth of the Unpublished Public Domain and Its International Implications

On January 1, 2003, a small, quiet historic transformation took place throughout the United States: unpublished works in mass came into the public domain for the first time. Section 302 of the 1976 Copyright Act created a unified system of duration, whereby unpublished and published works carry a term of life of the author plus seventy years. In order to aid with a transition from a state common law perpetual system to a limited Times federal statutory system, the 1976 Copyright Act built two mechanisms for change in the form of Section 303(a). First, Section 303(a) guarantees that no work would go into the public domain until after December 31, 2002, regardless of how long the author had been deceased. Second, the Copyright Act in Section 303(a) provided an incentive for unpublished works created but not published before 1978. If the unpublished work was published for the first time between January 1, 1978 and December 31, 2002, the new published work (protecting therefore the published portions of the unpublished work) would be granted further protection until December 31, 2047. What this means is that as of January 1, 2003, all unpublished works, by authors who had been deceased longer than seventy years, or in other words, had been deceased before January 1, 1933, were now in the public domain. This paper explores the legal elements of this change, both in a domestic as well as international context

January 1, 2003: The Birth of the Unpublished Public Domain and Its International Implications

On January 1, 2003, a small, quiet historic transformation took place throughout the United States: unpublished works in mass came into the public domain for the first time. Section 302 of the 1976 Copyright Act created a unified system of duration, whereby unpublished and published works carry a term of life of the author plus seventy years. In order to aid with a transition from a state common law perpetual system to a limited Times federal statutory system, the 1976 Copyright Act built two mechanisms for change in the form of Section 303(a). First, Section 303(a) guarantees that no work would go into the public domain until after December 31, 2002, regardless of how long the author had been deceased. Second, the Copyright Act in Section 303(a) provided an incentive for unpublished works created but not published before 1978. If the unpublished work was published for the first time between January 1, 1978 and December 31, 2002, the new published work (protecting therefore the published portions of the unpublished work) would be granted further protection until December 31, 2047. What this means is that as of January 1, 2003, all unpublished works, by authors who had been deceased longer than seventy years, or in other words, had been deceased before January 1, 1933, were now in the public domain. This paper explores the legal elements of this change, both in a domestic as well as international context

Development of a Novel Inhibitor to the Conserved, Developmental Regulator, WDR5, for Treatment of Acute Leukemia.

A majority of cases of acute leukemia in infants, as well as a subset of secondary acute leukemia in adults is characterized by translocation of the MLL1 gene to generate an oncogenic MLL1 fusion protein. The MLL1 fusion protein acts to abnormally recruit transcription-promoting mechanisms to target gene loci, including HoxA9 and Meis1. Overexpression of MLL1 gene targets through these mechanisms results in transformation. The MLL1 fusion protein has been found to cooperate with wild-type MLL1 to promote gene expression in leukemia. Wild-type MLL1 is a histone methyltransferase with specificity for H3 at lysine 4 (H3K4). Methyltransferase activity of MLL1 is stimulated through direct association with a conserved complex of proteins, WDR5, RbBP5 and ASH2L. As H3K4 methylation is strongly correlated with transcription activation in MLL1 translocation leukemias, we sought to develop inhibitors for MLL1 methyltransferase activity based on our understanding of MLL1 complex regulation by its constituent components. H3K4 methylation by the wild-type MLL1 complex is essential for expression of HoxA9 and Meis1 as well as transformation in leukemia. This activity is dependent on association between MLL1 and its direct interaction partner, WDR5. To exploit the essential function of this interaction in leukemia, we have used rational design to develop cell-permeable, peptidomimetic inhibitors, MM-102 and MM-401, to the MLL1:WDR5 interaction. We demonstrate that both MM-102 and MM-401 specifically inhibit assembly of MLL1 with WDR5, RbBP5 and ASH2L and block methyltransferase activity of the MLL1 complex. We show that mouse and human leukemia cells, transformed with MLL1 fusion proteins are specifically targeted by MM-401 and treatment with this compound results in differentiation or cell death. We also show that inhibition of the MLL1:WDR5 interaction by MM-401 specifically impairs expression of HoxA9 and Meis1, as well as histone methylation at these loci. These studies show that interaction between MLL1 and WDR5 is essential for expression of HoxA9 and Meis1 in leukemia. This also demonstrates that inhibition of the MLL1:WDR5 interaction has potential utility for treating leukemias with MLL1 rearrangement and our compound MM-401, is a promising lead for future drug development.PHDMolecular & Cellular PathologyUniversity of Michigan, Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate Studieshttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/96011/1/liztown_2.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/96011/2/liztown_1.pd

Copyright Law v. Trade Policy: Understanding the Golan Battle Within the Tenth Circuit

The Tenth Circuit seems to be in a battle with itself over the meaning and definition of our copyright system. In the last two years, the Tenth Circuit defined the public domain as a constitutionally protected component of the copyright system, and then reversing itself, defined copyright (ignoring the public domain) as a tool for international trade, where treaty obligations outweigh tradition. The Golan case stands at the center of competing priorities and definitions. How are we to understand the "physics" of the public domain within contemporary copyright law? Does copyright have principles and an internal logic to foster creativity, or is copyright to be seen as malleable tool for trade and international relations? Judge Henry in the 2007 Tenth Circuit Golan v. Gonzales stated that under the traditional contours of copyright, what comes into the public domain, stays in the public domain. With this came a First Amendment right to use public domain works, and he remanded the case back to the district court to further determine whether the statute in question required content-based or content-neutral First amendment analysis. This decision marked the first time a part of the copyright law had been found unconstitutional, and it also marked a moment where the public domain appeared to be protected by the U.S. Constitution. Upon appeal from the district court remanded decision, the Tenth Circuit appeals court—albeit with a different chief judge—found the same statute not in violation of the First Amendment, and perfectly in line with the United States' treaty and international obligations. In this opinion, works in the public domain were fair game, particularly because their restoration would somehow help American authors indirectly. Copyright was merely a tool for trade law, and, because of this, any alteration was acceptable and necessary

Rude assessment and I'm faking it: does witnessing incivility compel people to cheat?

The ease and convenience of personality testing for personnel selection purposes is somewhat marred by concerns that test-takers might fake their responses if they believe it is advantageous to do so. Whether or not a candidate fakes is determined by both the ability as well as the motivation to do so, and both are subject to individual difference as well as contextual factors. Here we report an experiment that demonstrates a powerful contextual link between rudeness and cheating. Participants who witnessed a rude encounter prior to a performance-linked cognitive task, subsequently overstated their performance (i.e. cheated) to a greater extent than participants who witnessed a neutral encounter but had the same opportunity to cheat. We suggest therefore that rudeness increases propensity to cheat. Consequently, to minimize the risk of test-takers providing fake responses, it is of practical importance to ensure a civil atmosphere before and during any testing situation that might afford an opportunity to cheat

Kamil Kubik: The Artist and Copyright Observed

For over 60 years—from the time he fled his native Czechoslovakia in 1948 until his death in August 2011—Kamil Kubik created amazing oil paintings and pastels. His art graces the walls of The Breakers in Palm Beach, Florida, the Old Ebbett Grill in Washington, DC, and the homes of Presidents, Governors, and celebrities. Many of his works were also printed as lithographs and serigraphs, and sold at more affordable prices than the four-to-five figures that he received for the originals. Fortunately, he was not dependent on the sale of these prints, as most of the original works were unprotected by copyright, and many of the prints were unauthorized reproductions. Copyright law is the key protection for the artistic and economic interests of an author. For a working artist, copyright law can be a vital tool in defending his personal property interests. As such, the result of the particular copyright law in effect at a specific point in time is dramatic and binary—a work is either under copyright or in the public domain; there is no middle ground. This essay examines the parallel relationship between Kamil’s biography and the copyright law that affected his works. What role did copyright law play, and how did his relationship with copyright provide insight into our own relationships with copyright law? Kamil’s life, as seen through the lens of copyright presents an opportunity to observe how the law interacted with an artist during the mid-20th through early 21st century. He produced artwork that spanned several distinct eras of United States copyright law, and his works created abroad add an additional dimension to their legal quagmire. The laws of copyright dramatically changed in the United States alone at least three times during Kamil’s lifetime. The complexity of the interaction between copyright law and Kamil’s work is not unique. Though this article chronicles his travels, his art, and how his copyright rights changed through time and space, it could be the story of many visual artists. The essay is important for 20th century visual artists themselves and their estates, and may provide valuable insight to museums and others interested in digitizing artists’ works. By focusing on Kamil’s journey, we hope to illuminate the intricacies, peculiarities, and sorrows that make up the copyright story of 20th century artists