International Copyright and Japan

[Emoni]

This might be a rather off shoot post, but I could think of no better place to ask.

I use Mixi, for Japanese practice mostly. It seems quite useful for both reading and writing practice. I'll post basic updates sometimes, but I have been putting together something new. A Mixi online comic/story based on ideas I've had. I've pieced together a story, some very basic artwork and plan to use it for writing practice.

However, I've seen numerous instances of ideas stolen from time to time, even in Japan. I'm curious what rights I would have to my idea and material in this regard... Would Mixi own the rights because it was posted on their site? Would there be any international laws protecting work? I wouldn't even know where to start honestly. I don't expect anything to take off with my little story, but I obviously don't want to leave myself open to have work stolen.

Is anyone familiar with this situation in general? International copy right or the rules in Japan concerning such material?

Thank you to who ever is familiar with something such as this.




(Disclaimer: While I'm personally concerned with my situation specifically, I am clearly open to other posts related to the topic being mentioned as well, such as international copy write law details, details in Japan, example stories of stolen material or topics that, in general, relate to this OP. )

[FrustratedDave]

Anything you write is your interllectual property whether it be on "mixi" or a personal blog(Unless they specifically have a clausse stating otherwise in their contract or terms of use.) and you have every right to pursue and a ruling of copyright in a court of law.

However, you will have tp prove that the material is in fact yours and not to mention the fact that it will cost you loads of money just so they won't be able to use it. So you have to weight up the possibility of your little story turning in to another "Harry Potter" success story ,or suck it up and realise that not much is safe on the internet. Your other option if you really are concerned is don't post it on the net.

[Emoni]

Good point on just not posting it on the net. Moreover, looking through terms and agreements in Japanese for a site like Mixi isn't exactly easy to do when it isn't my native language. I have thought of also posting the material on a linked site instead actually... of course that doesn't avoid the fact about fighting for rights obviously as that always seems to be an issue that could pop up.

I wouldn't expect a site such as mixi to declare, or even have the right to claim that all rights are lost to Mixi if material is posted by users... that doesn't sound legal nor sensible considering material is up there. I'll have to try to check.

[FrustratedDave]

Good point on just not posting it on the net. Moreover, looking through terms and agreements in Japanese for a site like Mixi isn't exactly easy to do when it isn't my native language. I have thought of also posting the material on a linked site instead actually... of course that doesn't avoid the fact about fighting for rights obviously as that always seems to be an issue that could pop up.

I wouldn't expect a site such as mixi to declare, or even have the right to claim that all rights are lost to Mixi if material is posted by users... that doesn't sound legal nor sensible considering material is up there. I'll have to try to check.
I doubt mixi has a clause like that or people would not write stuff on their site. But I have not read the terms and agreements so I can't say for sure.

[nice gaijin]

I read somewhere that facebook did something like that (claiming ownership over all content posted on their site)... has anyone else heard this?

[Emoni]

^ I had heard the same at one time, which why I was a bit concerned. However, to what extent that goes and for what purposes is a critical sub-issue.

[FrustratedDave]

Yes facebook has this clause in their terms and agreement and yes it is valid. Any content you post to any part of their site automaticaly grants them the licence to distribute that said works and the licence is indefinate. The terms and agreement are binding and you have no way of transfering that content to a different party without the consent of Facebook. But... you do have the right to withdraw the contents of your posting and the indenfinate licence to face book will expire. So try and figure that one out????

But like I said ,I have not read mixis terms and agreement. But your interlectual work is yours without having to put a copyright mark on it, it is automatic.

[nice gaijin]

But... you do have the right to withdraw the contents of your posting and the indenfinate licence to face book will expire. So try and figure that one out????
Hmm, it seems like they are saying that they have a claim over the content you post so long as it is on their site, so if you wish to revoke their rights over your content, your only option is to remove it yourself.

At least it seems to give you a way of reclaiming full ownership of your intellectual property.

[FrustratedDave]

Hmm, it seems like they are saying that they have a claim over the content you post so long as it is on their site, so if you wish to revoke their rights over your content, your only option is to remove it yourself.
At least it seems to give you a way of reclaiming full ownership of your intellectual property.
That is basically it, pretty ridiculus agreement if you ask me.

[epigene]

mixi's regulations on intellectual property rights are in Article 18:

第18条　日記等の情報の使用許諾等
1
本サービスを利用して投稿された日記等の情報の権利（著作権および著作者人格権等の周辺権利）は、創作した ユーザーに帰属します。
2
弊社は、ユーザーが投稿する日記等の情報を、本サービスの円滑な提供、弊社システムの構築、改良、メンテナ ンスに必要な範囲内で、使用することができるものとします。
3
弊社が前項に定める形で日記等の情報を使用するにあたっては、情報の一部又は氏名表示を省略することができ るものとします。
4
弊社が第2項に定める形で日記等の情報を使用するにあたっては、ユーザーが設定している情報の公開の範囲を 超える形ではこれを使用しません。

The user basically holds ownership rights.
mixi is supposed to intervene only within the scope of management of the website and with due respect to the rights of the user.

Article 23 says that law to be applied in case of a dispute is the laws of Japan and the court of jurisdiction the Tokyo District Court.

Just for your information. :-)

[Emoni]

Thank you very much Epigene! That was something that is very difficult for me to find, let alone know if I'm interpreting it correctly. Very much appreciated. Thanks.

Nice to know Mixi is a bit less crazy than Facebook.

[RolandtheHeadless]

I'm not sure why it is that some websites think they can make up their own copyright law.

In the US copyright and other intellectual property law is made by Congress. Our Copyright Act makes the rules, and doesn't say that individuals or businesses may make up the rules for themselves. There is also the international Berne Convention on copyright, of which the US and Japan are both signators. The following describes US law (since that's what I'm familiar with), but I'd expect Japanese law to largely be similar because of the Berne Convention. Words in parentheses are taken from the US Copyright Act, which defines them.

An "author" has a copyright as soon as his work is "fixed in any tangible medium of expression." A child has a copyright in his crayon scrawls, and a shopper has a copyright in her shopping list.

An author may assign all of his copyright to another party, or grant an exclusive "license," but ONLY by signing a written agreement that says so. But lesser rights (a "non-exclusive license") may be assigned orally or even by implication. By posting this here I'm granting the site-owner a non-exclusive license to display this post on this site.

One problem I see in the opening post is a confusion between ideas and the expression of those ideas. Only the latter is subject to copyright. In Western law at least, ideas are considered "free as the wind," to quote one old court opinion. Unless you disclose the idea under some type of non-disclosure/non-use agreement, that is.

I would never post on a webiste any idea I was considering writing into a work. And I don't post any work I consider marketable, just because some pirate might take it, or because some person acting lawfully (however unscrupulously) might steal the idea expressed by that work. Also, posting something on an internet site would be considered a first publication by many print publishers, and would likely hurt the value of the work. I know magazine editors who won't consider buying any article or story that's already appeared anywhere on the internet.

Roland

[Emoni]

Thanks Roland, I'll have to think about that.