I was reading a very good novel (Possession by A.S. Byatt) where the protagonists are chasing down all sorts of clues on the trail of a heretofore unguessed-at romantic relationship between a respected and influential victorian English poet and a reclusive and enigmatic poetess (both fictitious). At one point there were questions of ownership involving letters exchanged between the two - various scholars and collectors fighting over who had the right to take what and stick it where - and it was kind of cool how that whole aspect worked itself out, as the technicalities were unravelled. Something I'd never thought about closely before.
The author of a letter (and the author's estate) owns the copyright - no one else has the right to publish the contents of the letter. Obviously if the letter is ever published, at that point the clock starts ticking - I forget how many years after publication before it goes public domain. But the clock doesn't tick until the copyright owner allows it to be published.
The recipient of the letter (and the recipient's estate) owns the physical object, the letter itself. So if a group of letters are to be auctioned off as historically significant and valuable objects (which was one of the plots afoot in the book) then the recipient's estate has sole control to do so as they see fit - but anyone buying the letters buys only the physical artifact. Owning the physical manuscript confers no rights to publication.
The book's a great book, by the way - none of the above legal jumbo is what it's about, it was just something that came up in the course of it that I found instructive and kind of neat. And it made sense to me, which is rare.
The author of a letter (and the author's estate) owns the copyright - no one else has the right to publish the contents of the letter. Obviously if the letter is ever published, at that point the clock starts ticking - I forget how many years after publication before it goes public domain. But the clock doesn't tick until the copyright owner allows it to be published.
The recipient of the letter (and the recipient's estate) owns the physical object, the letter itself. So if a group of letters are to be auctioned off as historically significant and valuable objects (which was one of the plots afoot in the book) then the recipient's estate has sole control to do so as they see fit - but anyone buying the letters buys only the physical artifact. Owning the physical manuscript confers no rights to publication.
The book's a great book, by the way - none of the above legal jumbo is what it's about, it was just something that came up in the course of it that I found instructive and kind of neat. And it made sense to me, which is rare.
Comments