The change is not quite as broad as this posting would suggest.

There has never been any question of works of art bought by museums being
"in the public domain" - copyright has always remained unless this was
bought as a separate right along with the painting etc., something that
very few artists would agree to.

What has happened is that by international convention many copyrights now
run to the end of the 70th year following the artist's, writer's, or
other creator's death (following the German precedent), rather than for
more usual 50 years from the year of death.  The change therefore only
brings back into copyright the works of art, literature, music etc. of
people who died between 1925 and 1945.

On the legal side, I do not know of any cases under the new provisions,
but the estates of most major artists certainly do police the use of
images whether in books, on TV etc., or in the "souvenir" trade, and
typically have standing arrangements with a specialist law firms.

Patrick Boylan

============================================================

As from

On Fri, 26 Apr 1996, SHARON LIANNE SPAIN wrote:

> Sorry to bring up the copyright issue again, but I understand that the
> GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) Implemetation Act may cause
> some copyright headaches for the museum community.
>
> As of Jan 1, 1996 works of art produced outside the United States, which
> had previously been considered in the public domain have had their
> copyrights restored. This of course, will probably cause the most problems
> for museums that hold contemporary European works of art.  The copyright
> owner must notify the museum of their desire to reclaim copyright
> control, and the museum, at the date of notification must stop producing
> commercial products, i.e.- postcards, t-shirts, etc. (The museum does
> have a one year grace period to sell off its existing inventory.)
>
> I would be interested to know if any museums have started to receive
> notification from artists, their estates, etc., and how this issue is
> being handled. I understand the Implemetation Act itself was rapidly
> drafted, and has some potential legal loopholes that may have to be
> settled through litigation. I, (as you might have guessed) am writing a
> paper on this subject, but am finding very little information on the
> Act's effect on the museum community.  The issue has definitely gotten
> more attention in entertainment law journals!
>
> Thanks in advance!
> Sharon Spain
>