Re: "Commodore" brand

As

On 03/03/2020 07:21, William Levak wrote:
>
> Section 903 (c)(1) Any document pertaining to a mask work may be
> recorded in the Copyright Offic

The copyright office handles the registration, but you don't get the
same protection as for an artwork.

https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap9.html
<https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap9.html>


        904. Duration of protection

(a) The protection provided for a mask work under this chapter shall
commence on the date on which the mask work is registered undersection
908 <https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap9.html#908>, or the date on
which the mask work is first commercially exploited anywhere in the
world, whichever occurs first.

(b) Subject to subsection (c) and the provisions of this chapter, the
protection provided under this chapter to a mask work shall end ten
years after the date on which such protection commences under subsection
(a).

(c) All terms of protection provided in this section shall run to the
end of the calendar year in which they would otherwise expire.

Mask rights didn't exist at all in the US until November 1984.

Congress <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress>is
prohibited from passing/ex post facto/laws by clause 3 ofArticle I
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution>,Section
9
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Section_9:_Limits_on_Congress>of
theUnited States Constitution
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution>.

As the 6502 was introduced in 1975 then they would have expired at the
end of 1985 regardless

Japan got similar rights in 1985 when "The Act Concerning the Circuit
Layout of a Semiconductor Integrated Circuit" was introduced. I can't
find how long those rights lasted.

Article 39 of theconstitution
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Japan>ofJapan
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan>prohibits the retroactive
application of laws.

However I can't find anywhere that states either US or Japan law would
retroactively offer protection against new violations commited after the
date of the relevant act.

The Famicom came out in Japan in 1983. They wouldn't have thought about
having to license it at the time.

The NES didn't launch in the US until October 1985. Which was two months
before the mask rights (if they existed) would expire. I have no idea if
they sought a license for those two months.

The current WIPO treaty has a 15 year end date. So they have now
certainly expired.