Intellectual Property Insights from Fishman Stewart
Mini Article – Volume 23, Issue 2
Share on Social
Public Service Annoucement: No. Mailing Something to Yourself is Not a Substitute for Copyright Registration or a Patent.
A common intellectual property “urban legend” is that mailing something to yourself is legally equivalent to a copyright registration or a patent. This practice is often called the “Poor Man’s Copyright” or “Poor Man’s Patent” and the idea has been around for a long time.
The theory is that mailing a copy of a work or invention to yourself will provide you with certain legal rights akin to a copyright registration or a patent so long as the envelope remains sealed and bears a postmark by the United States Postal Service. Another variation of this theory is that documenting the work or invention and having the document notarized will grant similar legal protection.
There is no provision under U.S. law that supports these theories, and they are not a substitute for registration with the U.S. Copyright Office or obtaining a patent with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. A mailed or notarized copy may be evidence that a work or invention was in your possession on a certain date, but it does not prove that you hold the rights to the work or invention.
Thus, if you’re thinking about mailing something to yourself about your work or invention, whatever value might result from such a tactic may not be worth the cost of the stamp.
Kristyn Webb is the Group Leader of Fishman Stewart’s Copyright Practice Group, and is currently earning a Master’s Degree in Copyright Law at King’s College London.
Published January 25, 2023
Related Content from Fishman Stewart
As we celebrate our nation’s birthday on July 4th, many communities are replacing or supplementing traditional fireworks with drone-based light shows - which prompts the question of intellectual property protection.
The fun internet trend of promoting "dupes" has officially crossed the trademark line and everyday content creators are finding themselves in the crosshairs of multimillion-dollar corporate lawsuits.
The FIFA World Cup is global football (or soccer) at its highest level. It is, however, also one of the most carefully crafted displays of intellectual property (IP) in the world.
Trademark owners are often cast as villains when they send cease-and-desist letters. But in trademark law, failing to enforce rights can sometimes create bigger problems than enforcing them.
Women’s sports are having a moment, and not a small one. And right alongside that rise: the business of women’s sports is heating up, including some surprisingly dramatic trademark battles.
The idea that someone might “own” a piece of DNA raises a slightly uncomfortable question: can you really patent something that exists inside all of us?
Forbes reported that more than 1.5 million bots on an AI agent-driven social network appear to have created a new religion for themselves, the Church of Molt, with congregants adopting the name of “Crustafarians.”
Every March, college basketball players get an opportunity to become household sensations overnight. In today’s NIL (Name Image Likeness) era, that moment can be a once-in-a-lifetime business opportunity.
Behind the shamrocks and celebrations of St. Patrick's Day lies a surprisingly rich intersection with intellectual property.
Last week, PEI Licensing, LLC., the owner of the ORIGINAL PENGUIN brand (also known simply as PENGUIN) sued Pudgy Penguins Inc. in federal court in Florida over their respective penguin trademarks.
IDENTIFYING, SECURING AND ADVANCING CREATIVITY®
