1. What does it mean to say that a work is in the “public domain”?
2. a. If you were a Canadian composer in 1950 with a new orchestral piece, fully protected under the copyright laws of Canada (a Berne signatory), what would you have had to do to protect your work in the United States (based on the law as it is presented in Golan)?
b. If you were a Canadian composer in 2005 under similar facts?
3. Before Congress passed § 514 of the URAA what could petitioners do that, after the legislation, was no longer legal?
4. In the words of the Court, why did “Congress have reason to believe” that full compliance with the Berne Convention “would expand the foreign markets available to U.S. authors and invigorate protection against piracy of U.S. works abroad”? Explain.
The Berne Convention . . . is the principal accord governing international copyright relations. Latecomer to the international copyright regime launched by Berne, the United States joined the Convention in 1989. To perfect U.S. implementation of Berne, . . . Congress, in 1994 through enactment of § 514 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (URAA) extended copyright protection to preexisting works of Berne member countries, protected in their country of origin, but lacking protection in the United States for any of three reasons: The United States did not protect works from the country of origin at the