Martinus Wrote:
> Or it is a previously unpublished version in which
> case it would presumably be protected by the law
> regulating posthumously published works?
The laws that protect posthumously published works protect work that is new to the public. A story which was submitted to a magazine for publication in one form and published in a slightly altered form does not qualify as new to the public.
It would appear that the basics of intellectual property law are not common knowledge nowadays! But I suppose this is not surprising. These laws have been dramatically re-written in recent years and pushed through around the world, but especially in English-speaking countries, to protect the interests of giant media conglomerates. Many intellectual properties were in danger of lapsing into the public domain if the law was not dramatically revised.
If it were not for these Mickey Mouse laws, Clark Ashton Smith's works, along with those of Hemingway and many other important authors would have become the property of the entire human race on January 1st of this year, and there would be no need to argue the "complexities" of the subject any further. As it stands, the public appears to be deliberately misinformed and confused about these matters, presumably to keep them from fighting for the rights that they could have once taken for granted.
More information on the subject is available from Duke University's School of Law, which sponsors a Center for the Study of the Public Domain. It makes for enlightening reading. Highly recommended.
[
www.law.duke.edu]