KuMayl_Abidi

The most damning evidence against the film was promotional materials and even the opening credits of certain copies of Nosferatu that clearly stated that the film was an adaptation of Stoker’s novel. Unable to ignore such evidence, a German court found Nosferatu to be an unlicensed derivative work of Dracula and ordered that every copy of the film be destroyed. While this should have marked the end of the film’s legacy, one copy avoided destruction and resurfaced in the United States, where it was released in 1929. Under the U.S. copyright law of the time, in order for works by a foreign author to enjoy copyright protection in the United States, the author’s country of citizenship must have had a copyright proclamation or agreement with the United States. Stoker was a British citizen, and under the Chace Act, President Harrison had extended copyright to works by British citizens in 1891, thus making Stoker’s work eligible for United States copyright protection. However, United States copyright law also required two copies of the work be deposited with the U.S. Copyright Office. Stoker had never satisfied this deposit requirement, and therefore Dracula was part of the public domain in the United States. Stoker’s estate was thus unable to take any legal action against Nosferatu in the United States, and the film gained a second lease on life, developing into a definitive piece of vampire pop culture.

These three tales highlight just a few of the interactions between copyright law and the horror genre. Such tales should serve as reminder to always double check copyright laws to avoid the scare of an unexpected law lurking in the shadows.

Table of 1986

Table of contents

Volume 1