I have not yet seen anyone in academia put a copyright notice on their CV or resume. Why is this?
One might expect that even if the content is implicitly copyrighted, the layout/format/style of the document -- perhaps more so for a graphic designer -- is part of one's intellectual property.
While your CV can technically be regarded as a piece of intellectual property, the usual reason why people assert their copyright to a work by putting a copyright notice on it is to deter and prevent other people from copying or sharing that work (usually so they - the authors - can profit by selling the work).
With your CV, it is actually in your interest to have as many people as possible sharing it and passing it around, so the incentives work completely in the opposite direction from a more traditional type of intellectual product.
Now, if your CV is such an amazing piece of work that people will be willing to pay for a copy, we’d be having a different discussion...
In the US, copyright notices have not been required for decades. So there is no benefit.
It isn't done and will be perceived as strange. Since the purpose of your resume is to help you, don't do things like this.
Copyright generally protects the content/text/copy and not the layout. If you believe your layout is so novel, you could try patenting it, but I doubt that will be successful (and you probably should not be using something so novel for a CV unless you are a graphic designer).
In response to comments, according to this document from the US Copyright Office the layout of a document is not copyrightable.
As a general rule, the Office will not accept a claim to copyright in “format” or “layout.” The general layout or format of a book, page, book cover, slide presentation, web page, poster, or form is uncopyrightable because it is a template for expression.
You might try and claim the CV layout is like a blank form, but those are also not copyrightable
Blank forms that are designed for recording information and do not themselves convey information are uncopyrightable.
Even the content of the CV is probably not copyrightable
To be copyrightable, a work must qualify as an original work of authorship, meaning that it must have been created independently and contain a sufficient amount of creativity.
since a CV is generally just a list of facts and the text is not really creative.
The combination of the text and layout might satisfy the requirement for copyright and potentially entitle you to damages if someone copied your CV, but it would not provide protection from someone using your CV as a template and replacing your accomplishments with theirs and likely would not protect you from them taking your accomplishments and reformatting them.
As for weather a patent would be appropriate, I think it would fall under a design patent
A design patent protects only the appearance of the article and not structural or utilitarian features.
where the layout is the design and the article is the content of the CV. As I said above, this is probably a huge stretch.
One might expect that even if the content is implicitly copyrighted,
Content of a CV should generally contain information and information is not subject to copyright. It will probably be subject to some information privacy law though, depending on your location.
the layout/format/style of the document -- perhaps more so for a graphic designer -- is part of one's intellectual property.
Yes, it is possible for the layout or style of CV to be intellectual property, however, it is unlikely indeed, unless you are a kind of graphic designer or similar who has meticulously created a sufficiently originally looking CV unlike any other.
Otherwise, since CVs are generally comparatively rigid in structure, format and purpose, unless you are in the creative field, you might risk either (a) creating a CV that looks similar enough to one of the billions of previous ones to be considered plagiarism for the purposes of copyright, or (b) creating a CV whose outlook is unique, has a sufficient degree of originality, but fails to produce any interest in the potential reviewer, who, perhaps, must orient himself quickly among dozens of different CVs every day.
Plus, even in that case, as others said, you don't need an explicit copyright notice, since the things that are copyright-able will be considered such.
On the social side, if I, as a prospective employer, saw a trivially looking CV with a copyright notice, I would consider the author to be ostentatious and less likely of interest for employment (He wants to copyright his CV? What else he might have misconceptions about?).
Can you? Absolutely.
Must you include a notice in order to maintain a copyright? No, at least not under most current copyright regimes. For example, the U.S. did away with this requirement effective March 1, 1989. Most other countries had removed it long before. So long as your CV meets the threshhold of originality, which is generally quite low, it will be protected.
Should you? In the U.S., including a notice still conveys some "benefits." Generally speaking they are not actually beneficial to a person who holds copyright in a CV, because they are associated with bringing an infringement suit. It seems unlikely to me that you would want to bring an infringement suit based on someone's use of your CV. You can read about the benefits in the U.S. Copyright Office's Circular 3.
You say you haven't seen copyright notices on CVs in the past. (Neither have I.) I'd urge you to defer to this custom. Why give people reviewing your CV a distraction? Plus, presumably you want your CV to look like the CVs of people who have been successful in obtaining the sort of job you want.
While we're at it, let's address what the copyright protection in your CV, which is automatic and independent of the copyright notice, actually covers. It does not prevent others from using unoriginal elements of your CV that you did not create. For instance, typesetting the headings in bold would not be original, and thus your right to your CV would not entitle you to prevent me from bolding the headings on my CV. You might also follow quite a few CV conventions in preparing your CV (e.g., listing items in chronological order). Your copyright will not give you a property right in those conventions. You also list facts on your CV, such as the year you got a particular degree. Others can use that fact without permission, as copyright does not protect facts. Since CVs are dictated by convention and consist largely of facts, the right of the copyright holder is essentially narrower -- it covers only very close reproduction of the CV. In the United States this is sometimes called "thin" copyright.
Does that mean others cannot copy, distribute, or display your CV? Not entirely. When you share a CV with someone, especially via a job application, you are giving them an implied license to use it for the sorts of things you both anticipate they will use it for (e.g., distributing copies to members of a search committee). In addition, anyone can use your CV under the user's rights recognized in their jurisdiction (e.g., fair use in U.S. law).
I put a copyright notice on the version of my CV that I posted on my website. I did this because others periodically would upload my CV to file sharing websites. (I assume this was because the websites required you to upload files. Not sure why my CV was picked for this.) I don't want that to happen because my CV has changed significantly over the course of grad school. Old CVs don't represent me well.
Since doing this I have not noticed any file sharing websites with copies of my CV, though I don't know if that has anything to do with the copyright notice.
For what it's worth, I also added the date of the last change and a URL to download the most recent version at the bottom. Those would probably do more to stop people from thinking my old CV is current than anything else.
Putting copyright notices on pages you write is alien to how people think, and they typically never consider the possibility they might need to/want to do that.
After all, copyrights (and copyright notices) are strange artifacts of authoritarianism in human society, dating back to how the British crown decided to artificially prop up publisher monopolies centuries ago.
