My take on this crap is that what they want is a "finders-keepers" amendment to the law. If you didn't create it or pay for it then leave it the hell alone! Couldn't just pick up a MP3 from the net and assume that it's yours to use anyway you want. Why should our visual work be any different than what the other media moguls want for their stuff? What we should be doing is campaigning such that anyone using an image must prove that they paid for it or were granted rights. None of this finding it laying around stuff...
Regards,
Jon
mdude85 wrote:
Typically no -- the court interprets orphaned work as that which is set by precedent as I said, for instance, recited as discussion in Federal Register put out by the Copyright Office (I wonder if Lisa has ever perused *that* document, but I would guess the answer is no). I believe a discussion on the nature and questions of orphaned works as they relate to the 1909 Copyright Act and a variety of other statutes and rules located in title 17 of U.S.C, among a few choice case law examples is located in Vol. 70 of the Register (Google it). A lot of thought has been put into this -- courts will not interpret "willy nilly" as it were. A huge number of public interest groups, libraries, museums, etc, have lobbied in favor of this bill, so their representation and discussions have reached Congress. ...Show more →
Forgive me if I disagree. While it may not be typical, there are plenty of examples of courts establishing new precedents in many areas. Some are even upheld on appeal. Yes, a lot of thought has been put into the proposed legislation. Public interest groups, libraries, museums as well as many of the top stock agencies have lobbied effectively. However, it seems those parties will receive the flexibility they desire, while the rest of us have to become more diligent and incur additional expense and labor in order to protect our copyrights. Not a fair application of law if you ask me.
In a society where a single voice of opposition can silence a prayer at a high school graduation, why must the entire copyright system be altered to this degree to benefit the few?
mdude85 wrote:
Typically no -- the court interprets orphaned work as that which is set by precedent as I said, for instance, recited as discussion in Federal Register put out by the Copyright Office (I wonder if Lisa has ever perused *that* document, but I would guess the answer is no). I believe a discussion on the nature and questions of orphaned works as they relate to the 1909 Copyright Act and a variety of other statutes and rules located in title 17 of U.S.C, among a few choice case law examples is located in Vol. 70 of the Register (Google it). A lot of thought has been put into this -- courts will not interpret "willy nilly" as it were. A huge number of public interest groups, libraries, museums, etc, have lobbied in favor of this bill, so their representation and discussions have reached Congress. ...Show more →
I think you better get some more information. This law was going to supersede the existing copyright law. This law also was going to permit "broadcasting companies" along with libraries, etc to gain access to your work. This law was going to require you to register your work with two private companies(which don't even exist yet). "This Lisa" as you put it, is on the phone with representatives in Sen Patrick Leahy's office. "One of Leahy's aides told me over the phone that this is going to supercede The Digital Millenium Copyright Act, which of course was the outcome of The Bern Convention" Do a google search on these two things, and then maybe you'll stop ripping a woman that is spending hours of her time to protect your rights.
The illustrator's partnership has set up a page that allows you to easily write to your senator to oppose this bill. They even have some suggested text, or you can write your own.
In addition to the concerns that others have listed, I have to wonder how this database could possibly work. If you don't have the name of the artist, how do you search? AFAIK, image recognition technology isn't sufficiently advanced to allow a "find-this-image" sort of search that would be effective.
If this goes through, I also have to wonder if there will be a chilling effect on forums like this one where people share their work. I'm only a beginner/hobbiest, but even I will likely remove high-rez images from my smugmug sight if this passes.
Edit: I saw this topic linked from the front-page without realizing it was in the professional forum. I am not a professional photographer by any stretch, but I make my living as a CG animator and artist, so this issue effects me also.
If interested in how some entities are viewing the Orphan Works legislation and confusing the issues, along with clarifications of so called "facts" you may want to read this
