You have to login first in order to be able to post messages.
Click here to login or register if you are a new user.
| Page: 1 |
Showing posts 1 - 9 of 9 |
| Anyone concerned about the ORPHAN BILL |
| Author |
Message |
Kelpfish
51 posts
|
|
Message posted at 05/22/2008, 13:05:19 PM by Kelpfish |
 |
 |
http://mag.awn.com/?article_no=3605
Anyone worried about the implications of the Orphan copyright bill that is going through the US government for approval? Read this article and let's discuss. |
|
|
Uploaded files: 959 | Total Sales: 1215
|
|
Yannp
84 posts
|
|
Message posted at 05/22/2008, 14:45:54 PM by Yannp |
|
|
Even as a canadian it scares me little bit |
|
Body:
Canon 20D, Canon Elan 7, Canon AE-1
Lens:
50 mm, ...
|
Uploaded files: 677 | Total Sales: 427
|
|
Freetime101
127 posts
|
|
Message posted at 05/23/2008, 03:41:02 AM by Freetime101 |
|
|
Thats a worrying prospect even over here in England - why pay for an image in England when you can steal one from America? This bill is wrong and needs to be stopped. |
|
Currently:
Canon EOS 400D
Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS
C...
|
Uploaded files: 11 | Total Sales: 16
|
|
Kenneystudios
426 posts
|
|
Message posted at 05/23/2008, 06:43:25 AM by Kenneystudios |
|
|
Do you guys even know what an Orphan Works is? It's a work of art where the author is unknown and/or untracable. The bill, if you read the bill itself rather than some extremist trying to scare people, actually protects Orphan Works. Please, read the bill yourselves rather than some extremist's slanted and warped view who is just trying to scare people. |
|
Canon 30D; Canon G9; Photoshop CS3; many, many lenses.
|
Uploaded files: 1064 | Total Sales: 636
|
|
Dennis_hammer
61 posts
|
|
Message posted at 05/23/2008, 07:30:01 AM by Dennis_hammer |
|
|
I have read it and have personally talked to my congressman and emailed my senator. Its not the intent of the law its the loophole so big someone could drive the titanic through it. Whats to stop people (companies) to all of a sudden use images and wait to get caught to pay "reasonable" use fees after all the burden on the "creator" to find the misused work. And the lack of definition of 'reasonable search for the author', Image search software is in its infancy so its far from reliable or all encompassing. And how easy has it been to find your own photos when its been legitimately purchased. All in all the law as written is simply ridiculous. Its intent maybe be noble but it needs to shift burden and apply costs to using the images (even if an author can not be found) immediately that can be sent to a fund that when discovered the author can withdraw the fees from instead having to go to an arbitration hearing to prove whats his/hers. It needs to set minimum standards of search that a company must have proof of which, that they did in due diligence. As it sits now its a open season on images that can be acquired of decent quality freely (not legally). For example small to midsize company A wants to start an ad campaign, they find an image on smugmug or something like that. Now the campaign is going to be pricey so to save money they grab the image and use it. Why not pay for it? Because there is NO penalty if they get caught, they must only pay a reasonable fee that they would have had to do if done correctly by purchasing it. Now if they alter said image enough through cropping or photoshopping its derivative work and the image creator is SOL. And this is from my congressman (a man who has read the bill and spoken with the authors) not an extremist although I personally wish he was a little more agressive but thats my opinion of him politically not about this bill. |
|
Canon 30d - Canon 40d - 17-55mm 2.8 IS - 24-70 2.8L - 70-200...
|
Uploaded files: 12 | Total Sales: 36
|
|
Joseppi
91 posts
|
|
Message posted at 05/23/2008, 10:50:53 AM by Joseppi |
|
|
| Originally posted by Kenneystudios: |
 |
| Quoted Message: Do you guys even know what an Orphan Works is? It's a work of art where the author is unknown and/or untracable. The bill, if you read the bill itself rather than some extremist trying to scare people, actually protects Orphan Works. Please, read the bill yourselves rather than some extremist's slanted and warped view who is just trying to scare people. |
Photo industry professionals DID read the bill and see valid concerns. I don't consider mainstream photography associations "extremist"... they are peers...
One problem with this "orphan" bill is there are a couple of registries for ownership, and if someone looks in those few places, doesn't see Kennystudios images registered there, well then, it MUST be orphaned, and hey, they made a REASONABLE effort to locate you. Somebody copies your image from your website, posts it on their's without credit, then a new viewer "can't find you" so they could claim it's orphaned.
So now the burden is on the COPYRIGHT CREATOR to be listed in as many registeries as possible... What is broken with COPYRIGHT LAW now, and intellectual property rights? You own your creation, and the people can't take it. We also have public domain to cover works out of copyright for various reasons... why the big push for "orhpaned" works?
A photographer posted an analogy... "I found this car in the street, no license plate, serial number filed off... I called the police and they don't know whose car it is... it must be orphaned, so I'll take it..."
I would think companies like Disney will lobby to get this killed. They got the copyright period extended a few years ago when they were about to lose Mickey to the public domain. I don'
t think they would like to stand by with the shift in copyright from owned by the creator unless proven otherwise, to free to use if a "reasonable" effort is made to find the owner...
My ownsership should not depend on the effectiveness of someone's search. It's mine until I sell the rights...
Joe |
|
Canon 40D, 70-200 L 2.8, 28-135 IS, Sekonic L-358, 3D apps &...
|
Uploaded files: 293 | Total Sales: 590
|
|
Kenneystudios
426 posts
|
|
Message posted at 05/23/2008, 10:59:33 AM by Kenneystudios |
|
|
To each their own interpretation. I see it as a good thing. Reasonable research, by the bill, is not restricted to the web search examples you have provided. I have education in research, and there are many details, restrictions, and legalities which you are overlooking. It is not the individual who wishes to use the image that must do all of the research in order to claim it as orphaned, but the higher ups that they must request permission from. Once research has been performed by the authorities (no, not just web searches mind you), then they are given permission to use the Orphaned work. |
|
Canon 30D; Canon G9; Photoshop CS3; many, many lenses.
|
Uploaded files: 1064 | Total Sales: 636
|
|
Lisafx
459 posts
|
|
Message posted at 05/23/2008, 11:56:14 AM by Lisafx |
|
|
I think it is very worrying for all the reasons listed above by Dennis and Joseppi.
I already wrote my congressman and senators in opposition. It took about 20 minutes. I recommend everyone do the same. It's not a lot of effort to put toward protecting our rights. |
|
Canon 5D, 40D, Various lenses, flashes, studio lights, light...
|
Uploaded files: 4088 | Total Sales: 25092
|
|
Dennis_hammer
61 posts
|
|
Message edited at 05/24/2008, 10:08:54 AM by Dennis_hammer |
|
|
After you have read and formed your opinion of the bill I urge everyone (for and against) contact their representatives and express their support or opposition. After all thats how the system is suppose to work. I would also suggest if you really want to see the 'intent' of the bill, look for who is lobbying for this bill. I have and I will let everyone find out for themselves so they can form an independent opinion. Here is the link to contact your representative.
Contact your Representative to Congress |
|
Canon 30d - Canon 40d - 17-55mm 2.8 IS - 24-70 2.8L - 70-200...
|
Uploaded files: 12 | Total Sales: 36
|
|
| Page: 1 |
Showing posts 1 - 9 of 9
Current Server Time: 10/12/2008, 16:19:50 PM |
|
