View Full Version : Orphan works law dies! For now...
spikkel 10-01-2008, 09:29 AM http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/09/orphan-works-co.html
Lost in the House of Representatives' push to pass $700 billion bailout legislation is the so-called Shawn Bentley Orphan Works Act of 2008. Late Friday, the Senate passed the measure (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-2913) and sent it to the House (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-5889), where it landed dead on arrival.
The act changes the rules and reduces and sometimes nullifies damages for infringing uses of so-called "orphaned (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Orphan_works_legislation)" works as long as there was a "diligent" effort to locate the copyright owner. Orphaned creative works are those in which the copyright holder cannot be promptly located.
Lobbyists have assured Threat Level that the House, which is mired in trying to broker an economic revival package, won't take up the measure, at least not until after the November elections.
Dozens of copyright groups (http://www.abouttheimage.com/3900/senate_passes_orphan_works_bill_s2913_house_expected_to_follow/author2/) opposed the measure, saying it encourages infringement. Copyright expert Lawrence Lessig (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/opinion/20lessig.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) was against it as well. He said the bill was too vague when it comes to defining how "diligent" of an effort is required to locate a copyright owner before a work is infringed upon.
Digital rights groups like Public Knowledge (http://www.publicknowledge.org/issues/ow) hailed the measure. The group said "it would restore much needed balance to copyright law."
|
|
danlefeb
10-01-2008, 12:24 PM
Glad to hear it.
ShinChanPu
10-01-2008, 12:26 PM
Very good news (by now)... :hmm:
DuttyFoot
10-01-2008, 01:36 PM
glad to hear :D
DeVangiel
10-01-2008, 03:26 PM
Glad to hear, but I fear that had it not been for the bailout.......
I think if we want to pass something that helps with orphan works, next time let an artist help write it.
Trojan123
10-01-2008, 07:19 PM
Some good news indeed.
Sorry to be a downer but this story, in international terms, is pretty irrelevant.
Am I missing something?
Why is it on an International 3D/2D/Modelling forum?
Brian
sebbonaparte
10-02-2008, 02:00 AM
Sorry to be a downer but this story, in international terms, is pretty irrelevant.
Am I missing something?
Why is it on an International 3D/2D/Modelling forum?
Brian
It has everything to do with this forum. If this bill was passed, many of the freelancers and smaller studios here could have their work ripped off and redistributed without any royalties.
erilaz
10-02-2008, 02:16 AM
Sorry to be a downer but this story, in international terms, is pretty irrelevant.
Am I missing something?
Why is it on an International 3D/2D/Modelling forum?
Brian
It's extraordinarily relevant.
Firstly, all proposed US legislation should be taken seriously. Europe and Australia were already considering similar bills based on the US example. (Let's not extend this to a political discussion however). The fact that it was turned down should help quash that.
Secondly much of the services we take for granted (Flickr, Google, hosting services etc) are US-based which would have made the law applicable to international artists who use or are searchable by said services.
The law was too ambiguous for international artists not to get swept up in the issue, especially where boundaries of copyright are involved.
Are you suggesting that those "National" ideas/ideals, introducing out of date? rule relevanciies, will become relevant to the time/place of International actualities when they are introduced---
Sorry, but I hope some thought will evolve
The world will never be the same as ---5 minutes ago!
Brian
sebbonaparte
10-02-2008, 03:09 AM
Are you suggesting that those "National" ideas/ideals, introducing out of date? rule relevanciies, will become relevant to the time/place of International actualities when they are introduced---
Sorry, but I hope some thought will evolve
The world will never be the same as ---5 minutes ago!
Brian
I'm having trouble understanding what your post means, and how it relates to the topic. This is a law that could potentially hurt many artists, it isn't a case of evolution.
Why should the use of ideas be restricted by the principle of user pays?
(In this new world that we, maybe?, need!)
Most/much of the world seems to not be so "legally" restricted--Versions of say Photoshop for ?..
(Why not a "Universal" organisation, funded by the "United Nations"--SAY!----where there is a worldwide community response to acknowleging benefits added to the community welfare/wellbeing?)
A lightglobe that never wears out? (Or is that still hidden --for money ????)
Brian
Just food for thought-----are old philosophies still relevant?
hakanpersson
10-02-2008, 06:36 AM
The world will never be the same as ---5 minutes ago!
I like that idea. Lets dig a hole and stick our heads into it, because the world will change in five minutes anyway.
And lets not forget we must forbit any non-international artist to post images on this forum, it's simply not relevant to us.
Why even bother about relevancy? Just because this forum got rules, does it really mean they have to filter every post that doesnt concern you in specfic?
I was a Photojournalist/Photographer for some 50 years of my working life.
Works published in many languages, world wide.
None of the rules relating to my images being used without copyrite payment ever worked because I could never afford to make the legal claims!
Are you telling us of a law that will work, ecconomically, for a copyrite owner?
Brian
When you go into an International Airport and see a 15ft square reproduction of one of your images what will, any, new laws result in an effective worthwhile costeffective reccompense?
School of hard knocks!
Brian
BruceCLin
10-02-2008, 01:52 PM
When you go into an International Airport and see a 15ft square reproduction of one of your images what will, any, new laws result in an effective worthwhile costeffective reccompense?
School of hard knocks!
Brian
I think you got the meaning of this bill the other way around. At current time, in the example you gave, you can very well bring it to court and get compensated. If the new bill pass, artists can lose their copyrights much easier. In that case, you will NOT be able to do anything.
Bruce
RobertoOrtiz
10-02-2008, 05:51 PM
Orphan Works Bill Is Not Yet Dead In The House
WASHINGTON, DC (October 1, 2008) Today's published reports of the death of Orphan Works on Capitol Hill may be greatly exaggerated.
Despite stories published on several news blogs and on the Web site of at least one mainstream media and journalism industry magazine's Web site, the Orphan Works bill in the House is not dead and it can't be declared dead until the legislative session ends for the year.
At least one member of the House Committee on the Judiciary was not in favor of passing the Senate bill as of Wednesday, but there is no guarantee that his position won't change.
The House is on the receiving end of a lot of pressure to sign the Senate bill, and despite having to deal with the financial bail-out plan and the nation's monetary crisis there's no guarantee that the House won't eventually agree to the Senate's version, the Shawn Bentley Orphan Works Act of 2008.
Because there's still a chance even if it is a slim chance of the House taking action on Orphan Works, NPPA leaders are asking members to continue to contact their elected Representatives and to continue to voice their opposition to the measure.
The Senate's version of Orphan Works passed by "hotlining" on Friday night and was voted in by "unanimous consent." Some house members don't like it because it does not have the protections that the House bill, H.R. 5889, has and they feel those protections are important.
Some members of the House have said that they are still committed to seeing that an Orphan Works bill eventually gets passed.
Last week the Senate was, to use one Hill reporter's term, "hammered" with communications from library and publishing groups who were pressuring Congress to pass Orphan Works, a copyright amendment. One of the lead organizations who reportedly targeted Senators and applied as much lobbying as possible in favor of getting Orphan Works shoved through is the American Library Association.
More than 70 organizations, including the National Press Photographers Association, along with more than 100,000 petition signers online, have been opposed to Orphan Works legislation.
"Many of our members may not yet know how damaging Orphan Works is for photographers," NPPA president Bob Carey said.
NPPA's leadership has called for members to contact their Representatives in the House immediately and voice their displeasure with the legislation.
"I implore you to immediately contact your representatives in Congress and urge them to oppose this bill. Without a widespread and overwhelming grass-roots message from photographers and visual artists voicing opposition to this draconian law it will be enacted," NPPA's president wrote Monday in an open letter to NPPA members.
"Once that happens it will eviscerate any real copyright protections for our images and those who infringe upon our livelihoods will be able to do so as the cost of doing business," Carey said.
NPPA has also delivered letters expressing the organization's opposition to Orphan Works legislation to the leaders of the Senate and the House, and to members of each committee. The House version of Orphan Works was proposed by Representative Howard Berman (D-CA).
Supporters of the Orphan Works Act include the American Association of Law Libraries, American Association of Museums, Association of American Universities, Association of American Publishers, the Library of Congress, College Art Association, Association of Public Television Stations, and the Computer & Communication Industry Association.
The Illustrators Partnership reports that another major supporter of Orphan Works legislation appears to be Google. In July, 2005, Orphan Works Roundtables were held by the U.S. Copyright Office in Washington, DC, where Alexander MacGilivray of Google said, "Google strongly believes that these orphan works are both worthwhile, useful, and extremely valuable. ... We expect that our use of these orphan works will likely be in the 1 million works range."
In November 2005, Google announced that it would donate $3 million to the U.S. Library of Congress to develop a plan to begin building a World Digital Library. "Google supports the World Digital Library because we share a common mission of making the worlds information universally accessible and useful," Google co-founder Sergey Brin said when he announced the donation.
The U.S. Copyright Office and the Library of Congress are the "experts" for Congress on intellectual property matters.
MarketWatch reports that Microsoft has also advocated for copyright law amendments and supported Orphan Works legislation along with Google, believing that Orphan Works legislation will liberate "an untapped wealth of information" that they should be able to publish and that the public should be able to access.
The Orphan Works Act that passed in the Senate requires only that a company make a "reasonably diligent" search to locate a copyright owner before using their work in media including the Internet and places limits on how much a copyright owner can collect in compensation if their copyright has been infringed.
The previous copyright laws protected copyright holders for decades, whether the copyright holder was aware of it or not.
Hauzer
10-02-2008, 10:22 PM
Of course, Google want's to make money of of everyone and everything we create...
Still, it's still kinda good news. At least we have more time to fight it. Maybe someone could create a really good animated short film to protest the bill.
Sorry if some think I am not getting the message.
1. You are discussing USA laws.(What USA companies, ever, seriously took notice of other countries copyright laws??---and ,visa/versa, for many other countries!)
2. Has there, ever, been a list of all the individuals/small companies who have, financially, benefited by persuing a case?
The laws are an ass benefiting only the wealthy/lawyers.
I am suggesting a completely different philosophy that is not based around personal financial gain as such.
Doing a "Blender" ???????
Ahhhh well---
Brian
robcat2075
10-05-2008, 09:22 PM
Most of the discussion of this law revolved around "what if MY work is wrongfully claimed to be an orphan!?!".
But in the absence of any way to use legitimate orphan works they run the real risk of being neglected and being lost for everyone.
So celebrate the defeat of the law if you wish, but there's still a problem that needs to be solved.
I think the issue is basically unsolvable.
-on the one hand only a world-wide and all-covering system could ensure that every use of a graphic is properly credited and the artist properly compensated.
-on the other hand there is no case in any venue... art, law, science, whatever... where such an system has worked well and survived to everyone's satisfaction.
Chiko
10-14-2008, 05:02 PM
Sorry if some think I am not getting the message.
1. You are discussing USA laws.(What USA companies, ever, seriously took notice of other countries copyright laws??---and ,visa/versa, for many other countries!)
2. Has there, ever, been a list of all the individuals/small companies who have, financially, benefited by persuing a case?
The laws are an ass benefiting only the wealthy/lawyers.
I am suggesting a completely different philosophy that is not based around personal financial gain as such.
Doing a "Blender" ???????
Ahhhh well---
Brian
I'm rather confused. Are you FOR or AGAINST this law passing? You keep referring to old philosophies and such, but you're not really stating an opinion. Of course things that have been around for centuries can still be relevant, as long as they make sense. This law does NOT. I would like to not be afraid to share my work with other artist in a community, lest it be stolen by someone who just wants to profit from my work. All my liberties to pursue legal action against such a person would be taken away if a law such as this were passed.
CGTalk Moderation
10-14-2008, 05:03 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.
vBulletin v3.0.5, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.