Attention Writers, Photographers, Artists of All Kinds!

[Kylyssa]

Attention Writers, Photographers, Artists of All Kinds - Cover Your Asses ...Because the Orphaned Works Act is Creeping Up to Screw You

The "Orphaned Works Act" is an attempt to require all created materials to be registered with as yet non-existent private agencies (presumably for a fee) for the creator to have any real ownership of their own work or to have control over its use. Anyone who has made a "reasonable" search to determine ownership of a work can use it any way they see fit, potentially even registering it as their own. Additionally, the "Orphaned Works Act" would require you as the registered rights owner to track down violations of usage on your own registered work.


Read more...

[Asmodean]

I'm not sure what this has to do with writers though as to the best of my knowledge, all things written automatically belong to the writer unless specified otherwise and that does not require registration. You can however register a trademark, like the name of your main character.

[Kylyssa]

Many writers these days also illustrate their work or use photography in it as well.  I use my own paintings, drawings, and photography to illustrate some of my work.  Videos would also fall under the act so if you have created an independent film you'll need to register it with the as yet unnamed agencies.  So in order to own my independent films, paintings, drawings, and photography I would have to pay fees to register them.  If some else still decided to use them the worst that could happen is they'd have to pay a "reasonable fee" for their use - and, to me, it reads that they'd then get to continue to use the images.  Worse yet is if someone registers the rights to my creations before I do - then I would have to pay to use my own work.  This act would also provide a precedent for non-image artwork such as writing.

[Will]

I'm socialist. This doesn't really bother me.

If I were not a socialist, I'd hit the Obama campaign with emails about this and leverage your votes to get him to promise to fix this situation.

[joeactor]

Well, it's not as bad as it sounds.

People can't just use your stuff.  They have to search for the author of the work, and document the process.
Most scripts, mp3's, paintings and such are tagged with the artist's name somewhere.

Looks like I'm a closet socialist,
JoeActor

[Kylyssa]

I earn my living through creative works.  If the government actually becomes socialist - I'd be fine with this act.  Otherwise I need to eat so I need the ownership of my own works to be protected.  I'm also physically disabled so mental/creative work is about all I can do to earn a living.  I'm also poor so I can't afford any expensive fees to legitimize the ownership of my creative works.

[Kylyssa]

Well, it's not as bad as it sounds.

People can't just use your stuff.  They have to search for the author of the work, and document the process.
Most scripts, mp3's, paintings and such are tagged with the artist's name somewhere.

Looks like I'm a closet socialist,
JoeActor

Actually, the Orphan Works Act would require the artist to register their work with an agency or agencies.  The tags on such works would not be sufficient.  They currently are sufficient.  If the act goes through an unauthorized user of your registered work would only face the penalty of being required to pay you a fair market value price to use it.  You would have no choice as to whether they could use it or not, nor could you determine the amount you would receive for its use.

[Kylyssa]

I'm socialist. This doesn't really bother me.

If I were not a socialist, I'd hit the Obama campaign with emails about this and leverage your votes to get him to promise to fix this situation.

The situation doesn't exist yet, which is why I included the links to write to your congressmen and senators.  The problem with being OK with certain socialist changes (free use of people's labor) in a capitalist society is that the people whose currently paid labor becomes accessible to all without compensation can lose their livelihood.  The capitalist society does not support them, a socialist society would.  

Things such as socialized medicine would work because the medical practitioners would still get paid.

[curiosityandthecat]

Maybe I'm naive, but I would imagine just hearing the word socialist is enough to make most middle Americans flee from the idea. It's no surprise to us that words like socialism and communism send up a big red flag pretty quickly for most people.  

Somehow, capitalism has become synonymous with democracy, so any time someone questions capitalism (or speaks in favor of another system), they're speaking against democracy and therefore America and is therefore a terrorist. (Okay, that's extreme, but you see what I'm getting at.)

So, sounds like the best way to fight against this proposal (if you do, in fact, want to fight against it) is to attach the word socialist to it!

[McQ]

I don't yet have a very clear understanding of this act, but I did try to read it (boring as hell). We've been discussing it on the Nikon Cafe Forum (huge web based photography forum), and it does seem that this would totally screw photographers. One of the big issues is that it gives giant web companies like Google the opportunity to essentially take your work. No automatic copyright protection, as we have now. Again, I haven't really dug into the legalese of the act, but some of the more politically savvy members over there say it seems like a real problem. It is also being discussed on other photo forums a great deal. I can't at all document this, but it is generally agreed on these forums that Google is pushing this hard with lobbyists.

[tacoma_kyle]

I wrote a bit.

I dont like the sound of it. It is a socialist-ish move at the expense of people. Will it hurt me? No, but it'd be gay shit to see any of my stupid fuckin photo's somewhere under someone's name.

[tacoma_kyle]

Dear Friend:

Thank you for contacting me regarding S.2913, the Shawn Bentley Orphan Works Act of 2008. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.

As you may know, "orphan works" are typically defined as copyrighted works whose owner cannot be found. S.2913 seeks to limit damages in copyright infringement cases for users exhibiting orphan works.

S.2913 was approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 15, 2008. If it comes before the full Senate for a vote, please know that I will keep your views in mind.

Again, thank you for writing to me. Please feel free to contact me again about any issue of importance to you.

The response....