IMPORTANT! READ AND ACT NOW!!!
Sorry to be serious for a moment but this concerns all of us!
Hey friends….I hope you can give us artists a hand on this issue. It is time sensitive, urgent and critical that as many people as possible speak up. The financial crisis is providing cover so this bill is able to sneak through.
Because of the scramble on the bail-out bill, this Orphan Works bill was passed in the Senate under the radar. It’s about our copy rights for visual artists, writers, photographers and songwriters…anyone in the creative field. If this Orphan Works bill passes through the House , we artists will be obliged to pay Google, directly or indirectly, $200 for each piece, song, image, etc. we create in order to protect our copyright.
At this time, all we have to do is sign our work, put the date and the”circle c” and we have a copyright. If we want more protection, ie. from court costs on infringement issues, we can send our images and $30 to the Copyright Division of the Federal Government, and then we are registered.
I don’t think any of us want to further enrich an huge and very wealthy company and make it easier for them to catalogue and use artist’s work without their consent. As we have seen, especially in the recent weeks, the corporations (and the government in cahoots with them) have not served well for the ordinary US citizen. And, for most of us artists, our copyright is one of our most valuable assets. If we have no protection unless we pay, what for most of us, is big money for each creation, then we have no way to make a living.
Please click on the site provided…there is a form letter there and it’s easy…send it out and help your artist friends. I included quotes from some of my friends and the Illustration Society, if you want to read more about it. Thank you so much. Jennifer Carrasco
Here’s the site http://capwiz. com/illustrators partnership/ issues/alert/ ?alertid= 11980321
“While this is marked “low importance”, it’s exactly the opposite—congress is trying to hotline a bill through that would significantly change the copyright laws. As individuals involved in the generation of creative works, you would be required to register your work with two bureaus for $100 a piece—if not, then your work will be considered “orphan” and you will lose your ownership rights.
Please read more about this bill, and if you agree, send a letter to your congress people letting them know how you feel—links are below in the e-mail to do this, already written out, etc.
As you know, copyright is granted automatically in the US when the work is created—you would lose this under this addition to the copyright code. Interestingly enough, Google is a huge supporter of this legislation, as it will eliminate having to get your permission for them to catalogue your work, and repurpose it however they see fit.
Thanks for your time, and thank you for reading.
IMPORTANT! READ AND ACT NOW!!! belongs to the following groups:
1 on 1: The Fine Art of Portraiture , Complex Simplicity of Art, Acrylic Painting, All Things Poetic, Artistic, Philosophical, Animal Kingdom, Animation Domination, ART ACTION UNION - CREATIVE ACTIVISM, Art Deco Heaven, Art from the Workplace, Art in Math, Art Inspired by Dreams, As Is, Beginner's Expressions, Character Development, Cutest of the Cute, Deviant Art Welcome, Graphic Arts, Humour Captured, Pop Art, Something To Say and The Artistic NudeSorry to be serious for a moment but this concerns all of us!
Hey friends….I hope you can give us artists a hand on this issue. It is time sensitive, urgent and critical that as many people as possible speak up. The financial crisis is providing cover so this bill is able to sneak through.
Because of the scramble on the bail-out bill, this Orphan Works bill was passed in the Senate under the radar. It’s about our copy rights for visual artists, writers, photographers and songwriters…anyone in the creative field. If this Orphan Works bill passes through the House , we artists will be obliged to pay Google, directly or indirectly, $200 for each piece, song, image, etc. we create in order to protect our copyright.
At this time, all we have to do is sign our work, put the date and the”circle c” and we have a copyright. If we want more protection, ie. from court costs on infringement issues, we can send our images and $30 to the Copyright Division of the Federal Government, and then we are registered.
I don’t think any of us want to further enrich an huge and very wealthy company and make it easier for them to catalogue and use artist’s work without their consent. As we have seen, especially in the recent weeks, the corporations (and the government in cahoots with them) have not served well for the ordinary US citizen. And, for most of us artists, our copyright is one of our most valuable assets. If we have no protection unless we pay, what for most of us, is big money for each creation, then we have no way to make a living.
Please click on the site provided…there is a form letter there and it’s easy…send it out and help your artist friends. I included quotes from some of my friends and the Illustration Society, if you want to read more about it. Thank you so much. Jennifer Carrasco
Here’s the site http://capwiz. com/illustrators partnership/ issues/alert/ ?alertid= 11980321
“While this is marked “low importance”, it’s exactly the opposite—congress is trying to hotline a bill through that would significantly change the copyright laws. As individuals involved in the generation of creative works, you would be required to register your work with two bureaus for $100 a piece—if not, then your work will be considered “orphan” and you will lose your ownership rights.
Please read more about this bill, and if you agree, send a letter to your congress people letting them know how you feel—links are below in the e-mail to do this, already written out, etc.
As you know, copyright is granted automatically in the US when the work is created—you would lose this under this addition to the copyright code. Interestingly enough, Google is a huge supporter of this legislation, as it will eliminate having to get your permission for them to catalogue your work, and repurpose it however they see fit.
Thanks for your time, and thank you for reading.
Lee Wilde
Orphan Works bill introduced in US
By John Watson // April 25th, 2008
source: http://photodoto.com/orphan-works-bill/
There has been a lot of discussion and a lot of fear among photographers regarding potential orphan works legislation.
A major problem with current copyright law is that it does not provide a way to use a creative work that has been abandoned (no entity can be found to claim ownership). The premise behind an “orphan works” addition to copyright law is that it would provide a means for anyone to make use of copyrighted material that no longer has an owner.
It works by limiting damages that can be claimed if the work truly falls under orphan works protection. If a person wants to use a work they must ask permission from the copyright holder just as they do now. Under the current law, if they can’t find the owner they are out of luck. With the orphan works bill in effect, they could use the work after conducting a diligent search and failing to find the copyright owner. Later, if the original owner shows up, he must be paid fair royalties for the use of the work. It does not limit or change Fair Use.
This would be a huge boon to the public allowing new use of material that has lain dormant and forgotten for decades due to inflexible copyright restrictions. For example, you’d now be able to make reproductions of vintage family photos even though the original photographer cannot be located.
Obviously, a lot depends on how one defines “orphan” and “diligent search.” This has caused some debate among photographers and other artists who worry about corporations making blanket grabs of copyrighted material and claiming they conducted a search. This is mostly irrational fear. As written, that scenario would not pass the test of the “qualifying searches” section of the act which includes a court, following best practices as written by the copyright office, and that the search took place immediately prior to use. Of special note: the lack of any identifying information on the work is not sufficient to meet the standard. You really have to look.
Canada actually has a similar orphan works bill in effect. Since 1990, they’ve issued a grand total of 222 licenses to use orphan works. This is hardly the blatant rights grab that some people fear.
Incognita
The US has a long history of using copyright legislation to benefit corporate ‘owners’ not creative producers… this looks like another blatant attempt—and if they succeed, they will soon be pushing their ‘standards’ on to the rest of the world… as they have done through the mechanism of the cynically named and deployed ‘Free Trade Agreements’.
Pneuma
Lee I didn’t read your entire post, but we do have fair use wich allows educators to publish “abandoned” works without liability. This includes sites like Wikipedia, a free online encyclopedia… I really don’t see any need for drastic changes to copyright laws. Saying that educators and encyclos can publish higher resolution images and videos would be just fine for me. But no one should be able to make a business out of orphan works and no one should have to register anything to protect themselves.
Donna Adamski
Thanks so much for sharing. My letter is on it’s way. What about that web site of Free Copyrights that I see some bubblers have? I haven’t checked into it yet. But if this bill is passed will it matter?
bahgoesthesheep
sorrry but we need to stand up for ourselves. Its obvious for artist that this could be a life changing law, it could be good in some fluffed up bullshit blahblah way (sorry) but theres too much harm that can be done to small artist’s and small business if they have to register every single image they create. i don’t know about you but i can’t afford to pay for everything i create, the internet makes this orphan works bill way to dangerous, everything we create would basically be up for grabs.
pneuma right educators do have fair use :D
have you noticed the stock market basically crashing, the $700 bil bail out fall through. big business is under alot of pressure, it doesn’t seem completely ridiculous that this is like a last ditch effort to squeeze money from whatever they can. I mean come on through this entire admistration reign they’ve been basically lying to us.I think there should be a point when we just say cut the bull shit, you can’t STEAL OUR INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS of creation!! im mean damnit, if you have to pay for something your created thats BAD!! duh education has its god damn fair use, end o story. i like only having to sign my name to own it :(, i wouldn’t give that up for anything in the world.
oh and read the links, there good :3
bahgoesthesheep
oh excuse the first comment, more of to Lee, then a rant xD
i really like your whole sum up, and links…... good info
its good to see artist active about this bill, i’ve been hearing about it for a while,read up, signed a couple of petitions. i didn’t think it would get passed, then some artist got a little delusional about the bill, and noooow were in trouble. oh man i just hope we can stop it in the house
Squealia
if what Lee Wilde reports is correct, i can’t actually see what the great issue is…. because unless to let images of your work float around cyber space unattached to anything, I don’t see how it would apply. Assumming all you images are either on a personal website or a site such a Redbubble, they could hardly state they don’t know who owns the copyright could they? So long as you look after your images as you should I really don’t see what the issue is? I cannot believe any Government would expect every piece of art be registered at a cost of $200, that’s just ludicrous…. the links/http addresses don’t work to the legislation.
Arletta
You know, many artists are persons who have physical and mental health issues, who use their art to release their frustrations and stress. Passing this law is taking that release away from them.
That would not be good for the artists, and it certainly would not be good for America at large.
Also when they had to stop creating art because they could no longer afford it, nor could they stand the emotional strain of other people stealing it – and morally it is still stealing- and so they stopped selling art, stopped paying taxes on it, stopped the galleries from making exorbitant sums off of their art and the persons who work in the galleries also end up out of work, therefore a whole lot more people will not be paying taxes and an entire industry will collapse in the main, this will not be good for the American people as a whole.
When they all have to move out of America and request political asylum from a country that allows art to be created, this to will not go well for Americans.
This is one of the stupidest laws ever. It goes against the Constitution, because we’d have no liberty or pursuit of happiness and our “speech” would no longer be free. It has been ruled that art is speech and the government , oh, the government can pay for someone to speak for them but they cannot stop the American citizen, or foreigners within their midst, from speaking their free mind or require that they pay for the privilege . it is not a privilege, it is a right!
And that is why the copyright laws are as they have been for some time, to protect the rights of the citizens to own their own property.
This smacks of communism and worse: it’s exactly the sort of thing the Nazis did. Curtail freedoms, cut welfare, stop helping the helpless, and the next thing you know everyone who doesn’t fall in line ends up in a concentration camp or as a slave or dead.
This is what the Constitution and Bill of Rights is meant to stop. They wrote it for their present and for the future, too, because, baby, they knew this was coming – not just the art thing, but everything that has been happening.
bchrisdesigns
Hi there, I wrote a journal about this months ago and have an ongoing list of links to other journals that talk about this issue. I will add this to the list!!! Cheers!!! :)
P.S. You can see it here.