What do you think of this in regards to art & CopyRight?

[keii4ii]

For those of you based in the U.S., please read the sample letters linked here and write/submit your own to the Copyright Office. I fully intend to do so, myself. The deadline for the letter submission is July 23rd. That's this week, guys.

Still haven't fully read the Notice of Inquiry yet, but I most certainly will.

[SethJH]

I sent my letter in. Hopefully we can get our opinions heard on this issue.

[nobody]

Here's a very quick and simple summary of what it's all about, written by a friend and fellow artist of the artist that posted the video: http://digital-doodle.tumblr.com/post/124514342906/i-interrupt-a-long-term-hiatus-to-help-raise

[elixiadragmire]

http://sugarfiendgfx.tumblr.com/post/124572625177/sirpangur-samrosemodblog-okay-so-reading

this link actually clears up a lot of misunderstanding about this bill.

[nobody]

I honestly don't find that post very reassuring...the first attempts at creating a bill like this started 15 years ago, and there's a reason why prominent illustrator/artist organisations are trying to stop it. I mean, one of the recommendations from the Copyright Office was also:
A Copyright Small Claims Court to handle the expected flood of orphan works lawsuits.

The Copyright Office expects a flood of orphan works lawsuits as a result of passing this bill. I think that's troublesome.

[elixiadragmire]

Yeah, I don't have all the answers on this but this bill passed in the UK and looking at all the changes made to the UK copyright law, Berne's law is STILL there it's just to make things more accessible online, for non-profit mainly and personally use like burning a CD or printing an image. The orphan works I think they're talking about is actually stuff written or made generation ago that still can't be touched. I know that IS a bigger problem,

I think it's more trying to make stuff a 'Creative Commons' than to poach work. The small claims court thing I think is to actually benefit artists, making claims more accessible rather than having to go to bigger general courts to get this sorted resulting in bigger costs

heres the bill to read:
http://copyright.gov/orphan/reports/orphan-works2015.pdf

[nobody]

I think the main concern for the people wanting to stop this isn't people wanting to print things for personal use or non-profit organisations, it's that for-profit organisations/businesses will use your work for their own profit. And this bill will make it easier for them. As an illustrator, if you don't register your work in one of these private, for-profit registries, it will be legally orphaned, and is then available for commercial infringement by “good faith” infringers. Good faith infringers would be anyone who believed they had made a “reasonably diligent,” but unsuccessful effort to find you.

And this is of course where a lot of debate could take place. Today you can't use something you find online and use it for profit even if you can't find the owner. This bill opens up for that. And that's why they expect there will be a need for a Copyright Small Claims Court. It's because they expect there to be a flood of orphan works lawsuits. It doesn't matter if it's for the benefit of illustrators/artists. They just expect there to be so many as a result of passing this bill, because there WILL be instances where companies use work that belongs to an artist.

I don't know everything either! And maybe the actually passing of this bill won't have a lot of effect "in real life", but it's better to have the law on your side, and this is a matter of principle. Again, the fact that they've tried to pass this bill for so long is because they see a lot of profit in it (not for artists), and there's a reason artist organisations are against it.

[Marvin]

As an illustrator, if you don't register your work in one of these private, for-profit registries, it will be legally orphaned

Are you sure this bill says that it will completely ignore Berne's law and that by not registering, the law will consider it orphaned ?
I'm sure there will be a lot of abuse and this bill needs to be stoped in my opinion but if you see your content being used by someone else, you can still fight back even if you didn't register your work can't you ? (Especially if you're easily traceable)
Then I suppose it will be a lot more difficult to fight back without a good lawyer so there's that.

English isn't my mother tongue so I didn't get everything and I'm really asking, does this bill plans to overwrite Berne's law ?

[nobody]

This is from the actual bill: As a broad spectrum of participants in this study noted, anyone using an orphan work does so under a legal cloud, as there is always the possibility that the copyright owner could emerge after the use has commenced and seek substantial infringement damages, an injunction and(or attorney's fees. While some users certainly may have viable defenses on fair use or other grounds, many will choose to forego use of the work entirely rather than risk the prospect of expensive litigation. The Copyright Office continues to believe that this uncertainty and the gridlock it produces do not serve the goals of the copyright system. This Report explores the relevant legal and business issues and a number of potential solutions. For instances other than mass digitization, the Office recommends a framework in which liability is limited for a user who conducts a good faith diligent search for the copyright owner, and favors the kind of legislation set out in the Shawn Bentley Orphan Works Act passed by the Senate in 2008.

So if you as an artist want to sue a user that can prove that they have conducted a good faith diligent search for the copyright owner, then you can't expect substantial infringe damages.

I do think most artists today are doing a decent job marking their work, but there's still the principle of knowing that you as an artist have all your rights properly secured, even if you haven't been as careful as you should marking your work.

[elixiadragmire]

I think thats to stop someone from 'taking them to the bank' and clearing them out and instead get them to pay the cost of using the artwork only.

 Limit monetary relief for infringement of an orphan work by an eligible user to
responsable compensation – the amount that a willing buyer and a willing seller would
have agreed upon immediately before the use began;

[nobody]

I've read A SMALL PORTION of the actually bill, I'm NOT a lawyer, I just choose to listen to the people who are active in artist's and illustrator's organisations. These organisations are there to help illustrators and artists, they're there to protect our rights and interests. If they say "this bill is a bad idea", I listen to them, because they probably have access to lawyers who inform them about this stuff, and because these organisations are specifically there to protect our rights and interests.

[nobody]

Which the user would profit from, not the copyright owner/artist.

[futureboundentertain]

Oh wow, so its still rotten garbage to basically make it legal for people to steal from other people... greaaaaaaaaaat.

[Marvin]

Yeah, I thinks it's a very bad idea too. I just wanted to know if someone had a clear answer about Bern's law or if, as you put it, just by not registering you work you'd make it fall under the "orphaned work" legally speaking.
But I think I got the gist of it now, it's just the way you formulated it that confused me for a sec =)

The way I see it, registering your work gives you a chance to fight back while if you've got your work stolen and didn't get it registered before, it's still yours but you might not win in court because the other party can say "sorry dude, couldn't find you so here's the ten bucks I would have paid you if we had a contract" (in the best case)

[starlightcityentert]

I literally just bust out laughing joanne...jeez hahaha

sick part is...someone probably would o_O

[nobody]

Yeah, again based on my understanding of what's going on, that's what it's about. If this bill is passed it will make it easier for companies to use artwork where they (after a proper effort) have failed to find the copyright owner. If they can prove that they made a proper effort in case the copyright owner takes them to court, they won't have to pay as much in infringement damages, just what they would normally have to pay if they had a contract on the work in the first place. And this lowers the risk for the companies, while it limits artist's protection of their work and how much we can expect in damages.

But yeah, I'm not a lawyer (probably very few lawyers in this thread :P) , and I'm not sure how this might affect artists outside the U.S. :/

[starlightcityentert]

It's garbage like this that makes me invest a few dollars every few months to copyright any new material. Any portion of my series that is for public consumption was copyrighted months ago. It's still unfair, but we live in a world where laws are written to benefit the ones who line politicians pockets instead of public interest.

[Marvin]

It still sounds very permissive... Like a forced contract of sort (if your work is stolen by a company you would have refused to work for or something...)
As for how it would influence those that live outside of the US...
A) they might want to do the same
B) US compagnies would be able to sell "orphaned" works that they took as their own to other countries who will think, "why employ an artist when we can have cheap good quality art with no production time ?" Then again, this doesn't apply for specific works but could still represent a big part of the market... I don't know...
C) I still don't get what would happened if they stole an "orphaned work" made by someone from France for example and the guy would be like "Uh, what the hell ?". He would be in his right to ask for real compensations but the american client would be in his right to refuse ? My head hurts.

[futureboundentertain]

How does that make it okay in any logical world to steal something?

Just because you cant find the owner of a work, doesnt mean there is no owner.... Hell some people like to have their anonymity online.

Its basically saying "identify yourself or have your work stolen by big corporations"

The whole concept behind this orphan works thng is like something a 12 year old would say "but I really really really want it" that is their whole logic.

[nobody]

Wow, yeah, I didn't even think about the issue if some company you wouldn't want to work for used your work :/ And like you say, what would happen if US based companies use the work of a French artist...?