Orphaned Works Bill?

[.+Destiny.Eclipsed+.]

I think it's only the US, but recently I've been hearing about something called the "Orphaned Works Bill" that will supposedly take away all artist ownership. Anybody know anything about this?  

[Goldenavatar]

This page here seems to have a lot of useful information on the subject. The main reason that this bill even came into existence was as a result of a growing problem. Though you have a copyright for something you've created the minute you've given it form, in order to legally protect said copyright it must be registered as your copyright. That allows you to go to court on matters like copyright infringement, and there's a growing number of people just not filing their copyrights, yet sharing material on the internet where others can lay claim to it.  

[amosa]

i sent a letter to my congresswoman about it- really hoping that the bill won't pass....

 

[Raine Dragon]

Goldenavatar, Whoa, that's a reaaaallly biased site. ^^;


First of, Goldenavatar, that's not true in the US where this bill is coming up.

the Copyright Act of 1976 in the united states says that the moment you make something, you own the copyright to it. No registration required.

Which is what has lead to the existence of "orphan works". An orphan work is a work that has been published in some nontraditional form by the copyright holder, and has since been copied, moved, or the publishing source lost.

For example here is an image that has been passed around on the web for years; I downloaded it in like 2002?


and it appears here on this free clipart page: http://www.webweaver.nu/clipart/ which requires a link back to their site, which would imply that they are the copyright owners.

I put it through tineye and I got this:

Now that looks like a painting or book cover to me. Now, I have a dilemma. If I put the imaged in something and distributed it, I just inadvertently broke copyright.

What the Orphan works bill actually says, is that I try my best to find the copyright holder and can not*, I can assume that the image is in the public domain.

*this means more than just asking my next door neighbor, you are expected to do a pretty good investigation.

Now, lets say I use the image, and get contacted by the copyright holder and they want to sue me. What this act says is thus:

Quote:

‘‘(1) MONETARY RELIEF.—
‘‘(A) GENERAL RULE.—Subject to sub17
paragraph (B), an award for monetary relief
(including actual damages, statutory damages,
costs, and attorney’s fees) may not be made,
other than an order requiring the infringer to
pay reasonable compensation for the use of the
infringed work.

Now, as a web developer, I do not like the idea at all. However, I see the logic in it.

the actual text is here: http://www.publicknowledge.org/pdf/ow-act-2006.pdf  

[amosa]

The bill still has no way to track if people are actually attempting to find the owners before distribution, and "reasonable" is such a general and slippery word that in all likelihood, verdicts will rule for the offender more oft than award the victims what they deserve. Outside of the art world, few people fully understand or respect the value of ArtWORK.