Orphaned Works Bill
Copy-pasted from my DA account. If you know me on there, chances are you've already seen it or will see it, so I apologize for duplicates. But I wanted to be able to link to a few places for easier access to the information, which I plan on continuing to update as I learn more.
This is pissing me the hell off, so.
Did anyone actually take the time to do research into the proposed Orphaned Works Bill before getting their knickers in a knot? Because I've been reading up on it all day, and it really isn't nearly as bad as people seem to think it is.
For starters, the majority of the concern should be stemming from photographers, not digital artists. Why? Think about this for a minute, people. Canine artists: Under what circumstances would people really want to commercially use your art? Maybe some two-bit t-shirt place would like to use your work to sell more shirts to girls that like cutesy, over-the-top fluffy things, but big businesses wouldn’t see the use for it. Anime artists: Same to you. Anime is such a small niche still that its use in advertisements is still awfully limited.
Even then assuming someone is perfect okay with using anime or Disney or some other very stylized work, the artists in question would have to produce some HELLA AWESOME work for people to even look at their stuff and go ‘hm, I could use that.’ Anyone and everyone who’s ever dealt with art theft knows it’s the skill that makes your work appealing to thieves, which is why many of the more popular (read: “skilled”) artists deal with theft so much more than less popular (and in many cases, less skilled) artists do. Photographers, on the other hand, produce anything from candid images of kids playing to serious artistic work and everything in between. They frequently capture images of every day life, and these are the things advertisers look for when they go to market a product. This
AND, for the most part, businesses know their asses are on the line if they just take images. This doesn’t mean they don’t - any artist who has found their work being printed without their permission knows that this is true - but they know that there is quite a bit of legal fallout if they’re ever caught. Ubisoft got caught using istock photos on one of its game packages not too long ago, and not only was it glaringly obvious, but the company got a lot of flack for it besides.
Admittedly, yes, this proposed bill did seek to make businesses less culpable if they are caught - but only if said businesses can PROVE beyond reasonable doubt that they did their damndest to locate the original artist and seek permission to use the work commercially. YOUR ARTWORK IS ONLY ABANDONED IF IT CANNOT BE TRACED BACK TO YOU. Posting your artwork here, on FA, SA, Y!, LJ, or any other site you have to provide an e-mail address to register for means that it can be traced back to you and you can be contacted for permission. However, on the off-chance that your work wanders to someplace (here’s lookin’ at you, 4chan, or photobucket, too, in ways) where it can be posted anonymously and there isn’t an obvious way to find the original artist, you should put your name and some form of contact information (even if it’s an alias and a website or your e-mail) on the piece so that you can still be found.
THE SIMPLE SOLUTION: If you feel like being paranoid, put your signature and some form of contact information on every piece you post online, regardless of what it is and how much you like it (or don't, as the case may be). KEEP THAT INFORMATION CURRENT. Even if it means putting it somewhere garish and obscene, DO IT. This is something we should all be doing anyway, as artists, but it means that our work will never be fully abandoned IF WE TAKE CREDIT FOR WHAT IS OURS ANYWAY.
Not only that, but a simple google will reveal a lot about this bill anyway - not the least of which is the fact that THE LAST TIME THIS BILL CAME BEFORE CONGRESS WAS IN 2006, and it DID NOT PASS then. Virtually every article, sans one, that I came across in my search revealed dates in 05 and 06 - two years ago, ladies and gentlemen.
And in that last one? The one that wasn’t from 05 or 06? Right here:
http://www.asmp.org/news/spec2008/orphan_update.php
From this website, and I quote: “It has become clear is that some Orphan Works law is likely to be passed sooner or later. Key members of the House and Senate want it; significant user groups such as museums, academic institutions and publishers want it; and the general public wants it. ASMP understands the need for, and welcomes, a solution to the Orphan Works problem. Our objective has never been to defeat Orphan Works legislation as such. Rather, our goal is and has always been to make sure that any Orphan Works bill is fair to visual artists. In addition, it appears that the political environment this year is substantially more favorable to creators than it is likely to be over the next few years. These factors make it important for ASMP to help craft an Orphan Works bill that treats photographers and other visual artists fairly, and to support the passage of a fair and workable bill in this Congress.”
Read that, and then head down to the heading just below it and PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT IT SAYS. Those are the institutions this bill aims to protect; they are all institutions that want NO MONEY from the work they have, save what it takes to keep their doors open to the public. They seek NO CLAIMS to your work and would, in all likelihood, be happy to give credit where credit is due.
If you are still worried, think about it. This bill seems to come up in Congress every now and again, and it NEVER PASSES. That it exists as a proposed bill DOES NOT MEAN it’s gonna be a shoe in. Congress still needs to be convinced this is the right thing to do, and that’s gonna take some work.
In addition, here are some more links that deal with both the current proposal and past proposals. Do yourself a favor and read them.
http://community.livejournal.com/artists_beware/180291.html
http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/newswire/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002383134
http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2005/70fr3739.html
http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/392
http://www.nikondigital.org/dps/dps-v-4-08.htm
At the end of all of that, if you are still worried and have some spare cash on hand, look at the work you’re producing. Register one or two of the pieces you think are more likely to be taken from you. Do you have characters of your own? Register one or two of them. Ask your parents and friends to shell out the five bucks you need to do so as a birthday present.
We live in a changing society. What is sacred never stays untouched. It’s our responsibility as artists to take care of what is ours in the ways we see fit, and never be afraid to adapt to the world as it changes.
If anyone has any additional (preferably up-to-date information) I would love to have it.
This is pissing me the hell off, so.
Did anyone actually take the time to do research into the proposed Orphaned Works Bill before getting their knickers in a knot? Because I've been reading up on it all day, and it really isn't nearly as bad as people seem to think it is.
For starters, the majority of the concern should be stemming from photographers, not digital artists. Why? Think about this for a minute, people. Canine artists: Under what circumstances would people really want to commercially use your art? Maybe some two-bit t-shirt place would like to use your work to sell more shirts to girls that like cutesy, over-the-top fluffy things, but big businesses wouldn’t see the use for it. Anime artists: Same to you. Anime is such a small niche still that its use in advertisements is still awfully limited.
Even then assuming someone is perfect okay with using anime or Disney or some other very stylized work, the artists in question would have to produce some HELLA AWESOME work for people to even look at their stuff and go ‘hm, I could use that.’ Anyone and everyone who’s ever dealt with art theft knows it’s the skill that makes your work appealing to thieves, which is why many of the more popular (read: “skilled”) artists deal with theft so much more than less popular (and in many cases, less skilled) artists do. Photographers, on the other hand, produce anything from candid images of kids playing to serious artistic work and everything in between. They frequently capture images of every day life, and these are the things advertisers look for when they go to market a product. This
AND, for the most part, businesses know their asses are on the line if they just take images. This doesn’t mean they don’t - any artist who has found their work being printed without their permission knows that this is true - but they know that there is quite a bit of legal fallout if they’re ever caught. Ubisoft got caught using istock photos on one of its game packages not too long ago, and not only was it glaringly obvious, but the company got a lot of flack for it besides.
Admittedly, yes, this proposed bill did seek to make businesses less culpable if they are caught - but only if said businesses can PROVE beyond reasonable doubt that they did their damndest to locate the original artist and seek permission to use the work commercially. YOUR ARTWORK IS ONLY ABANDONED IF IT CANNOT BE TRACED BACK TO YOU. Posting your artwork here, on FA, SA, Y!, LJ, or any other site you have to provide an e-mail address to register for means that it can be traced back to you and you can be contacted for permission. However, on the off-chance that your work wanders to someplace (here’s lookin’ at you, 4chan, or photobucket, too, in ways) where it can be posted anonymously and there isn’t an obvious way to find the original artist, you should put your name and some form of contact information (even if it’s an alias and a website or your e-mail) on the piece so that you can still be found.
THE SIMPLE SOLUTION: If you feel like being paranoid, put your signature and some form of contact information on every piece you post online, regardless of what it is and how much you like it (or don't, as the case may be). KEEP THAT INFORMATION CURRENT. Even if it means putting it somewhere garish and obscene, DO IT. This is something we should all be doing anyway, as artists, but it means that our work will never be fully abandoned IF WE TAKE CREDIT FOR WHAT IS OURS ANYWAY.
Not only that, but a simple google will reveal a lot about this bill anyway - not the least of which is the fact that THE LAST TIME THIS BILL CAME BEFORE CONGRESS WAS IN 2006, and it DID NOT PASS then. Virtually every article, sans one, that I came across in my search revealed dates in 05 and 06 - two years ago, ladies and gentlemen.
And in that last one? The one that wasn’t from 05 or 06? Right here:
http://www.asmp.org/news/spec2008/orphan_update.php
From this website, and I quote: “It has become clear is that some Orphan Works law is likely to be passed sooner or later. Key members of the House and Senate want it; significant user groups such as museums, academic institutions and publishers want it; and the general public wants it. ASMP understands the need for, and welcomes, a solution to the Orphan Works problem. Our objective has never been to defeat Orphan Works legislation as such. Rather, our goal is and has always been to make sure that any Orphan Works bill is fair to visual artists. In addition, it appears that the political environment this year is substantially more favorable to creators than it is likely to be over the next few years. These factors make it important for ASMP to help craft an Orphan Works bill that treats photographers and other visual artists fairly, and to support the passage of a fair and workable bill in this Congress.”
Read that, and then head down to the heading just below it and PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO WHAT IT SAYS. Those are the institutions this bill aims to protect; they are all institutions that want NO MONEY from the work they have, save what it takes to keep their doors open to the public. They seek NO CLAIMS to your work and would, in all likelihood, be happy to give credit where credit is due.
If you are still worried, think about it. This bill seems to come up in Congress every now and again, and it NEVER PASSES. That it exists as a proposed bill DOES NOT MEAN it’s gonna be a shoe in. Congress still needs to be convinced this is the right thing to do, and that’s gonna take some work.
In addition, here are some more links that deal with both the current proposal and past proposals. Do yourself a favor and read them.
http://community.livejournal.com/artists_beware/180291.html
http://www.pdnonline.com/pdn/newswire/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002383134
http://www.copyright.gov/fedreg/2005/70fr3739.html
http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/392
http://www.nikondigital.org/dps/dps-v-4-08.htm
At the end of all of that, if you are still worried and have some spare cash on hand, look at the work you’re producing. Register one or two of the pieces you think are more likely to be taken from you. Do you have characters of your own? Register one or two of them. Ask your parents and friends to shell out the five bucks you need to do so as a birthday present.
We live in a changing society. What is sacred never stays untouched. It’s our responsibility as artists to take care of what is ours in the ways we see fit, and never be afraid to adapt to the world as it changes.
If anyone has any additional (preferably up-to-date information) I would love to have it.