Update on the Orphan Works Act
FROM THE ILLUSTRATORS’ PARTNERSHIP
Backers of the Orphan Works bill are circulating their Talking Points:
“Neither the House nor the Senate drafts of the bill contain the word
“registries,” [they write] but rather they require users to search
non-governmental databases of copyrighted works. The purpose of any
database is not meant to take the place of copyright registration, but
to have a way to search for visual images. Any participation in such a
database would be voluntary.”
But this doesn’t mean what it appears to say. Take it point by point:
Talking Point #1: “Neither the House nor the Senate drafts of the bill contain the word ‘registries.’ ”
Response: Correct. They contain the word “databases,” a synonym:
Registry: register: an official written record of names or events or transactions
http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Database: A database is a structured collection of records or data
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database
Q: Why a synonym?
A: Because international copyright law forbids member countries to
impose registries as a condition of protecting copyrights:
Berne/Article 5(2) ”The enjoyment and the exercise of these rights
shall not be subject to any formality.”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/treaties/berne/5.html
In other words, if they used the word “registries” in the bills, it
would be a red flag to other countries that the US is flirting with
non-compliance with international treaties.
Talking Point #2: “...rather they [the bills] require users to search non-governmental databases of copyrighted works.”
Response: Non-governmental databases” means databases maintained in the private sector.
For users to find your work in these commercial databases, your work would first have to be in the database.
Work not in the database would be orphaned.
Talking Point #3: “Any participation in such a database would be voluntary.”
Response: Congress cannot pass a bill making registration mandatory because that would violate Berne/Article 5(2).
And that would state explicitly to other countries that the US no longer intends to honor its international agreements.
There are red flags all over these talking points.
Summing up: The Orphan Work bills would mandate the creation of registries by commercial interests.
You would not be legally forced to place your work with these for-profit registries.
But failure to do so would orphan your work.
The deceptive talking points accompanying this bill are another red flag.
- Brad Holland and Cynthia Turner, for the Board of the Illustrators’ Partnership
Take Action/ Write Congress http://capwiz.com/illustratorspartnership/home/
Over 37,000 messages have been sent from the site in the last 48 hours. Please spread the word.
Please forward or post this announcement in its entirety to any interested party.
Backers of the Orphan Works bill are circulating their Talking Points:
“Neither the House nor the Senate drafts of the bill contain the word
“registries,” [they write] but rather they require users to search
non-governmental databases of copyrighted works. The purpose of any
database is not meant to take the place of copyright registration, but
to have a way to search for visual images. Any participation in such a
database would be voluntary.”
But this doesn’t mean what it appears to say. Take it point by point:
Talking Point #1: “Neither the House nor the Senate drafts of the bill contain the word ‘registries.’ ”
Response: Correct. They contain the word “databases,” a synonym:
Registry: register: an official written record of names or events or transactions
http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
Database: A database is a structured collection of records or data
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database
Q: Why a synonym?
A: Because international copyright law forbids member countries to
impose registries as a condition of protecting copyrights:
Berne/Article 5(2) ”The enjoyment and the exercise of these rights
shall not be subject to any formality.”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/treaties/berne/5.html
In other words, if they used the word “registries” in the bills, it
would be a red flag to other countries that the US is flirting with
non-compliance with international treaties.
Talking Point #2: “...rather they [the bills] require users to search non-governmental databases of copyrighted works.”
Response: Non-governmental databases” means databases maintained in the private sector.
For users to find your work in these commercial databases, your work would first have to be in the database.
Work not in the database would be orphaned.
Talking Point #3: “Any participation in such a database would be voluntary.”
Response: Congress cannot pass a bill making registration mandatory because that would violate Berne/Article 5(2).
And that would state explicitly to other countries that the US no longer intends to honor its international agreements.
There are red flags all over these talking points.
Summing up: The Orphan Work bills would mandate the creation of registries by commercial interests.
You would not be legally forced to place your work with these for-profit registries.
But failure to do so would orphan your work.
The deceptive talking points accompanying this bill are another red flag.
- Brad Holland and Cynthia Turner, for the Board of the Illustrators’ Partnership
Take Action/ Write Congress http://capwiz.com/illustratorspartnership/home/
Over 37,000 messages have been sent from the site in the last 48 hours. Please spread the word.
Please forward or post this announcement in its entirety to any interested party.