SAA learned yesterday about an aggressive last-minute push by Congress to pass Orphan Works legislation. The Senate was “hot lining” the Orphan Works Bill (S2913) for a vote, and the House was expected to follow suit.
We’ve now learned that the Senate bill was passed.
We must immediately turn our attention to the House.
We need to stop the House Judiciary Committee from folding their own bill (HR5889) and moving to adopt the Senate version.
PLEASE EMAIL CONGRESS RIGHT AWAY.
The CapWiz site is set up to make this a very quick and easy process. A letter is prepared, and all you need to do is enter your contact information.
Posted by Ed Cordes on September 27, 2008 at 6:25 PM
Done! Thanks for the link. It made the process quick and easy.
Posted by Robert Fisher on September 27, 2008 at 7:25 PM
Have either of you actually read the bill or are you merely following along like lemmings over a cliff or the swallows to Capistrano?
If you actually read the bill, you'd understand that the provisions of a 'qualifying search' are reasonably extensive. In addition, if, as artists, you're not prepared to take the steps necessary to keep your records up to date in order that a potential user of your works is able to find you; then quite frankly you obviously don't care enough about your precious photographs to deserve any compensation at all, let alone the compensation that is available under the bill. The one section that is a bit disturbing is the 'Copyright for Derivative Works and Compilations' clause but I'd have to go back and reread S103(a) to find out how relevant that is (I'm not going to do that right now).
I'm constantly amazed at how quickly and the extent to which 'artists' get their knickers in a twist over things that are either basically irrelevant or virtually entirely withing their ability to control.
Take responsibility for your own original works! If you don't want people having the chance to use them in a quasi-inappropriate manner or don't want to have any limits on the potential compensation if your copyright is infringed upon then don't allow that to happen; take the necessary steps to ensure that your asses are covered. In other words: Take responsibility for yourself; don't abdicate it to someone else. Bloody hell, grow up for crying out loud.
Posted by Steve Foss on September 28, 2008 at 12:31 AM
Robert, noted.
Jim, done.
Posted by Jim Goldstein on September 28, 2008 at 12:32 AM
Thanks Ed and Preston. Its quite important for all photographers to take action on this bill. The Senate version was less friendly to photographers than the House version. Prior to the vote there was a large campaign put on by Librarians to contact their representatives. Its now or never to have your voice heard.
Robert yes I've read the bill and I have an article due out on this subject shortly in Digital Photo Pro magazine. Check for it and you'll have a better understanding why the bill is not cut and dry and puts photographers at greater risk. Also check for my next episode (soon to be released) of my podcast where this is discussed in great length with other photographers who span the spectrum of those supporting to opposing the bill.
Posted by Louis Neal on September 28, 2008 at 12:05 PM
I've read it and I don't like it. Please follow the link and post your objections.
Lou Neal
Posted by Hali Sowle on September 28, 2008 at 4:04 PM
I've read it as well and although there are restrictions there is also a lot of language that makes photographers at risk. I've sent email and posted my objections and forwarded the information to friends.
Discussion
7 repliesSAA learned yesterday about an aggressive last-minute push by Congress to pass Orphan Works legislation. The Senate was “hot lining” the Orphan Works Bill (S2913) for a vote, and the House was expected to follow suit.
We’ve now learned that the Senate bill was passed.
We must immediately turn our attention to the House.
We need to stop the House Judiciary Committee from folding their own bill (HR5889) and moving to adopt the Senate version.
PLEASE EMAIL CONGRESS RIGHT AWAY.
The CapWiz site is set up to make this a very quick and easy process. A letter is prepared, and all you need to do is enter your contact information.
Send an email now
If you actually read the bill, you'd understand that the provisions of a 'qualifying search' are reasonably extensive. In addition, if, as artists, you're not prepared to take the steps necessary to keep your records up to date in order that a potential user of your works is able to find you; then quite frankly you obviously don't care enough about your precious photographs to deserve any compensation at all, let alone the compensation that is available under the bill. The one section that is a bit disturbing is the 'Copyright for Derivative Works and Compilations' clause but I'd have to go back and reread S103(a) to find out how relevant that is (I'm not going to do that right now).
I'm constantly amazed at how quickly and the extent to which 'artists' get their knickers in a twist over things that are either basically irrelevant or virtually entirely withing their ability to control.
Take responsibility for your own original works! If you don't want people having the chance to use them in a quasi-inappropriate manner or don't want to have any limits on the potential compensation if your copyright is infringed upon then don't allow that to happen; take the necessary steps to ensure that your asses are covered. In other words: Take responsibility for yourself; don't abdicate it to someone else. Bloody hell, grow up for crying out loud.
-P
Jim, done.
Robert yes I've read the bill and I have an article due out on this subject shortly in Digital Photo Pro magazine. Check for it and you'll have a better understanding why the bill is not cut and dry and puts photographers at greater risk. Also check for my next episode (soon to be released) of my podcast where this is discussed in great length with other photographers who span the spectrum of those supporting to opposing the bill.
Lou Neal