It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Attention Artists and Musicians!! (The Orphan works Bill)

page: 2
26
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2008 @ 09:30 AM
link   
We'd all better be ready for this to pass. As an author, I do know how hard it is to defend your copyright. I've already had to do it a few times, just in these last four years. The old rules no longer apply. In the age of the internet, its too easy for the bad guys to get greedy.




posted on May, 27 2008 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by zysin5
 


There are well presented opposing views to what Brad Holland of the Illustrator's Partnership presents and promotes. From what I can tell, either side of the issue is failing to make a compelling case. I have to say, though, that Brad Holland's tactic of using fear to motivate people may hurt his organization's cause. In any event, do your own research and give both sides of the issue your full attention.

Other views that help to inform on The Orphan Works Bill issue:

May 15, 2008 EFF designer Hugh D'Andrade speaks with Staff Attorney Corynne McSherry about the Orphan Works Act of 2008.

May 16, 2008 Release the Orphan Works!

May 21, 2008 Orphan Works Update: Is the Legislation Fair to Copyright Holders?



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 01:35 PM
link   
the word "reasonable" is pretty vague. not sure i like the sound of that.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Orphan work is a term obviously coined by lawyers trying to make a buck. Art is about expression and business makes it about capitalizing. I understand one's perspective that nothing is truly "new" in the respects that all art is built upon learned & passed down knowledge through the generations. However, ARTISTS ARE WAY TO POOR THESE DAYS. It makes it hard to create when you have to worry about eating, or paying rent, or gas in your car to go to meet a client, or money to buy supplies...but I know I feel ALOT better knowing that Johny-Corporate is going to get the opportunity to make money off of something I can't afford to "legally" claim that I was in fact the originator of because he doesn't want to pay me for my work even on a production artist basis...yeah makes a lot of sense. Now I have to get back to digging in my couches for change for gas.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 03:19 PM
link   



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 03:31 PM
link   
On the bright side, does that mean I as an artist can more freely "borrow" others stuff and sell it as my own?



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 03:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Areal51
 


Thanks for those links.. This will take me some time to dig deeper into all this. Thats a 207 page report. Which I have no problem doing the reading and research upon. But it will take me some time to fully get threw all these reports, and more research online.
However I do know that most of this has been made into filler to make it seem much more complex than it really is. Thats what lawyers and big biz does to the little guys. They produce extreamly big reports that are filled with confusing and mixed up details, and when you get to the bottom line you are dealing with maybe 5-7 pages of real information.

The rest of this stuff is put here to confuse, and make us lose heart in this research. I will be working on a report, and offer up as much information as I can on both sides to this story.

I have also been given the chance to do a podcast about this, which after my research is complete I will be more than happy to put some work into this affair.

I will try my best to plow threw their mumbo jumbo and get down to brass tacks here and see what I can find out.



The Copyright Office has completed its study of problems related to “orphan works”—copyrighted works whose owners may be impossible to identify and locate. As requested by Senator Orrin Hatch and Senator Patrick Leahy, the Office submitted its Report on Orphan Works to the Senate Judiciary Committee on January 31, 2006.


When I first learned about this bill, I didnt really think it would even get this far. It looks like its getting further along, becasue of the wording and terms they are using to slip this one past us here.

They have much more money and resources than I could ever gain in my lifetime. Yet being one man, I will do my best to provide some solid facts and information. And also I want to stress fear is a big tatic being used in their favor. I dont want to fall under those gears, where I seem fearful.
However I am highly concerned. For the will of my fellow writters, artists, and musicians! I know what this means to all of you, and know what this means to me.. This is one battle worth fighting. As with the advice Ive been given, stick with what you know.. Well this is right up my alley.

Thanks agin everyone who has taken this seriously and helping me get the word out. For everyone here who knows, if you are on other places across the net, by all means copy and paste this in other places.
I freely give anyone permission right here to use this work to help them spread the word! I for one dont care if you take something I say and put it somewhere else, if thats what it takes to get the word out, then thats what needs to be done. As Im just one person, who was told by another person to get the word out.. Yet my role doesnt end here.. There is much work to be had, and much reading to be done!

Background from 2005


During 2005, the Copyright Office studied issues raised by “orphan works”— copyrighted works whose owners may be impossible to identify and locate. Concerns had been raised that the uncertainty surrounding ownership of such works might needlessly discourage subsequent creators and users from incorporating such works in new creative efforts, or from making such works available to the public.




posted by skyfloating
On the bright side, does that mean I as an artist can more freely "borrow" others stuff and sell it as my own?

Not unless you are a coperate entity yourself. Everything you make, will become theirs. As the little people, we dont have the pool resources to make our work well known. But those with high pool resources have all the outlets to sell off your work to others.

So if you work for a big company.. and do lets say logos.. And I make something, and they take it, and I dont have the money to buy it back from them in essence, yes you would be using my work, but its not your work at all. Even if you spend 2 days on that logo.. its the companies logo.
And you are paided a set amount.
Bill Hicks was right about Marketing.. And Commerical Art type stuff..
Open wide, and bend over little guy...

However my feeling is they wont be able to push this threw this year.
But sooner or later.. They are going to push it threw.. We just have to keep fighting! And keep fighting until the last person.


Now this is a lose term here.. They are claiming the artists or writters that can not be found will be up for grabs. This is clever wording on their part.




The House and Senate both introduced new legislation to allow for greater use of so-called “orphan works” — books, music, photos, movies or other works whose owners can’t be found. Why are these bills important? Because there are literally millions of works in existence that are currently under copyright protection but for which the copyright owner cannot be easily found. Because if you use a copyrighted work without permission, you could be on the hook for statutory damages of up to $150,000 per work, orphans go unused.



Think of a diary kept by someone during the world war 2 and recovered from an attic. A box of old photographs happened upon at a yard sale. Think of an illustration used in an advertisement but not clearly attributed. At the moment, these works are unavailable to publishers, filmmakers, collage artists and many other creative professionals who would like to use them and gladly pay for the privilege, but can’t because of the potential for massive penalties if the original copyright owner does come to play here.
The newly introduced bills allow artists to use orphan works as long as that user makes a diligent effort to find the original copyright owner. In the unlikely event that the original owner does emerge, the compensation that a user pays should be reasonable. The two bills currently on the table — S. 2913, the Shawn Bentley Orphan Works Act of 2008 go a long way to address these issues and if passed, would grant the public access to millions of previously inaccessible works of art.


But thats the catch there.. As I see this here, thats just one way for them to say hey.. Look, no one is claiming this.. Why cant we just take it, and use it to make money.. ITs all great stuff! And if these people are dead, and not around to lay claim then why cant we use it?

But it wouldnt end there.. And its clever wording, and big money that makes up these terms. From the outside everything seems like this would be a great thing. But as we know theres always hidden terms, and hidden agendas that need to be brought to the table. Before we make a big mistake by saying, "let it pass!".





[edit on 27-5-2008 by zysin5]



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 04:35 PM
link   
no one read this before knee jerking out a reply, did they?

This isn't just going to let someone slap their name on someone else's work and call it their own, that it still protected, but it will allow people to use copyrighted works if the owner of the work can't be located after a diligent search in good faith. This will also cover derivative works.

As a performing artist, i support this kind of bill, as well as stricter licensing fees and procedures. I feel that you should have to individually copyright each work you with to protect, not just have a blanket authority over anything written. That's not in the public interest and not in the spirit of the law.

Just because I hummed out a cute little ditty while sitting on the johnny 5 years ago and never used it doesn't mean that that tune should be locked away from society. If you believe the RIAA and other copyright/IP nazis, they would have just that kind of law. with them being the defacto enforcers/collectors as well.



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by CoffinFeeder
no one read this before knee jerking out a reply, did they?

This isn't just going to let someone slap their name on someone else's work and call it their own, that it still protected, but it will allow people to use copyrighted works if the owner of the work can't be located after a diligent search in good faith. This will also cover derivative works.


Yes thats is the bold print which I did state in one of my posts. However there is some fine print that prehaps you should be more concerned with.

A knee jerk reply is not a bad thing. It will help open peoples eyes, and get a response from people, and also drive them to dig deeper within this bill to see if their "knee Jerking" reply was self warrented.

I dont mind you saying that and all, I welcome all thoughts here.
But I would rather reply and get this out in the open, so that people like you and can come here and help exlpain this much better.

There are reports with up to 207 pages, some reports that have 355 pages. Others are shorter, and all of them are from different years.

You are talking about the bill in 2006. The 2008 Bill has be re-defined, and has been upgraded that has smaller print. And smaller hidden agendas that could slip past us unseen.

Hence thank you for offering your feelings and thoughts into this thread.
They are welcomed as much as the next guy.
But do you honestly feel they would be honest about anything?

We are talking money here.. Lots of money! And anytime you have major money you know you have Organized Crime!
Yes I am saying most corperations at top levels are high Organized Crime!

And they will take and take, until there is nothing left!

As the money you have in your pocket is nothing but debt. It has no real value in the sense of what value really is.
However when you produce something. Now thats value. That is something that has real worth. Art, writtings, music ect, do not come with debt attached to them.
This bill will attach debt to all of our work, which in essence is what they want. They want everything of value in this world for them.

I see your point about work that has gone un-used. However that work is not theirs.. They didnt make it, and I dont care how you want to slice it.
They shouldnt be able to hire some lawyers and come in and take what they want.

Thats what pirates do. Theives and crooks! Lets say there is a house, with stuff in it. Yet no one lives there. And the house was left to a family member. Yet the family member lives in the jungle for a few years in the peace core.
Does that give you a right to walk in and take everything in that house, just because they can't find the owner? The owner will sooner or later show up, and be like.. "wheres my stuff"?
And they can say.. Well we honestly tried to find you, but sorry you couldnt be reached, so now what you had is now ours.

If you really think they are going to be "honest" about this.. You have alot to learn about governments and corperate greed.
They are anything but honest!!!



posted on May, 27 2008 @ 05:30 PM
link   
well we had to expect it someday.
tbh unless your planning on making money off your art or music then it doesnt really matter.

obviously alot of people will complain and this obsurd suggestion will be whipped in the ass quicker than hooker in a room full of horny virgins.

i'd say dont worry about it, this cant possibly happen becuase this law is infringing on several laws atm.

to begin with i think there are some copyright theft laws which would just kick this in the teeth and ofcoarse there are also laws on stealing in the first place, so if you keep everything to yourself or if you buy a website then host your images on that, legally they cannot copyright those images withought the consent of the site owner, which would ofcoarse be you.

i dont know if im right, just trying to pop this baloon before it gets to big.



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Earthscum
I mean... seriously? The other thing Wiki says is that he is a recording artist himself.

Of course...When an artist someday loses his "spark of the muse," wouldn't it be natural (read: jealousy) for him to try profiting from the copyrights of others who still have their spark?

I think the work on my avatar is pretty secure...Not only do I have my own original rights confirmed by the picture's long-term presence here, but ATS itself maintains their copyrights as a "collective work." Looks like I'm covered twice & they'd have to try cutting through ATS' rights before they could try touching my individual rights...And I've got all these witnesses right here.



Originally posted by zysin5

posted by skyfloating
On the bright side, does that mean I as an artist can more freely "borrow" others stuff and sell it as my own?

Not unless you are a coperate entity yourself.

If I'm not mistaken, the standard procedure for filling out Birth Certificates includes entering the new child's name in all capital letters. This effectively turns the child into an "item of inventory" to be tracked. So, not only is a newborn child automatically born as a State Citizen, it also turns the child into a "corporate entity." As a point of the UCC (Universal Commercial Code), there's only 2 opportunities to "opt-out" of this corporate status, but some info about that is in another thread.

At any rate, when accepted for the Social Security Card, a person also becomes a US citizen...That's right, that's two different kinds of citizen. This is what covers your "corporate status" with the Federal Government. It's best to fight against this in a courtroom under the UCC, because most courtrooms in America don't operate (& have no jurisdiction) under Constitutional Law.

It would be much more efficient & waste less time to fight the Bill before it becomes law, though...


Originally posted by the secret web
...art is the voice of freedom.

And this is how we can fight them...By pointing out that such legislation is a violation of the Right to Free Expression and Natural Rights to protect your work.
All the fax machines & email accounts are lined up...Auto-dialing set to Congressional Offices...Gentleman, start your engines & let fly the green flag!



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 12:39 PM
link   
First we are not free, we never were free

Second we do not live in a democracy, get that out of your heads

Third, congress deciding all your laws, I mean wtf. You have no voice, you have no say, they decide the laws, they decide what you will follow and heed too.

As long as there is congress deciding for you, you will never be free.
As long as government is running your things, you will never be free.
As long as you continue to do nothing, you will never be free!

A real democracy will never exist
The system needs to go

Peace



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Drewdatt
First we are not free, we never were free

Second we do not live in a democracy, get that out of your heads

Third, congress deciding all your laws, I mean wtf. You have no voice, you have no say, they decide the laws, they decide what you will follow and heed too.

As long as there is congress deciding for you, you will never be free.
As long as government is running your things, you will never be free.
As long as you continue to do nothing, you will never be free!

A real democracy will never exist
The system needs to go

Peace


TRUE DAT, DREWDATT!!!

Just wait 'til people are spending 2/3rds or 3/4ths of their hard earned money on blood oil. The tension is building. The awakening has begun. Some would say it's Revelation Times. I'm no Bible Thumper, but goddamn it's an eerie similarity.

We are being revealed the true nature of the tyrants that control us.

Music is a dangerous weapon in the eyes of those who seek to suppress and destroy free will!



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 03:27 PM
link   
SO, what can I do to stop this bill? I'm a musician and artist and really don't like the sound of this.

To me, this seems to be something that 150 years ago would have had people marching to Washington with weapons. The people posed a real threat to the government and it wanted to aviod a war with its people. Nowadays, the military is so powerful, how can the people fight back agains deceptive harmful legislation? We are nothing.

This is something that makes me mad enough to consider bloodshed.

2 other things I thought of:

1) let's say you DO register your works with the new system. A big company could still use your art anyway. And you'd have a hell of a time tyring to prove YOU registered it and it WASN'T an orphan work, so much you may give up.

If I am understanding this right, it seems that if it passes, anything online will be up for grabs. The assumption wil not be that online art is protected and you should get the owner's permission. The assumption will be that online art is NOT protected. YOu'll have to fight hard to PROVE that YOU indeed registered it with the new companies.

2) What's more: the companies won't justt use it for free; that would be bad enough. But, since the art was found and the big companies assume it IS an orphan, they'll go ahead and spend the money and register YOUR work.

That would be like walking by someone's house, seeing their bike on the front porch, or even their car and taking it, becasue it wasn't parked in the new government mandated parking garage.

God, this makes me mad.



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 03:36 PM
link   
I also thought of this:

This may puch music, art, writing back int othe underground. I could see it pusing some (like me) to leave our works out of the virtual realm and off of the internet.

Back to the days before albums when musicians played live only.

Maybe visual art heads in the direction of graffiti. Painting in abandoned out of the way places that would be difficult for big companies to access.



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 06:17 PM
link   
I will definately post something about this in my Deviantart blog- I am not sure how many will see it, but word of mouth will get it around some more, and I will ask my DA watchers to put a link in their blog/journals as well. Some of them have a large following. I count on the internet to get work. Im a freelance illustrator, and my portfolio is online. There is no way I would get work just by leaving my business card around- heck I would have to get my business card copywrited because it is a peice of my art too! Thank you SO much for posting this!



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by CoffinFeeder
no one read this before knee jerking out a reply, did they?

This isn't just going to let someone slap their name on someone else's work and call it their own, that it still protected, but it will allow people to use copyrighted works if the owner of the work can't be located after a diligent search in good faith. This will also cover derivative works.

As a performing artist, i support this kind of bill, as well as stricter licensing fees and procedures. I feel that you should have to individually copyright each work you with to protect, not just have a blanket authority over anything written. That's not in the public interest and not in the spirit of the law.

Just because I hummed out a cute little ditty while sitting on the johnny 5 years ago and never used it doesn't mean that that tune should be locked away from society. If you believe the RIAA and other copyright/IP nazis, they would have just that kind of law. with them being the defacto enforcers/collectors as well.


Okay- I did a knee jerk as you put it- Im guilty. But I dont think it is a bad idea to spread the word and let people know that they need to put their email on stuff they publish on the net and maybe a blurb that people need to contact them to use thier work. The truth is, people blatantly steal other's work now, so if this act passes, it may encourage more of the same. It certainly doesnt hurt to watermark your images and put some verbage on your sites. I think my galleries are safe because you can contact me easily from the sites.

Thanks, Coffinfeeder for being a voice of reason- I was getting all but hysterical



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 08:02 PM
link   
Apparently, it is not enough to homogenize the collective mind of people into malleable, predictable, Pavlovian response drones.

We are now witnessing that the United States Corporation expects to exploit any remaining creativity and unique talents for its own monetary gain.

Par for the course, as I see it.

Btw, Our band recently recorded an album and anyone can download it for free from the Net. It seems incredulous to me that, even though we saved up and spent a few thousand dollars to finally record well over a decade of original riffs that we simply want people so inclined to enjoy for free, someone would come along and claim an infringement and legally demand compensation for our creation


[edit on 28-5-2008 by FewWorldOrder]



posted on May, 28 2008 @ 09:22 PM
link   
I had a wood print cut that I did, hanging in the walls hanging on the walls of of a verv famous art gallery in Chicago. The Art Institute to be exact.
Without the permission of Judy......
Granted. it was on the walls of a woman who promoted the gallery

Shall I claim a monetary price for my work of art?.

[edit on 28-5-2008 by Enthralled Fan]

This is the Art Institute of Chicago, museum.

My work was dispayed by Judy #######.

I never recieved a dime for my work.

[edit on 28-5-2008 by Enthralled Fan]



posted on May, 29 2008 @ 11:43 PM
link   
I'm a canadian artist and starting out graphic design.
If this is passed, they're eventually going to take all of our freedom away, everything. To me it's like if I draw a squiggle, or what I'm typing right now then it can be taken away, I no longer own it. Freedom of Expression is it? I'm not sure about american law, I haven't read into it. But the world is going down.

Another thing, I don't know if the pleidian thing is real but I sure hope it is, so they can come and help us, because this world needs some help. I'm not associated with any religions by the way.




top topics



 
26
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join