Proposed changes to U.S. copyright law = disaster for photographers
03-10-2006, 01:35 PM
#1
Big Block go VROOOM!
Thread Starter
Proposed changes to U.S. copyright law = disaster for photographers
If you care at all about photographers being entitled to just compensation for their work, then please read up on this issue.
http://photoshopnews.com/2006/03/09/...-orphan-works/
*** Cliff's Notes ***
The Copyright Office issued a report on "orphaned works" which contains language for a proposed ammendment to U.S. Copyright law.
Unlike most other categories of copyrighted works, photographs and illustrations are most commonly published without any copyright notice or credit to the photographer or illustrator. These could be considered "oprhaned works" under the new proposal.
Here's the key...
http://photoshopnews.com/2006/03/09/...-orphan-works/
*** Cliff's Notes ***
The Copyright Office issued a report on "orphaned works" which contains language for a proposed ammendment to U.S. Copyright law.
Unlike most other categories of copyrighted works, photographs and illustrations are most commonly published without any copyright notice or credit to the photographer or illustrator. These could be considered "oprhaned works" under the new proposal.
Here's the key...
Under the proposed legislation, a person or other entity who wants to use a copyrighted work is required to make only a “good faith, reasonably diligent search” to locate the copyright owner. If, after making such a search, the user is unable to locate the copyright owner, he/she/it gets an almost free license to use the work. If the copyright owner never comes forward, the user gets to use the work for free. Even if the copyright owner discovers the use and demands payment, the MOST the copyright owner can get is “reasonable compensation,” i.e. a reasonable license fee for the use actually made. There is NO possibility of statutory damages or attorneys’ fees, even if the work was registered before the use was made without your permission.
Wait, it gets worse: If the copyright owner discovers the use and demands payment, “where the infringement is performed without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage, such as through the sale of copies or phonorecords of the infringed work, and the infringer ceases the infringement expeditiously after receiving notice of the claim for infringement, no award of monetary relief shall be made.”
Wait, it gets worse: If the copyright owner discovers the use and demands payment, “where the infringement is performed without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage, such as through the sale of copies or phonorecords of the infringed work, and the infringer ceases the infringement expeditiously after receiving notice of the claim for infringement, no award of monetary relief shall be made.”
03-10-2006, 02:08 PM
#2
Not Registered
So, I see my copyright, signature, or watermarked pic used for a promo. I can only get a "reasonable compensation fee" no matter how much money my work makes whoever is using it? How many people are going to but their name, address and phone number on the picture for a copyright contact?
03-12-2006, 12:41 AM
#3
Race Director
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Posts: 10,121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^^^ That is what's proposed. If you see your work being used and you do nothing about it and you don't respond to the person who is using it who tried to contact you diligently and repeatedly in good faith and that person makes about $1 million from charitable donations from people simply looking at the disturbing pictures before you decide to step in two years later, you can't take $800,000 from him. Makes sense to me.
03-12-2006, 12:33 PM
#4
Big Block go VROOOM!
Thread Starter
You're missing the point Ken. An overwhelming majority of photographs that are professionally licensed are not credited to the copyright holder. If there is no credit listed, how can the copyright holder be contacted? Even if you contact the publisher of the work that the photo appears in, all you need is some idiot to bury your request or phone message and not respond, and you now basically have infringe at will.
03-12-2006, 10:36 PM
#5
Race Director
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Overland Park, Kansas
Posts: 10,121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Billiam
You're missing the point Ken. An overwhelming majority of photographs that are professionally licensed are not credited to the copyright holder. If there is no credit listed, how can the copyright holder be contacted? Even if you contact the publisher of the work that the photo appears in, all you need is some idiot to bury your request or phone message and not respond, and you now basically have infringe at will.
I'm just thinking what I would do, if I saw a photo I wanted to use and I sought permission and the publisher said "go ahead" [incorrectly] based on your above example, a year later, the photographer wants money from me? I need the protection....
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ExcelerateRep
4G TL Performance Parts & Modifications
8
10-14-2015 08:20 AM
