Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Orphan Works bill response...
OpenSourcePhoto > New Stuff! > Hot off the Press!
J Scott
So I received a canned response from my congressman today It still worries me what can be consided a "reasonably, dilligent search" and I STILL don't want any of my works to be used by non-profits, charitable, scholarly, educational purposes and definitely not religious organizations without my approval first!

Here's the response:

"Dear Scott:
Thank you for letting me know your thoughts on a Congressional proposal to address the so-called "orphan works" problem involving copyrights. I appreciate your taking the time to get in touch about this subject.

I know about the Copyright Office's report on problems faced by people who cannot find the holder of a copyright to get permission to use a copyrighted work and don't want to run the risk that the copyright holder might bring an infringement action if they use the work. The bill you mentioned, H.R. 5889, would address this by limiting awards in infringement cases if the defendant proves that: (1) he or she made a reasonably diligent but unsuccessful search for the copyright owner; and (2) the infringing use provided attribution to the author and owner of the copyright. In such cases, a copyright owner could win "reasonable compensation" unless (1) the use was without commercial advantage and primarily for charitable, religious, scholarly, or educational purposes; and (2) the infringement halts expeditiously after notice of the claim. A court could enjoin an infringement, but would have to consider harm caused to a defendant who did a reasonably diligent search; it could not enjoin continued preparation or use of a new work that recasts, transforms, adapts, or integrates the infringed work with the infringer's original expression if the infringer pays reasonable compensation and provides attribution to the copyright owner.



I can certainly appreciate your concerns with the bill, but as I am not a member of a committee responsible for its initial review I will not be directly involved in its consideration unless and until it is debated by the full House of Representatives. If that happens, I will remember the points you have made.



Thanks again for contacting me. To do my job well, I need to hear from my fellow Coloradans. For more information, please visit my website at <a href="http://co02:800/iq/Documents%20and%20Settings/ssloss/My%20Documents/www.house.gov/markudall" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">www.house.gov/markudall .




Warm Regards,



Mark Udall
Member of Congress
Misty
I also got a static response from my congressman:

Dear Mrs. Pfeil:

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to the Shawn Bentley Orphan Works Act of 2008. I appreciate hearing your views on this matter.

As you know, S. 2913, the Shawn Bentley Orphan Works Act of 2008, was introduced by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) on April 24, 2008. This bill would allow orphan works - art work whose copyright owner cannot be traced - to be exhibited if no copyright owner was found after an extensive search. This bill also contains provisions to protect copyright owners of orphaned works and allows for monetary compensation to be given should they later emerge. This bill was referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Companion legislation was also introduced in the House of Representatives and has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

As you know, hundreds of creative works that may be protected by copyright are not being viewed because their owners are unknown. While interest in displaying such works exists, fear of copyright infringement fines have prevented these works from being displayed. The sponsors of the legislation contend S. 2913 would help potential users find the owners of the orphan works and facilitate a way for the owners to receive compensation for their works. Moreover, the public would be able to view many creative and artistic works that are valuable to our national heritage.

On the other hand, I have heard from some constituents, like you, who are concerned that the legislation would make it easier for others to replicate their work and produce it cheaply in factories for personal gain. Moreover, while those in opposition to the bill agree that they would have copyright protection, they contend that most artists would not be able to afford the court costs associated with proving the ownership of the piece.

I certainly understand your concerns with this legislation. Artistic fields are very competitive and I appreciate the time commitment involved in learning a new craft. Should I have an opportunity to consider the Orphan Works Act of 2008 before the full Senate, I will be sure to keep your views in mind.

Thank you for contacting me, I appreciate hearing your views on this matter. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about other matters of importance to you.

With best personal regards, I am


Sincerely,

Tom Carper
United States Senator
Phil P
Yeah, responses from Congress are usually done by staffers who use stock language, so don't be overly offended by the canned stuff, it's just the day to day operations and with the volume of stuff congressional offices get, it's nice that they at least have a way to reply to you.

J Scott
I was surprised to see anything at all...I just hope that the people who need to see what we have to say about it ARE hearing from us.
Misty
I was also very surprised to get a reply email! I only got one reply though, even though I wrote all 3 of my congressmen. Hopefully the letters are getting to the right hands to make the difference.
Mark T.
If you are interested in this bill, the best options you have are 1-write your congressman and senators, and 2-join PPA. PPA is on capitol hill everyday lobbying for your interests. Support them.
J Scott
QUOTE(Marky T. @ May 12 2008, 12:55 PM) *
If you are interested in this bill, the best options you have are 1-write your congressman and senators, and 2-join PPA. PPA is on capitol hill everyday lobbying for your interests. Support them.


Agreed....working on that PPA part
*B*r*y*c*e* L*e*o
... tell me you fine folks aren't actually worried about this? It's really pretty reaonsable.

http://realitysquared.deviantart.com/journal/18227968/
Mark T.
This from PPA---
QUOTE
This statement can also be found at www.ppa.com in the Government Affairs section. There are also links for both the Senate and House bills.

PPA cautious but optimistic about new legislation
(statement on orphan works)

Noting substantial improvements over previous orphan works legislation, Professional Photographers of America (PPA) remains cautious yet optimistic about two newly proposed orphan works bills.

The two separate bills were introduced April 24th—one in the House of Representatives and the other in the Senate. While PPA maintains a cautious concern about these bills, analysis indicates that they are significantly improved compared to previous orphan works legislation.

Orphan works, loosely defined as copyright-protected material where the copyright owner is unknown or cannot be located, has been debated on Capitol Hill for several years. PPA was called on to testify about orphan works at congressional hearings two years ago and has since worked tirelessly to mitigate what seemed destined to be a bad situation for photographers.

One of the factors making the going so tough for photographers is the very broad public and congressional support for orphan works legislation. There are perhaps millions of photographs owned by museums, libraries and archives that cannot be legally used because the owners cannot be located. Similar problems exist when a consumer can no longer locate his or her portrait or wedding photographer.

The pressure for significant, broad-based change has been mounting against photographers for a number of years—even very pro-copyright members of Congress have vowed that orphan works legislation would be passed.

Despite its work on Capitol Hill, PPA was not sure what form the new legislation would take. Certainly, there are improvements which we think can, and should, be included in the proposals.

Generally, though, it is our opinion that the newly proposed bills are significantly more favorable than the legislation proposed two years ago. More importantly, based on expected changes in the House IP Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, we believe that if the current legislation is not approved, we can expect much less favorable legislation in 2009.

Under these proposed bills, the requirements to become an orphan work and claim protection from copyright infringement are stringent and narrow. Key provisions include:

* A photograph without a copyright notice would not automatically qualify as an orphan work.
* The proposed bills require a “diligent, good faith” search based on industry best practices as catalogued by the Copyright Office. This includes searching databases certified by the Copyright Office in addition to the Office’s own records.
* Failure to meet the requirements of a diligent search, or adhere to the usage requirements, will void any orphan works protection.
* If the copyright owner of an orphan work photograph emerges, the user(s) of that photograph would have to provide reasonable compensation. Failure to negotiate and provide that payment in a timely manner voids orphan works protections.
* A “safe harbor” provision will protect nonprofit institutions’ use of qualifying orphan works (such nonprofits include museums, libraries and public archives), but this provision is very narrow and applies only to non-commercial uses.
* Orphan work protection is excluded for “useful articles” such as mugs, T-shirts, and other similar trinkets in the House version.
* The House version also requires that a user file a “Notice of Use” along with documentation of the diligent search.

Two other helpful provisions are included, due in part to PPA’s lobbying:

* Both bills task the Copyright Office with conducting a study on a small copyright claims alternative dispute resolution system and submitting its findings to Congress within two years of the bill’s enactment. During the debate two years ago, PPA argued aggressively for a small-claims-type process like this, which would allow photographers to pursue reasonable compensation without the expense of filing a federal court lawsuit. We continue to believe that there is a tremendous need for photographers to be able to seek redress for infringements outside of the federal court system.
* Both bills mandate a study by the U.S. Comptroller into the deposit requirements of the current copyright registration process. PPA is pleased with this, as we have argued for a number of years that the current process—specifically the deposit requirement—discriminates against photographers. We believe this study is a direct nod to photographers and an attempt by the writers to make otherwise contrary legislation more palatable.

Both versions of the bill set an effective date of January 1, 2009, but carve out an exception for photographs and other visual material. The House version sets the effective date for visual arts at January 1, 2013 or after two searchable databases receive Copyright Office certification. The Senate version sets the date at 2011.

We feel certain that orphan works legislation is going to pass. It has been our position that photographers should work within the system to effect the most positive legislation possible.

Expecting a worse fate if we wait until 2009, and recognizing that it is possible to gain some small improvements yet, PPA is generally pleased with the proposed bills’ direction. We are grateful for significant improvements made on behalf of photographers and artists. We stand ready to support what we hope will be the very best legislation possible—allowing us to prepare for the future copyright fights that are sure to come. To view a complete copy of the proposed bills, go to:

Orphan Works Act of 2008 (H.R. 5889)

Shawn Bentley Orphan Works Act of 2008 (S.B. 2913)
J Scott
Ohhhhh! So it has nothing to do with putting orphans to work? tongue.gif
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.