digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

See the original image at mag.awn.com —

You Will Lose All The Rights to Your Own Art & Photos

mag.awn.com — "...If the Orphan Works legislation passes, you and I and all creatives will lose virtually all the rights to not only our future work but to everything we've created over the past 34 years, unless we register it with the new, untested and privately run (by the friends and cronies of the U.S. government) registries."

show profanity settings
expand all
  • sevenslashfour, on 04/12/2008, -3/+7This sorta kinda needs to make it to the front page soon.
  • nutty52, on 04/12/2008, -6/+1Parents, don't let your kids draw on the walls. You have been warned.
  • nursethalia, on 04/12/2008, -3/+5Ouch. An outrage for artists! This needs to get on the front page.
  • jhaydon, on 04/12/2008, -2/+2That's terrible! It should be an assumed right that anything you create should be yours, whether or not you register it. Luckily this possible change in legislation won't apply in Australia!
    • VisualDemon, on 04/25/2008, -0/+0Yes,but as I understood it that doesn't stop someone to steal your work from America via internet.And still it will affect all of us as most of the networks and galleries will crumble.
  • ASheep, on 04/12/2008, -2/+4This is an absolute outrage! I sincerely hope this doesn't pass in the USA because it could set a precedent for the rest of the world to follow.
    • MacEnvy, on 04/12/2008, -1/+4The rest of the world really needs to stop following our lead. It should be clear by now that we really don't have any idea what we're doing.
  • TyrantWave, on 04/12/2008, -2/+4Why isn't this getting more hits? This is an outrage!
  • unitedkronos, on 04/12/2008, -2/+5Come on, just a few more hits and it'll be front paged...
  • BrapAllgood, on 04/12/2008, -2/+8"You could see photos you take of your family and kids, or of a family vacation, used in a magazine or newspaper without your permission or payment to you. You would have to pay to register your photos, all of them, in every new registry in order to protect them. Say the average person takes 300 photos per year (I take a lot more than that). If a registry only charges $5 per image, that is a whopping $1,500 to protect your photos that are protected automatically under the current laws. If there are three registries, protecting your images could cost an amazing $4,500. Not to mention the time it would take to register every photo you take. Plus, you will also have to place your copyright sign on every photo."

    This is a nightmare, right? I want to wake up now.
  • notouch, on 04/12/2008, -2/+6WTF!
    They let RIAA sue people just for listening to a song without paying, and yet they let others profit off artist's hard work?!!! If they want to pass the bill, they better free up all movies and music too! They can't let big companies have all the money and steal things from poor independent artists!

    p.s. I've seen people's comment in the past comparing torrenting music and stealing artwork. In case someone brought it up again, here's the major difference: People torrent music and listen to it, they don't claim they made that song, they don't re-sell it and make profit off it!!! On the other hand, people stealing artworks claim they drew/paint it, and sell it and make profit off it! BIG DIFFERENCE!
  • RomanThommassen, on 04/12/2008, -2/+5OMG WTF they think of something new everyday to surpress you more, don't you see what will happen in the near future. YOU ARE LOSING ALL YOUR RIGHTS. EVERYTHING george orwell told us is coming true ffs. INFORM people!
  • ZackRI, on 04/12/2008, -2/+4Keep spreading the word. This sucks.
  • knobtwiddler, on 04/12/2008, -3/+2so i guess this means if we can download whatever we want now without fear of prosecution? seems like there are an awful lot of orphaned files on bittorrent out there... that just need a loving hard drive to call their own.
    won't someone please think of the orphans!!!
  • shimoroka, on 04/12/2008, -2/+6This NEEDS to get frontpage!
  • RomanThommassen, on 04/12/2008, -2/+7Ok, so i'm 99% sure this won't get on frontpage, cos it isn't even in upcomming articles top 10, while it should be. This is so corrupt.
    • shimoroka, on 04/12/2008, -2/+4I hate having to agree with you... thus the only no-nonsense no-arguing-possible reason why Digg sucks. It seems a goth doing hula hoops is more important than art, videos, audio and photos.
  • notouch, on 04/12/2008, -1/+4Site's down.
    About Orphan works legislation: http://www.copyright.gov/orphan/
    Progress of that bill: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Orphan_ ... (seems they haven't brought it up again since 2007, maybe the artists are safe for now)

    And a working link for that article for the time being: http://mag.awn.com/index.php?ltype=pageone&article ... (it may be down soon with traffic.)
    • S4pphire, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1date correction, 2006 was the first time it was taken up.
  • JustDino, on 04/12/2008, -2/+4The reason this crap happens is they get paid on our tax dollars while we have to use our own resources to fight back. Registration = Confiscation and the ones who swear to protect the Constitution never bother to read much less follow the oath to protect it. We have one option
    come November give them a lot of reading time when we vote them out. As the Constitution repeats time after time--Congress shall make no law against our God given rights which can nether be given or taken away.
  • Ngamer01, on 04/12/2008, -2/+3Buried this as inaccurate. To sum up Orphaned Works, it's just a fancier word for public domain. When you create a work, it's legally yours until you release it, you die, or you go into seclusion from the rest of society by any means necessary including using disguises / plastic surgery and your seclusion makes you impossible to find (jail / solitary confinement doesn't count as seclusion).

    The 2008 Orphaned Works bill hasn't even been drawn up yet. All this is just preliminary talk to see if it should be drawn up to be debated in Congress.

    http://www.copyright.gov/orphan/
    http://www.publicknowledge.org/pdf/ow-act-2006.pdf

    A lot of the references in the AMW article above is editorial (READ: OPINIONS -- opinions =/= fact; CAPS lock also kills credibility). All the stink he's trying to raise up is based from the 05/06 bill when the US Copyright Office even has opinions from those who chimed in against it years ago (the bill did get totally shot down). And if you think I'm BSing, why hasn't the author of the article actually bother supplying reliable / verifiable sources and citations with the article?
  • robertoortiz1, on 04/13/2008, -1/+1Here are some supporting arguments:
    Ok guys fair enough here are some good counter arguments....
    BTW I do hope I am wrong aboutt his new law.

    Frequently Asked Questions about Orphan Works
    http://www.illustratorspartnership.org/01_topics/a ...

    Hearing on Promoting the Use of Orphan Works: Balancing the Interests of Copyright Owners
    and Users (Video webcast ) -Both sides of the issues are represented
    from Thursday 03/13/2008

    http://judiciary.house.gov/oversight.aspx?ID=427
    Here is a PDF is an outline of the above webcast :
    judiciary.house.gov/media/pdfs/Perlman080313.pdf

    And here is a great blog with current information:
    http://orphanworks.blogspot.com/

    And if you guys agree with me please spread the word...
  • WelshWench, on 04/13/2008, -3/+2Buried as hyperbolic and inaccurate. There's a valid discussion to be had on the topic of orphan works and -possible- registrations, but this ain't it.
  • pond70, on 04/13/2008, -1/+5- how do you dismantle free thinking and free speech in a country that controls it's people - make them pay for it

    USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA USA
  • robertoortiz1, on 04/13/2008, -1/+3For those who think this is fantasy:
    http://www.publicknowledge.org/bill/110-hr4279

    H.R.4279: Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2007
    Introduced
    December 5, 2007

    Sponsors
    Rep John Conyers, Jr. [MI-14] with:

    Rep Howard L. Berman [CA-28]
    Rep Mary Bono Mack [CA-45]
    Rep Steve Chabot [OH-1]
    Rep Howard Coble [NC-6]
    Rep Steve Cohen [TN-9]
    Rep Tom Feeney [FL-24]
    Rep Bob Goodlatte [VA-6]
    Rep Darrell E. Issa [CA-49]
    Rep Sheila Jackson-Lee [TX-18]
    Rep Ric Keller [FL-8]
    Rep Mike Pence [IN-6]
    Rep Adam B. Schiff [CA-29]
    Rep Lamar Smith [TX-21]
    Rep Melvin L. Watt [NC-12]
    Rep Robert Wexler [FL-19]
    Status
    3/6/2008 House committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.

    CRS Summary (as Introduced)
    Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2007 - Amends federal copyright law to: (1) provide a safe harbor for copyright registrations that contain inaccurate information; (2) provide that copyright registration requirements apply to civil (not criminal) infringement actions; (3) require courts to issue protective orders to prevent disclosure of seized records relating to copyright infringement; (4) revise standards for civil damages in copyright infringement and counterfeiting cases; and (5) prohibit importing and exporting of infringing copies of copyrighted works.

    Amends the federal criminal code with respect to intellectual property to: (1) enhance criminal penalties for infringement of a copyright, for trafficking in counterfeit labels or packaging, and for causing serious bodily harm or death while trafficking in counterfeit goods or services; and (2) enhance civil and criminal forfeiture provisions for copyright infringement and provide for restitution to victims of such infringement.

    Establishes within the Executive Office of the President the Office of the United States Intellectual Property Enforcement Representative to formulate a Joint Strategic Plan for combating counterfeiting and piracy of intellectual property and for coordinating national and international enforcement efforts to protect intellectual property rights.

    Directs the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to appoint 10 additional intellectual property attaches to work with foreign countries to combat counterfeiting and piracy of intellectual property.

    Establishes within the Department of Justice (DOJ) the Intellectual Property Enforcement Division to be headed by an Intellectual Property Enforcement Officer (IP Officer).

    Amends the Computer Crime Enforcement Act to modify grant programs for combating computer crime to include infringement of copyrighted works over the Internet. Directs the Office of Justice Programs of DOJ to make grants to state and local law enforcement agencies to combat intellectual property theft and infringement crimes.

    Directs the Attorney General to: (1) review Computer Hacking and Intellectual Property (CHIP) units and provide such units with additional support and resources; (2) direct each U.S. attorney to review policies for accepting or declining prosecutions of criminal cases involving intellectual property theft; (3) deploy five additional Intellectual Property Law Enforcement Coordinators in foreign countries to protect the intellectual property rights of U.S. citizens; and (4) increase DOJ training and assistance to foreign governments to combat counterfeiting and piracy of intellectual property.
  • 2trkpony, on 04/14/2008, -1/+4"Your tax dollars at work"

    Heavily lobbied for by the same shenanigans who brought you the letters 'R - I - A - and A' & then some.

    Too bad they don't put this much effort into impeachment proceedings for the war criminals in office who knowingly lied to deceive an entire nation into horrific war, an illegal unprovoked overseas massacre that has bankrupted the country. They would never touch that, much less anything else of crucial importance facing this nation today. Where are the impeachment proceedings on tricky Dick Cheney for illegal wiretapping, violations of the FISA act & high crimes and misdemeanors against the American people? Even more disgusting these 'elected officials' & "representatives" with the "publics best interest in mind" would never, ever pursue a REAL 9/11 investigation with such unrestrained, vicious fervor as their latest "Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act" aka: SHAM. Much easier for government traitor sell-outs to go after the citizen taxpayers who fund their salaries rights instead of their own 'network.'

    Too bad we the billions of tax-paying people can't turn this around on the cockroaches and draft our own legislation to make it illegal for such political waste to even think about ***** garbage bills like this down our throats. Make political crimes punishable by a much greater offense. That would truly help clean up America. Let's draft our own citizens legislation be used on politicians who betray their oath of office, who fail to uphold their promises and instead sell us out for profit, commit criminal acts while in office with our tax dollars, who abuse their power and fail to defend the United States Constitution. Keep 'em in line. THAT is of much greater significance and true importance than some traitorous citizen rights-extinguishing bill the bought & paid for politicians are salivating to pass under the table in secret. We the people certainly don't need another fraud piece of legislation like this so-called "Intellectual Property Act' wolf in sheep's clothing. Just who do these charlatans represent, anyway?

    Because nobody's life, liberty or property are safe while con-gress is in session.
  • Ngamer01, on 04/14/2008, -2/+1Sorry, but Congress isn't a reliable source.
    • Ngamer01, on 04/15/2008, -1/+1Ah, dammit. I meant this as a reply to an earlier post. Bury this whole comment set down please.
  • AikoWorld, on 04/17/2008, -1/+0This has to be front page, and the new law has to be stopped before it gets thru.
  • lemonnado, on 04/17/2008, -0/+0Enforce 'If you did not make it, don't touch it!"
  • Skyview, on 04/25/2008, -1/+0This is just horrible !
    I mean imagine somebody finds my grandfathers old photos and uses them in a BLOCKBUSTER movie and makes million ? Oh yeah, that's a disaster because content creators are used to get life time + 70 years of payment.
    Content creators are at this moment OVERPROTECTED with the current Copyright laws. What OTHER profession guarantees you an income 70 years after you're dead ? If you don't want your art to be shown then freaking don't POST it ANYWHERE on the web and for gods sake don't show it to anyone.
    If you took a great picture of "Stockholm at night", you don't have to reimburse the government if you make money of that photo. What if you took a picture of my apartment ? Man, you BETTER reimburse me for that.

    For the good of mankind all work should be put under creative common license at least.
    BUT HOW ABOUT WE CRY SOME MORE BECAUSE GETTING PAID 70 YEARS AFTER WE DIED IS NOT ENOUGH!!

    • ShinyFriction, on 05/24/2008, -0/+0You do not get the point. I will have to PAY a third party to have my art registered or it can used without my permission. Even if it costs $0.05 for every piece it is still too much!
  • S4pphire, on 04/28/2008, -0/+1I really hope this new bill isn't getting approved. It would be death to an incredible large number of artists. It would also make it almost impossible to have an online portfolio up for smaller artist and I bet a lot of art communities would get too see their deaths approaching fairly fast as well.
  • BarneysPosse, on 06/23/2008, -0/+0Skyview are you really that dense?

    Sure not showing your creations to anyone but yourself would keep you protected from someone stealing your work, but then what would be the point of creating if you can't share it with others?

    We just don't want anyone claiming our works as their own just because we didn't register it with some private registry.

    If this bill comes to being and passes we'll be spending 1% of our time creating original works and the other 99% of our time trying to protect our rights for them with our dear lives.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.