Quoted from an email sent to me earlier this day. All photographers and visual artists should respond top this matter.
BREAKING NEWS, May 6, 2008 - The House is meeting tomorrow 2:00 p.m. Wednesday, May 7, 2008, 2141 Rayburn House Office Building markup of H.R. 5889, the "Orphan Works Act of 2008"
This means that if you oppose the House Bill as it stands, it is extremely important to make your voice heard before that meeting begins.
At this time, it is understood that the House believes that photographers and other visual artists including their trade associations are in agreement with the current bills. APA opposes both the House and Senate bills as written.
Please take a moment to be heard via a prepared letter of your choice, or by including your own reasoned thoughts in a professional courteous manner.
This link <http://capwiz.com/illustratorspartnership/home/> will allow you to be heard.Â
Scroll down about half way to see "For Photographers".
It is important to be heard. It is your future.
Martin Trailer
National President
Â
Constance Evans
National CEOÂ
OLJ studio wrote: Do they really going to put attention to several hundreds e-mails?
Every time an elected official receives a contact they view it as the opinion representative of 10,000 people. The 10,000 are the silent majority that allows the vocal minority to bear the burden of most of the protest or support the officials receive. Don't be a member of the silent majority, send the email and be counted for something.
Sophistocles
Posts: 21,308
Seattle, Washington, US
Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:
Every time an elected official receives a contact they view it as the opinion representative of 10,000 people. The 10,000 are the silent majority that allows the vocal minority to bear the burden of most of the protest or support the officials receive. Don't be a member of the silent majority, send the email and be counted for something.
Actually, having worked for a Congressional office, this is not specifically true. A hand-written posted letter, perhaps. But email, no. And a form email even more-no.
That said, it can't hurt and I encourage everyone to make their voice heard.
Actually, having worked for a Congressional office, this is not specifically true. A hand-written posted letter, perhaps. But email, no. And a form email even more-no.
That said, it can't hurt and I encourage everyone to make their voice heard.
Sophistocles
Posts: 21,308
Seattle, Washington, US
Kevlar Vest Girl wrote:
Party pooper!
Send the form.
Like hell. I wrote a letter quite some time ago, made a phone call to a senior staffer who owed me a favor, and ensured that the issue was pushed up to my representative (who doesn't owe me a favor, but should).
This link <http://capwiz.com/illustratorspartnership/home/>
ORPHAN WORKS LEGISLATION IS BACK!
APA's Position on the Orphan Works Act of 2008
From the onset, APA has been actively engaged in the effort to help solve the orphan works dilemma. We made public our support for the crafting of an amendment that would permit use of verified, i.e. true, orphaned works for certain uses, by way of procedures that are clearly defined in the statute or regulations, while retaining remedies for use by copyright owners in the event of abuse.
APA, in seeking to represent the best interests of its members, takes the position that the legislation offered in both bills -- S.2913 and H.R.5889 -- does not achieve the goal as we believe was originally intended, and instead provides a distinct road map for the infringement of contemporary works by living artists worldwide. If left unchanged, this legislation has the potential to destroy the businesses and livelihoods of thousands of photographers, other visual artists, as well as the collateral small businesses that serve the industry, and are dependent on, creators.
Therefore, APA is asking its members and all concerned individuals to take action by writing your members of Congress to voice your concerns. PLEASE go to this resource page on Orphan Works for sample letters (scroll down for the photographers' letters) and the ability to automatically contact your specific members of Congress. Great thanks to the Illustrators' Partnership for making this site available.
The full text of is available as a pdf download here:
APA POSITION ON ORPHAN WORKS 2008
And both the House and Senate versions of the bill are available as pdf downloads on the APANational.com homepage here
Monito -- Alan wrote: Any news on yesterday's developments? news.google has nothing to report about it.
Haven't heard anything from APA/ASMP. They're usually very on top of any updates.
Last time it went up for vote it kept getting pushed back until they went out of session. Could happen again *crosses fingers*.
Haven't heard anything from APA/ASMP. They're usually very on top of any updates.
Last time it went up for vote it kept getting pushed back until they went out of session. Could happen again *crosses fingers*.
Of course, ASMP actually supports one of the current versions of the bill (can't remember if it's the house bill or the senate bill)
Personally, I feel that reversing the current policy of essentially perpetual copyright would be a better use of effort than the "band-aid" solution that Orphan Works legislation provides, but given the fact that REAL reform will never happen, I hope that they canb eventually find a way to make Orphan Works stuff work for everyone involved.
Madcrow Photographics wrote: Of course, ASMP actually supports one of the current versions of the bill (can't remember if it's the house bill or the senate bill)
With the amount of money being thrown at this by large corporations, it's inevitable in coming to fruition. You might as well get used to the idea. From my understanding of what ASMP has been saying, it's not that they out right support it, it's that they're trying to lessen how much we get reamed.
Done and sent the day it was posted and this is the reply I got:
"Dear Mr. Tracy:
Thank you for getting in touch with me to express your concerns about the United States Copyright Office's "Report on Orphan Works." It's great to hear from you.
As you know, the Copyright Office recently proposed legislation to change the rules for using copyrighted works in situations where the creator or owner cannot be identified. I understand your concerns that adopting these proposals would affect your ability to earn a living as a photographer. I want you to know that I strongly believe copyright laws should help foster creative endeavors that enrich the lives of all Americans.
The Senate Committee on the Judiciary recently held a hearing to consider the Copyright Office's suggestions. Knowing of your views will be very helpful to me should this proposal come before the full Senate for debate.
Again, thanks for contacting me. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance to you in the future.
Sincerely,
Barbara A. Mikulski
United States Senator"
With the amount of money being thrown at this by large corporations, it's inevitable in coming to fruition. You might as well get used to the idea. From my understanding of what ASMP has been saying, it's not that they out right support it, it's that they're trying to lessen how much we get reamed.
On the bright side of things, Bill Gates (i.e. Corbis) can make a lot more money.
....and just to add more confusion to the mix. This just in from ASMP.
Dear Member of ASMP,
Please do not write to your Congressmen now. It will hurt our cause.
I completely understand that the Orphan Works situation is very confusing. Please do not buy into the hysteria that you are hearing. You have people and organizations that you have trusted for years giving you mixed messages. There have been some terrible accusations about ASMP on forums and blogs. I assure you that we are working at the table to make these versions of this bill as good as we can. We are working to influence changes that can greatly effect the final versions. If everyone bombards their Congressmen with messages of âvote no,â it damages what we are working to achieve.
There may be a time when we do want you to contact them with a specific message, but now is not the time.
Please do not write to your Congressmen. Thank you for your understanding.
Thank you for writing about S. 2913, the "Shawn Bentley Orphan Works Act." I appreciate hearing from you.
America's copyright industry is one of our most important economic engines, and giving artists the incentive to produce their works is vital to our country. As I am sure you know, the creative process is so important that our Founding Fathers put copyright protection into the U.S. Constitution. That is why I feel so strongly that we must continue to give copyrighted works the protection they deserve.
I understand your concerns regarding certain provisions in this bill. I believe that all artists should be able to maintain their right to be compensated for their hard work, and I worked with Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) to make improvements to the bill that would further protect the rights of visual artists. The bill now also requires the user of an orphan work to search for all persons and entities that can license the intended use of the work before they may use it.
On May 15, 2008, the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which I am a member, unanimously approved the orphan works bill. Please know that if the Senate considers this legislation any further I will be sure to keep your thoughts and concerns in mind.
Again, thank you for writing. If you should have any further comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, DC staff at (202) 224-3841.
Andy Pearlman
Posts: 3,411
Los Angeles, California, US
Christopher Hartman wrote: I received this today...
I got the same email today as well. I wrote back the following, reqarding this section of her reply: The bill now also requires the user of an orphan work to search for all persons and entities that can license the intended use of the work before they may use it.
This (italic section) is NOT good enough. If they can't (or say they can't) find me, why should anyone have the right to use first, ask questions - and negotiate - after the fact? Why should it be MY responsibility to make sure I can be "found", and who is to determine whether the user tried hard enough? And what if I don't want any use of MY work by anyone but me? I've invested MY time and money in a product - the government didn't help me, why are they wanting to give it away? Can you imagine letting someone build a house on unused land because the builder claimed they couldn't find the owner (of course with land, there are proper ownership records. There is no reliable system for photography, that can be searched by just the photograph). PLEASE on behalf of all the creative artists in your state, do NOT let this bill pass in ANY form.
Monito -- Alan
Posts: 16,524
Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
One angle to exploit is that with the new Orphan Works system for turning copyrighted work in to orphan work by "finding" it on the internet means that more lawmaker's wives and daughters pictures will end up being used for strange purposes because there are fewer penalties. At least with proper protections for photographers there would be more incentive and means to fight and win civil lawsuits, meaning more deterrence.
I got the same email today as well. I wrote back the following, reqarding this section of her reply: The bill now also requires the user of an orphan work to search for all persons and entities that can license the intended use of the work before they may use it.
This (italic section) is NOT good enough. If they can't (or say they can't) find me, why should anyone have the right to use first, ask questions - and negotiate - after the fact? Why should it be MY responsibility to make sure I can be "found", and who is to determine whether the user tried hard enough? And what if I don't want any use of MY work by anyone but me? I've invested MY time and money in a product - the government didn't help me, why are they wanting to give it away? Can you imagine letting someone build a house on unused land because the builder claimed they couldn't find the owner (of course with land, there are proper ownership records. There is no reliable system for photography, that can be searched by just the photograph). PLEASE on behalf of all the creative artists in your state, do NOT let this bill pass in ANY form.
Andy Pearlman
I agree. Let's pretend NO ONE CAN find the photographer/copyright holder. My feeling should be, FINE, you CAN NOT USE IT EVER!!!
What possible harm could there be in NOT ALLOWING someone to use a photo that is NOT theirs? If they like the photo so much, hire a talented photographer to recreate it! It's not exactly rocket science and you might actually get something that is better. In the very least, you'll have something that is yours and yours alone to use.
The allowance of let people use ophaned work for commercial purposes is beyond me.
Question, how does this affect model release requirements?
So they steal a photo from me because they can't find me. Ok...how do they find the model since if they cant' find me and unless the model is famous, they aren't going to find them either. Of course, not all photos havem odels, but for those that do...what then?
Just imagine you have some private diary and you accidentally lost it (or your property was stolen and your diary was dumped.) Do you really want somebody having right to publish it just because he cannot find you?
| 
| 
| edu