?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

The Orphen Works' amendment

Someone posted this in a yahoo group I'm in and I figured some of y ou would be interested in this.


Currently, copyright works that the moment something is declaired 'fixed' or
finished it is automatically copyrighted. You have five years therein after
to registar it with the U.S. Copyright Office. The cost? Usually $30 a piece
or (the best way to do it) is to copyright multiple pieces under a single
'portfolio' name. Also, there was an assumption that because something came
into existence it had a creator and due to this nothing could be used
without gaining permission from this owner.

The amendment wants to change it to:

If somethig is not marked CLEARLY with a NAME then it will be assumed to
have been ABANDONED and thusly ANYONE has the right to use it, sell it or
otherwise 'put it to good use'. There is also a part in there talking about
if a thrid party takes something, erases your name and hands it off to
someone that someone can claim ignorance. Due to this the copyright office
is looking to be absolutly swamped with registation and what happens when
the demand for something is high but there are limited resouces to process
the infomration? The process either slows down dramatically or prices
usually go up or both.

(The rest of what she posted is under the cut to spare your friend's pages)



Please speak out against this! We CAN NOT LET THIS PASS! This would screw
every artist out there. How so? Who has sold a Con badge before? Yay! AND
HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE SIGNED IT? Of those who did sign it HOW MANY OF YOU
HAVE SIGNED IT I A WAY YOU'RE POSTIVE CAN'T BE PHOTOSHOPED OUT? Further more
HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE $30 A PIECE SITTING AROUND TO COVER THE SON TO BE MORE
IMOORTANT THEN EVER COPYRIGHT REGISTATION?

Prepare to write your congressmen. Discussion is nice but this needs action!
People who are really loud and know how to spread word of things REALLY fast
this is your time to shine.

I thought I would bring this up to the gorup for a few reasons:

a) Seriously, everyone should know about this! TALK PEOPLE!
b) Yeah, so the furry fandom is pretty much BUILT on artwork, so if you're
fur this affects YOU.
c) If you've ever drawn anything rasie your paw.......exactly...

So, do what you need to do. Go here for further, more then likely way more
imformative information:
http://www.illustratorspartnership.org/00_home/newsFeedArchive/newsItem.php?newsID=060224110555

more info

http://www.copyright.gov/orphan/orphan-report-full.pdf

Artist's beware has moved!
Do NOT repost your old bewares. They are being archived.
https://artistsbeware.info/

Comments

crssafox
Mar. 3rd, 2006 02:04 pm (UTC)
Re: I think you're drastically over-reacting here...
My husband just brought up a good point on why this could be a bad thing, not JUST for furry artists....

Imagine a company makes a logo for themselves. Imagine one of the workers snatches it up before it's been copyrighted, and they take it to the copyright office themselves and copyright it. This logo the company just had designed (probably paid a graphic designer to make it for them) no longer belongs to them because it had been "abandoned," by the government's definition.

As for the whole thing about photoshopping signatures off, well, the problem there is that if people end up doing that, the internet will be overrun with stolen art. I know you say that you won't do such a thing - I'm leaving you out of this discussion. But suppose all those kids on Deviant Art decide to take images from their favorite artists, slap their own signatures over it, and post it up? Enough artists are already upset that DA allows kids to trace work and post it as their own. Now for it to actually be legal to post someone else's work as your own and not receive any consequences they'll start taking artwork and claiming ignorance. And sites like DA - that don't seem to want to do anything in the first place, they brush off art theft like a little bug that was bothering them - will do absolutely nothing.

This isn't an argument about signed vs. unsigned art. This is about someone else taking someone's hard work, claiming it as their own, and actually being able to get away with it. That's just downright dirty.

You say you have 100 unsigned sketches from Fenrir. I assume, then, that he's an artist that you enjoy. Suppose someone took all of his works, duplicated his web page (because hey! one could claim that the web page is art) and then put their own name on everything, taking all the credit. If no one else yet knew who Fenrir was, and this other person that stole his work ends up publicizing their copy web site and gaining more attention than the original artist... is that really fair? The other person is getting credit, praise, and attention for someone else's work. That is not a good thing.

I hope you can see why this amendment would be of concern to a good many people. My husband and I will be writing letters about it.

Profile

A_B icon
artists_beware
Commissioner & Artist, Warning & Kudos Community
Artists Beware

Community Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com