PDA

View Full Version : "Orphan Works" poll


felipe
05-11-2006, 01:58
I'm picking up on Simons idea to post a poll about the "Orphan Works" bill, to raise further attention on the matter, and to see where we stand here.

WHAT IS ORPHAN WORKS?
In short, Orphan works is meant to facilitate the appropriation of photos, illustrations etc. that appear without credit lines and whose authors cannot be found through a "good faith, reasonably diligent search". The use of such an "orphaned work" would then be FREE, unless the copyright owner comes forward.

If this bill is passed on it would affect all of us, US citizen or not, and considering the widespread use of uncredited images, especially on the internet, it's definetly no matter to be taken lightly at all!

If you want to read up on the bill itself, please visit this thread:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22735

WHAT CAN I DO?
We're sending off the petition this wednesday and the bill is very likely to be promulgated within the week. Be aware of the urgency of the situation! We need to ACT NOW, and the easiest way to do so is to simply SIGN our petition.

You WILL be affected, if you take pictures or paint pictures, for money or for fun, be it in the US or anywhere else, so it might pay off to speak up.

The final draft can be found over here:
http://www.lightstalkers.org/final-draft-copyright-petition-for-those-who-have-not-signed-yet

Once again, if you don't want to sign up on lightstalkers, I'll glady forward your signatures to Jon.
Either drop me an email at [email protected] or just send a PM that's all it takes!

Now we would like to know how you feel about the amendment, what you already did/plan to do about it, and obviously if you (don't) feel affected by it.
There have been a tremendous amount of lurkers on the "Urgent call to.." thread, and we are trying to understand why so few people are speaking up, and why even fever have given their voice to the LS (lightstalkers) petition.

There won't be any calling names and pointing fingers, I suppose we're all mature enough to be aware of the responsibility of our actions, and conscious of the reasoning behind them.

Thanks for the effort, I hope we can make a difference!
Cheers,
Phil

P.S.:
You can choose more than one answer, if you feel there's something missing from the list, please tell me.

felipe
05-11-2006, 02:09
I reposted the whole thread (since you can't just edit polls...duh), the five people who voted, please vote again!

Thanks Rich for pointing out the public poll thing, must have been the late hour yesterday. :)

Vote at will, no one will see who you are!!

Cheers,
Phil

jaapv
05-11-2006, 03:41
I wish the links would work.....As of now, I haven''t the foggiest idea what you are talking about.

felipe
05-11-2006, 04:15
My bad, updated the link. Apologies!

Phil

Simon Larbalestier
05-11-2006, 04:40
Two votes including mine which is a shame.

Ken Ford
05-11-2006, 05:00
I wrote both of my Senators and my Rep a few months back, and only one has responded so far...

Pherdinand
05-11-2006, 07:22
"You WILL be affected, and it doesn't matter if you take pictures or paint pictures, for money or for fun, be it in the US or anywhere else, so it might pay off to speak up"
I don't get the point of the above poll with such a description. You say it WILL affect me and you ask me if i think it will affect me???
Anyway, the world is crazy enough already.

jaapv
05-11-2006, 07:32
It won't affect me or anybody who takes the small trouble of embedding his copyright and an url (I use the one of my gallery) in his file. about 10 sec. work in Photoshop. It is also possible to create a copyright brush, which will put a visible copyright on your photo with one click.

Simon Larbalestier
05-11-2006, 07:34
[QUOTE=Pherdinand I don't get the point of the above poll with such a description. You say it WILL affect me and you ask me if i think it will affect me???
Anyway, the world is crazy enough already.[/QUOTE]

I think Phil's point is he like to know how you feel about the forthcoming bill.
If the bill is passed it will affect you- it will affect everyone. Isn't it better to try to do something about this rather than stand by and let it happen? :mad:

It may be a "crazy world" but I think it's a world worth photographing and retaining the copyright to the pictures you make of it.

Simon Larbalestier
05-11-2006, 07:36
It won't affect me or anybody who takes the small trouble of embedding his copyright and an url (I use the one of my gallery) in his file. about 10 sec. work in Photoshop. It is also possible to create a copyright brush, which will put a visible copyright on your photo with one click.

interesting but what happens if someone just crops out the copyright info?

Pherdinand
05-11-2006, 07:38
i'm not sure it will affect me. However by the "crazy enough world" i was meaning that it is crazy enough without further bills, amendments, regulations and such.
But I'm getting a little bit anarchistic nowadays, or maybe i always was??

jaapv
05-11-2006, 07:42
interesting but what happens if someone just crops out the copyright info?

That is called fraud and is outside the scope of this law. The embedded information is not lost that easily, you'd have to strip all exif information and that is fraud again.If you feel really protective about your work you can even put a transparant watermark across the centre which cannot be removed at all.

Simon Larbalestier
05-11-2006, 07:44
Ok for those of you who don't think it will affect you how about adding your names to the petition on behalf of those who don't have access to a copyright piece of software or are unable to protect their images such as painters etc. RFF is supposedly a community so surely if all of its members were to sign alongside the 8000 members of Lightstalkers it would at least be a step in the right direction?

jaapv
05-11-2006, 07:48
Ok for those of you who don't think it will affect you how about adding your names to the petition on behalf of those who don't have access to a copyright piece of software or are unable to protect their images such as painters etc. RFF is supposedly a community so surely if all of its members were to sign alongside the 8000 members of Lightstalkers it would at least be a step in the right direction?
I support your quest as a fellow anarchist. But all digital camera's worth their salt come with at least Photoshop Elements, which has copyright options in the program.

Pherdinand
05-11-2006, 07:48
OK, you can count on me for signing the stuff, but i keep my vote here as 'i think it won't affect me'.
And nope, that's not a contradiction!

Simon Larbalestier
05-11-2006, 07:55
I support your quest as a fellow anarchist. But all digital camera's worth their salt come with at least Photoshop Elements, which has copyright options in the program.

Jaapv -that's comforting for those with a digital setup and a computer - what about those that don't? I'm not getting into one here just trying to give a voice to those who are less fortunate than ourselves or are image makers in a different medium.

jaapv
05-11-2006, 07:58
I see where you are coming from and I support you, but I do think the main problem will be with stuff floating around on the Internet, and that can be reasonably protected.

Simon Larbalestier
05-11-2006, 08:06
I hear you Jaap but i think it's not really the internet - it's all the below the line advertising and the cheap publishers that cut corners and illustrators are especially at risk in these instances.

f/stopblues
05-11-2006, 11:12
I've been reading though all this info since this morning, since I wasn't familiar with it before. I just added my name to the petition on Lightstalkers. Thanks for getting this out!

felipe
05-11-2006, 11:33
Everybody, thanks to all of you who contributed so far, keep the posts coming!

Ken, while it may be frustrating to find out that the people who should care actually don't, it's important folks like you keep reminding them to DO so! But who am I telling this to..

One has to consider that the basic concept of Orphan Works sounds reasonable enough for anybody not too familiar with the creative industry, and while it is their duty to act in favor of the people (is it?) and the constitution, one can't blame them for not knowing every detailed insight or even the most obvious (to us!) facts.
--

Jaapv, I suppose you missed the links in the other thread?. I'm not very good at explaining things, but the information provided should make it pretty clear that you are going to be affected.

That is, unless you are one of the brave people with a diagonal 120pt Helvetica Bold signature in their pictures. In that case I'm not going to debate this any further, go to hell ;-)

But back to your suggestion:
I agree it's easy to add metadata to a picture, but it's even easier to strip it from the image, even by a complete dummy.

It's obvious that the person ripping your image is culpable, but that's not the point. If someone else finds the pirated picture, conveniently ripped from any credit lines, placed out of context, with no way to locate the copyright holder, your picture is orphaned work.
I am not a lawyer, but you will need one if you want to sue the person who's now using your picture.
Your compensation though, would be limited to a normal liscensing fee, not inlcuding attorneys fees, with no possibility to claim additional damages.
--

But infact this is only the icing on the cake. Please read the links and look arround a bit, I'm not going to explain these things any furthe. The information is readily available, in conveniently premade opinions with plausible reasoning behind them or as the raw deal on all the .gov sites.

Finally, as Simon has already said, even if you don't see yourself affected or don't have to live off your images, there is no reason NOT to make a point and sign that LS petition, call up reps and congressmen, publish articles, just spread the word!

You don't have to be an anarchist, or an especially social and altruistic human being to understand that it's B.A.D. when the government cuts down on your rights. Considering the potential commercial interest (or make that influence) behind this bill, hell even more of a reason to man the speakers!

Thanks for your opinions and especially the signatures, and again, keep the posts coming!

Cheers,
Phil

felipe
05-12-2006, 13:24
Pherdi, Robert, Kevin and John, Chris thanks a bunch for signing the petition, I hope we can make a point, with 474 people and counting!


But time to cut the crap!

I posted the first thread on april 29th, 600+ views so far, and thirteen! days later we have FIVE signatures, and whew, a whooping 17 people taking the poll, utterly impressive.
Is my wording incoherent brabble or aren't the facts clear enough? This ain't no ****in rocket science!


I may not be the only one thinking this but I'll say it out loud anyways; I am appaled by the apathic, narrow minded naivete the remaining 99.95% of the members of this board bring to this issue.

Don't get me wrong, I realize some people might come here to relax from work, have fun and whatnot. But you guys are so full of yourselves with the fancy gear, and so focussed on playing nice there is no synapse left for talking problems?!

Nobody will give a **** if I don't post here anymore and frankly I won't miss it, but you should be ****in ashamed of yourselves. The "esprit du corps" on this board is 99.95% pure original bull**** a la carte.

You can just ignore this, or send some of the ususal "family values" zealots forward, do what you want, I hope I made my point.

Hope I didn't spoil the party!

Cheers,
Phil

Simon Larbalestier
05-12-2006, 13:52
It is indeed extremely sad Phil. FWIW i'm surprised and disappointed at the low response too.
Strange 'cos many people signed it over at Lightstalkers.

Rich Silfver
05-12-2006, 13:59
What happened to "There won't be any calling names and pointing fingers"?

f/stopblues
05-12-2006, 14:02
I participated because of the issue, and I can appreciate your intensity towards it, but I'm not sure that last post is an effective way to open the ears of our members. I wouldn't want something silly to turn people off of this thread.

Simon Larbalestier
05-12-2006, 14:15
Rich
no one's pointing any fingers per se - just making a very clear statistical point.

felipe
05-12-2006, 14:33
What happened to "There won't be any calling names and pointing fingers"?

Rich, if you bitch about this, I hope you're bitchin about OW too. :angel:

I may be the DEVIOUS, arrogant prick, but sitting it out and playing nice is not one of my qualities.

Chris,
I hear ya! But statistically with 5 votes in two weeks, we'll be sitting here playing nice until the next ice age.
I'll gladly revert to playing happy kiddo all over again if more people take awareness of the issue at hand here.

That doesn't necessarily include signing the LS petition which you can do over here btw.:
http://www.lightstalkers.org/final-draft-copyright-petition-for-those-who-have-not-signed-yet
but spreading the word and freaking out uncontrollably alone would be a start.

Cheers,
Phil

erikhaugsby
05-12-2006, 14:36
Question: what is there that I can do? Put blatant copyrights on every one of my photos with all of my contact info?

What are some of you people doing to really secure your photos?

felipe
05-13-2006, 04:38
Question: what is there that I can do? Put blatant copyrights on every one of my photos with all of my contact info?

What are some of you people doing to really secure your photos?


Erik,
Since you asked, you could sign our petition, or any other for that matter!
Speak up while you still can, you don't have to make a living in this industry to oppose the bill or give voice to a protest! Tell other people, make them aware, be angry about it!

The LS petition is 489 people strong and counting, why not make that 490!

Just pm me and I'll forward your sig to Gayle or sign up directly over here:
http://www.lightstalkers.org/final-draft-copyright-petition-for-those-who-have-not-signed-yet


To answer your question more specifically:
There are several ways to "secure" your photos, check the other OW thread for more posts on this matter, Bill posted some good advice.

basically, it burns down to this:
a) Put a visible Watermark style credit line over the whole picture so people can't crop it out
b) Attach a credit line as metadata. (can be stripped with one click though)
c) Showcase your images in a secure flash .swf file.

ALL of those "solutions" have at least one or two caveats, and basic credit lines, metadata and flash files can be stripped or ripped even by an amateur.

d) Don't showcase large Hires images on the web.
e) Keep the images in context to your name (i.e. your site)
f) Register them with the copyright office (US)

There is nothing you can do to *really* prevent your images to be ripped in at least some way, but you can hamper the effort necessary to do so.

And the only thing you could do to prevent your work from becoming "orphaned" if it's ripped out of the context of your name, is a big fat centered watermark.
I don't know a single photographer whose client would put up with this, even if they got the image for free, and I suppose even a 3 year old would bitch about it.

Cheers,
Phil

Pherdinand
05-13-2006, 04:43
Felipe, may I speak freely and clearly to you? Just trying to answer your question about why so few.

Two points I wish to make:
1. The post you wrote and the links, are very long and tiring, and difficult to get to the point. People will have to spend quite some time (actively!) if they want to find out where they sign their names. People comning here usually spend much less time on one thread, in my experience. People are busy, or lazy maybe, or too ignorant, you have to accept this if you want to reach something.
2. As Rich wrote... You are way too aggressive in your approach. Aggressive against the reader i mean. "Nobody will give a **** if I don't post here anymore and frankly I won't miss it, but you should be ****in ashamed of yourselves. The "esprit du corps" on this board is 99.95% pure original bull**** a la carte." Etcetera. These words will not make any good to your reputation here, and even worse, they will not do any good to the reputation of the cause you are fighting for.

Let me tell you what would I think if I read this thread right now as a newcomer:
"What the **** is this guy's problem? Who is he to bash 99.95% of the forum members. I shall nbot read further and I will ignore him coz i don't need to take such crap from noone, not in real life nor on a photo forum."
IS this the reaction you were looking for?

Regards
pherdinand

felipe
05-13-2006, 06:11
Pherdinand, thanks, critisism very much appreciated!

I know I am not a rethoric wunderkind and I edited the initial post to bring some more structure to it FWIW. If anyone else has anything to add to it, please step forward!

You are certainly right and I alrady mentioned I am aware of the fact most people don't come here for this kind of posts.
But being apologetic about at least some hundreds of people not giving a **** because they aren't used to reading into more than 10 word of a post is hardly acceptable, which leads me to your second point.

I already said this, but I'll say it again.
There have been six (Thanks Richard!) people giving their voice to the LS petition, with 649 views on the original thread and 300+ on this one, and I can only guess, 7000+ members on RFF? Anything less than 70 people is less than 0.05% people giving a ****, which is a number I don't really have to comment on do I?

The OW issue is so blatantly WRONG it's almost laughable, and even if I would've posted the initial info as incoherrent brabble (which hopefully is not the case), "cut copyright" "severe" "attorney" "oppose" and "government" should've rung a bell.

I keep repeating myself over and over, but to see that less than 0.05% of us here decide to read up on this, take action or just snap and spam the word in my opinion is every reason to start barking.

You notice your description of the offended newcomer is absolutely in line with my general perception of the 99.95% I mentioned in my rant btw.?

Cheers,
Phil

Simon Larbalestier
05-13-2006, 07:05
SNIP
1. The post you wrote and the links, are very long and tiring, and difficult to get to the point. People will have to spend quite some time (actively!) if they want to find out where they sign their names. People comning here usually spend much less time on one thread, in my experience. People are busy, or lazy maybe, or too ignorant, you have to accept this if you want to reach something.
pherdinand

I'm sure this thread is going to get closed soon but really Pherdinand if this is the main reason why no one will step forward it's very sad. If i may suggest in the politest way possible way ( :angel: ) - rather than directing your frustration towards Phil's efforts (and i don't really see why he should apologise) why not direct it at those who haven't signed for whatever reason?

FWIW i've posted Phil's thread on the RPS and Leica Customer Forums to see if there is a better response.

Pherdinand
05-13-2006, 07:11
Simon, there was no frustration directed anywhere, neither took he offense, i think. I also did not say anything about apologize. Just gave him my oppinion about why people might not react. I could be completely wrong with that.

Additionally, i would not direct anything to anyone who did not sign for whatever reason. If you are an angel, a revolutioner, a saint, that does not give you the right to say everyone else not agreeing with your ideas is a devil (or an "apathic, narrow minded naivete" for that matter).

Simon Larbalestier
05-13-2006, 07:18
Ok Pherdinand but that's how i read your post but now you've put me right. Thank you.
Both Phil and I are very frustrated with the lack of response - guess it shows on my part.
There is a saying which i think is relevant here -that goes something along the lines of "you can take a horse to water you can't make it drink".

Pherdinand
05-13-2006, 07:30
that's right as well, Simon, but you have to be careful with such sayings cos some people might take it as you call them a horse. :))

Simon Larbalestier
05-13-2006, 07:32
that's right as well, Simon, but you have to be careful with such sayings cos some people might take it as you call them a horse. :))

LOL Pherdinand :D :D :D but the sad thing is you may be right.
Ok well i got leave this particular sandpit and to go back to wet printing...........

felipe
05-13-2006, 08:33
Simon, there was no frustration directed anywhere, neither took he offense, i think. I also did not say anything about apologize. Just gave him my oppinion about why people might not react. I could be completely wrong with that.

Additionally, i would not direct anything to anyone who did not sign for whatever reason. If you are an angel, a revolutioner, a saint, that does not give you the right to say everyone else not agreeing with your ideas is a devil (or an "apathic, narrow minded naivete" for that matter).

I didn't take offence, I didn't take it as a cue to apologise, and I think you are quite right in your assumptions. Infact I can't think up any other reason but yours (on why the folks don't care).

What you're saying on the lurkers IMHO misses the point though.
Of course you're not supposed to bedevil them for not agreeing with you, but you should at least be righteously indignant when they're sitting it out while it concerns "yourself and thy neighbor".

Now let me saddle my horse.. :D

Cheers,
Phil

Al Kaplan
09-24-2008, 20:02
It's possible that people who already signed a petition elsewhere won't "double vote" by signing the petition here also.