Mind Your Business: You Will Lose All the Rights to Your Own Art

Mark Simon is mad as hell and, in this month's "Mind Your Business," he tells you why you should be too.
Posted In | Magazines: AnimationWorld
With the pending Orphan Works legislation, artists might lose rights to works they've created. Courtesy of Jon Hofferman.
With the pending Orphan Works legislation, artists might lose rights to works they've created. Image courtesy of Jon Hofferman.

Two proponents of this new legislation are Corbis and Getty Images. They are large stock photo and stock art companies. They sell art and photos inexpensively and are trying to build giant royalty-free databases. Do you see how they could benefit from considering most works of art in the world orphans?

Do you know who owns Corbis? Bill Gates. He doesn't do anything unless it can make a huge amount of money. Helping you lose the copyright to your art is big business for Gates.

For years we've heard of Hollywood fighting with China to protect copyrights and stop the pirating of DVDs. Our government has worked with the studios to protect their investment.

Our government is NOW WORKING AGAINST US by allowing our own fellow citizens TO STEAL OUR CREATIVE WORKS.

It will be easy for them to get away with it unless we make ourselves heard.

Your calls and letters do work. I've seen many instances in which a single letter made a difference in public policy. Tens of thousands of calls and letters help even more.

This is not empty talk. I have written letters to my congressmen and I will do so again. I do what I can to let every creator know about terrible legislation like this... thus you are reading articles like this one and you can listen to interviews I've posted online.

CONTACT YOUR LEGISLATOR:
Go to http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml to quickly find the phone number, address and e-mail of every U.S. senator, U.S. representative, governor and state legislator.

Forward this article to every creator you know and urge them to take a moment to protect their very livelihood. I am giving everyone the right to reprint this article in any form to help spread the word to protect our creative rights.

Instead of sitting around watching TV tonight, TiVo that show, write a letter and make yourself heard.

Letters to our government officials don't have to be long, but they should be heartfelt. A good story helps. Tell them who you are, how this legislation negatively affects you and that you want them to vote against the Orphan Works legislation. It's that easy!

If you don't, you will have only yourself to blame when you see other people making money from your art and you don't see a dime.

Spider-Man comic artist Alex Saviuk is also concerned about the loss of copyright protection. "When I found out all the negative aspects of the new legislation, it would almost behoove us to want to do something else for a living," says Saviuk. "If we would have to register with all the different companies, we would never be able to make a living."

"It would be impossible for me to register all my art," continues Saviuk. "It would put me out of business."

You can listen to my complete interview with Alex online. Think this doesn't apply to you? Maybe you don't license your artwork? How about this?

Photos on the internet could be orphaned. With tens of millions of photos shared online with services like Flickr, Shutterfly and Snapfish, there is a huge opportunity for unauthorized use of your photos... legally.

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.

That's not including all your art, sketches, paintings, 3D models, animations, etc. Do you really have all that extra time and money? Plus, even if you do register, the people stealing your work can still claim it was orphaned and, unless you fight them, they win. Even if you win, you may not make back your legal fees.

It gets even better. Anyone can submit images, including your images. They would then be excused from any liability for infringement (also known as THEFT) unless the legitimate rights owner (you) responds within a certain period of time to grant or deny permission to use your work.

That means you will also have to look through every image in every registry all the time to make sure someone is not stealing and registering your art. You could actually end up illegally using your own artwork if someone else registers it. DOES ANYONE SEE A PROBLEM WITH THIS?

Do you think the U.S. Copyright Office is here to protect you from this legislation? Think again.

Brad Holland of the Illustrators' Partnership shares his notes from a recent meeting with David O. Carson, general counsel of the Copyright Office.







Comments


Once again the talentless jealous and uncreative are lined up to claim that which they are incapable of imagining and producing on their own. Through their mentally deficient short sighted greed they will happily ruin the lives of their betters as "america the new third world country" retrogrades into a nation of incompetent losers by the incompetent losers and for the incompetent losers. Don't join the losers call and write your Congress and Senate and Governor and newspaper and do it every god damn week until we put this host of the uncreative down like the thieving curs that they so closely resemble.
Jason Argos (not verified) | Sat, 04/19/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
It seems the copyright office supports the orphan legislation and delivered a letter of support in March of 08 based on their findings in 2006. While the writer of this article may or may not be correct in all of his information, something is going on. Without more information and further study I cannot say if I support this proposed bill or not. http://www.copyright.gov/docs/regstat031308.html
Michael Grant (not verified) | Fri, 04/18/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
I am an artists and I am not important , but to make artists pay a fee and register all their art work if just unbelievable . Most artists are starving and then we add a fee when they can not deduct their work and some big business that makes millions can use it. How unjust are we going to get in the U S
Cynthia Anderson (not verified) | Fri, 04/18/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
This is an outrage! What kind of fools are in charge? This is the stupidist thing I have ever seen someone do with their power to influence laws!
Mizu Rakahasi (not verified) | Thu, 04/17/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
Howdy, Well, here's my opinion. You can like it or lump it. If you lump it, then that's your problem. Let's put our greed aside and look at this issue with a little integrity. First of all, no one should be able to register as the copyright owner of a work unless they: a) created the work, or b) paid for the creation of the work. If an owner of a work cannot be found, then it can be classified as being orphaned, BUT from the moment it is classified as being orphaned, it should go into a state of non-usability for a period length of the average life span of a human being. If the owner of the work can be determined before the end of the period of non-usability, then the work should be reclassified as being the property of its owner. If after the period of non-usablity has ended and an owner cannot be determined, it should then be classified as being public domain, or in other words "owned by the public." Once it is classified as being a work owned by the public, then anyone who wishes to use the work for profit should be required to pay the public for the use of the work. If the use of the work is not for profit, then the work could be used freely. In my opinion, if we use a work for profit, then we should have to pay for that use, by either spending the time and money to create it ourselves, paying someone else to create it for us, or paying the public for works that have been classified as public domain. Adios, Cactus Dan
Dan Libisch (not verified) | Thu, 04/17/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
The Orphan Works Legislation will affect the businesses of every creative person in the state the country. Thanks for your article, everybody, not just artists and other visual creatives should be concerned. Here is my blog entry posted on wwwcristinaacosta.blogspot.com : Have you ever picked up a camera and taken a picture? Of course you have. And you probably put the photos online and send them to your friends and family. Now and then a doting relative passes on a uber-cute photo to their friends. But no matter how large your circle is you'd never expect to see that same photo in some corporation's national ad campaign without your permission or payment. That's the future folks if the Orphan Works legislation passes. In fact, it's already happened. It's just going to get brazenly, egregiously worse and it will be virtually impossible for the little guy (most of us) to do anything to rectify this theft of our intellectual property. Follow the money on this bill and you'll realize that big business stands to gain. Everybody else -- photographers, painters, sculptors, designers and the ordinary guy or gal with a camera will lose, BIG. Virgin Mobil is in a lawsuit right now with a family that found a picture of their daughter in a Virgin Mobil advertisement. Taking advantage of the very small print on the Flickr site, Virgin's ad agency took this picture without permission -- and saved themselves a bunch of money on models and photo shoots. Alison Chang, the subject of the photo and her uncle, filmmaker Damon Chang got NOTHING. In fact, Alison Chang complained that the imagery insulted her Asian heritage. Read more about this on The Register.co.uk If you're an artist, don't fool yourself thinking that theft is some form of flattery. This is about your bottom line. No cash and you aren't able to work. The copyright laws as we know them will be gutted. Getty, Corbis and other media supply agencies will have free rein to use your images without ANY payment to you. And, it only gets worse. Individuals and businesses will get on the bandwagon. An image of your painting or design work could be put onto paper plates, tissue boxes, beach towels, calenders, stationary, ad campaigns and you'll get nothing except a sinking feeling when you walk into some retailers shop or open a magazine or book and see them SELLING your work and you get NOTHING! Brad Holland and Cynthia Turner, the powerhouse behind the IPA's efforts to preserve the civil economic rights of creators has this to say: "Remember: the US Orphan Works amendment is not an exception to copyright law to permit the archiving and preservation of old, abandoned works. It is a license to infringe contemporary works by living artists worldwide. Its goal is to force these works into private commercial US registries as a condition of protecting copyrights. Coerced registration violates international copyright law and copyright-related treaties. To concede defeat on it is to knock a hole in copyright law and admit a Trojan horse." — Brad Holland and Cynthia Turner, for the Board of the Illustrators’ Partnership
Cristina Acosta (not verified) | Thu, 04/17/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
This article is ridiculous. It repeats itself for dramatic effect, and leaves the reader confused. Why write an article filled with so many scare tactics? I just want the facts from a logical point of view. This guy makes me sick.
Kaci Beeler (not verified) | Thu, 04/17/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
but I thought this had not gotten out of committee yet? Does anyone have any credible evidence as to where in the process it is?
ann Tracy (not verified) | Thu, 04/17/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
I hate this law...I will do all I can to help you fight this.... Steve D.
steve dreben (not verified) | Thu, 04/17/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
Poorly written and very misleading article. AWN should try to provide its readers with actual news and information, rather than this knee-jerk tripe. I am amazed at the ignorance that persists in the media these days.
Joe Shakula (not verified) | Thu, 04/17/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Use <!--pagebreak--> to create page breaks.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.