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


Mark... Next time you go to write an article out of anger, grab some tacos and get something to drink instead. Then take 15 minutes to do a bit o' research on the topic. There is a vast amount of information readily available on this here series of tubes, and with no large amount of effort you could've easily gone from the 'OMG THE GOVT. HATES ME' mentality to the 'OMG THE GOVT. HATES ME but doesn't want to steal my art' one. Sensationalism ain't journalism. Side note - do ye not already register your artwork with the U.S. Copyright Office? I don't think ye should go around getting upset over such matters if you don't care enough about your own work to see it protected in the first place. IMHUO. Seacrest out.
Jeremy Brown (not verified) | Tue, 04/15/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
Scary stuff! Thanks for the scary stuff and call to action! I almost fear our collective ignorance and lack of interest more! I'll write my congressmen and urge other artists to do the same.
Andy J. Smith (not verified) | Tue, 04/15/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
Copyrights are a bad thing. More artists should publish to the public domain.
Anonymous (not verified) | Tue, 04/15/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
This is another example of how too much of a good thing is a bad thing (capitalism). Now rich get richer and powerful gets more powerful until they "own" everything, even your thoughts! (oh wait that is already there)
Martian (not verified) | Tue, 04/15/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
Pls. let us know the exact reference number of the bill, and if it is CURRENTLY before the House and/or Senate. I know this bill has been proposed in previous years, but was unable to find it on current sites listing bills before Congress. I also could find no reference to it on Americans for the Arts, Graphic Artists Guild or AIGA sites, all entities who engage in actively influencing current arts legislation. Thx.
joan waters (not verified) | Mon, 04/14/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
thank you for this information this I refuse to let go down quietly
jacob crothers (not verified) | Mon, 04/14/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
I have most definitely started a forum and I shall start a petition soon. I will do this on my site: http://mattiello.deviantart.com/
Joseph Sturm (not verified) | Mon, 04/14/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
This is insane. Not only am I paying a ton of money to get my MFA degree but now I have to worry about paying for every image I make? As an image maker that makes roughly 500 images ever week, I may as well declare bankruptcy now and save myself the aggravation. For the sake of art everywhere this new law CANNOT pass.
Rona Gelman (not verified) | Mon, 04/14/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
This is a very poorly (i.e., NOT) researched rant posing as an informative article. I feel the AWM owes its readers an apology for printing such a mess of hysterical innuendo. Did anyone in the editorial staff read this article before publishing it? The best analysis of this highly flawed article is http://maradydd.livejournal.com/374886.html. As a former lab supervisor for the Library of Congress Motion Picture Lab, where we preserved many a Max Fleisher, Ub Iwerks and other lesser known animator's works, I find this unsubstantiated attack on potential (not even actual) legislation the archival community desperately needs, a giant paranoid turd of selfishness. Simons has the right to be stingy and selfish, but at least he should have the common courtesy to get a few damned facts straight. Frank Wylie
Frank Wylie (not verified) | Mon, 04/14/2008 - 00:00 | Permalink
Full Report on Orphan Works available for download: http://www.copyright.gov/orphan/
David Same as Before (not verified) | Mon, 04/14/2008 - 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.