Orphaned Works, the continuation.

JoshuaMadoc · Post by **JoshuaMadoc** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 7:01 am

http://mag.awn.com/index.php?ltype=Colu ... le_no=3605

Kudos to Void for the source.

So, who's still working commercially? Better strap up on ammo just in case.

Baphnedia · Post by **Baphnedia** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:01 am

Jesus H. Christ!

I still work commercially, and in order to build what I'm building, I would be required to register thousands of pieces of intellectual property, bankrupting everything. Making something for the love of the art would become just that.. although, my next question is, how and when can US Law trump International Law? Because I'll be more than willing to make infringement suits international (taking them to international court), where it is illegal to coerce registration.

Midnight · Post by **Midnight** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 8:58 am

Baphnedia · Post by **Baphnedia** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 9:08 am

Great catch, Midnight!

Howlitzer · Post by **Howlitzer** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 9:13 am

I admit this is a very, very very, very very very freaking BAD idea....

but the likelihood that it will survive to become law is pretty slim right off the bat, and there's enough widespread opposition to this to decrease those chances further... if they did pass it, I'd say there would be many politicians at risk of being castrated by an angry mob.

so yeah, voicing your opposition is a good idea, but I wouldn't freak out about it, because it probably won't happen.

Baphnedia · Post by **Baphnedia** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 9:33 am

Howlitzer, I agree with part of what you said...

The problem I see is that we've adopted any number of other Very Bad Ideas. I do not trust those in Washington to make the best decisions (after legalizing wiretapping on Americans, bailing out the banks for writing junk mortgages - but not the homeowners). The government has made clear whom it serves through it's actions. Those that would benefit in the music industry would be the major labels (they'd practically be able to claim ownership of most of the independent music out there (as orphaned works), AND start suing independent musicians - creating an apathy within the second largest community that garners money from entertainment (so that the Big Four can have the top four places again in the music market).

A piece of hope: This bill has gone before Congress twice before, and it's been shot down. What is different now than then that it might pass this time?

Kzinistzerg · Post by **Kzinistzerg** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:04 pm

Well, if this goes through I swear I'm moving out of the damn country.

But in the meantime I can wait and hope. I'm building my own entire new universe... what, do I have to register every work I write in it? Every sketch? every post, every teesy bit of lore? I'll be doing commercial art for a living; this is the absolute LAST thing we need.

RedEye · Post by **RedEye** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 4:46 pm

Here's what you do: Even the law has to recognize time, and time is on your side. Keep your sketchbooks and story lines and music sheets. Date them.
In most cases where the Copyright is unclear, the law recognizes the oldest date and goes with that. So, if some jerk pirates your stuff, then sues you*, you're home free if you can prove you thought of it first and then made it into substance (drawings, music, stories,etc) before said jerk did. Prior ownership still counts.
Note: Some countries (CHINA) have flourishing piracy industries and the police and government don't really do much to stop it; so there, just like now, your'e on your own.
Anyway: unless the proposed law overturns the prior ownership part of the law (not likely), not much will happen.

*What I see is an attempt by the Majors to draw in unprotected talent; as in "Sure, we'll recognize your ownership, just sign here...

Scared? GOOD!

Silent Hunter · Post by **Silent Hunter** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 7:09 pm

Midnight found these:

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/04/12/co ... fud-a.html

http://maradydd.livejournal.com/374886.html

More food for thought.

JoshuaMadoc · Post by **JoshuaMadoc** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:16 pm

Food for thought? More like "whoops, looks like that guy just bloated his expired oatmeal".

Lukas · Post by **Lukas** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 10:45 pm

well this made me lol, nothing like a internet freak fest over something that doesn't exist or is even being considering in the govt., don't forget to thank the idiot who posted the misconception and tell him next to do proper research and provide some links (I am talking about Mark Simon not kitetsu)

Scott Gardener · Post by **Scott Gardener** » Sat Apr 12, 2008 11:52 pm

Such a law is so much 180 degrees against the equally draconian stance of the music industry, which would if they had their way render illegal the process of simply copying CDs to your hard drive to put on an mp3 player. By contrast, if, suddenly, copyrights became meaningless without registration, the shock waves would crush entire industries, creating an infrastructure threat. Surely laws that disruptive wouldn't go into effect--or would have to be overturned as soon as their damages were starting to be realized.

I'm favorable to the idea of freeing genuine orphans from copyright constraints. There's works out there in which the original copyright owners were companies rather than people, and those companies went under, allowing no one to be able to use the work. Zero Wing, the video game that introduced the "All your base are belong to us" Internet craze, is such a work. We'll likely never see that game again because of this. I'm emensely grateful that Capcom got the rights to Okami when Clover Studios went down.

But, if ALL works default to orphan status rather than copyright status, and copyrights become an opt-in rather than opt-out at cost to the artist, then that's another thing entirely, and something that could be yet another stab at independents and small time operations.

Why is it that invariably the artists get the short end of the stick, while the distributors, marketers, and everyone else who DON'T CREATE seem to get such preferential treatment?

RedEye · Post by **RedEye** » Sun Apr 13, 2008 1:07 am

Actually, Marketers are quite creative people. If you doubt me on this, just cruise down the breakfast cereal aisle in your local market.
Nothing there but grains, sugar, and marketing...

Marketers sell things we don't need by making us think that we do need them, to the point of paying ridiculous prices for them.
Like the Memory chip/amp/power supply called an I-Pod.
Like the "Shake up" batteryless flashlight (it has batteries and doesn't work very long on a charge).
Like a "through the door" water dispenser when the faucet and a bottle does exactly the same thing...

Ahhh, don't say there isn't art (and some fraud) in Marketing, because there is lots of it!