| Know the Orphan Works Proponents |
|
|
|
A Big "Thank You!"Thanks to all who answered the call last week during the last minute attempt to thwart passage of H.R. 5889, the House version of Orphan Works 2008. Your calls and emails made a difference, believe it or not. Although some emails to Representative Berman were actually deleted by one of his legislative assistants (!), enough of the key people in the House knew that artists' concerns weren't being answered, and no agreement was reached for passage of the bill. Some DetailsMany of you are confused, rightfully, about what actually is going on during these last minute pushes. One of the principal proponents of Orphan Works, Public Knowledge, has given us their view in a post to supporters. Please read their excerpts, below, as well as comment by the Illustrators Partnership board members, Brad Holland and Cynthia Turner. Let's hope your attentive reading gives insight into the process, and to the viewpoint of the those pushing to weaken copyright with Orphan Works legislation. it helps to know why others think your rights are less important than their interests. Credit Where Credit is DueAs always, you can scroll to the bottom of this post to learn how to subscribe to the IP Orphan Works blog. We all owe much gratitude to Brad and Cynthia for their hard work and leadership in giving us the tools and information to protect our livelihoods. Similar nods go to OWOH, who took the fuel Brad and Cynthia provided and, with great inventiveness, lit fires under their friends, colleagues and Congress people to action!
FROM THE ILLUSTRATORS' PARTNERSHIPOrphan Works: A Public Knowledge Postmortem10.9.08"Orphan works relief was vigorously opposed by visual artists... And while we have thought some of their concerns misguided, they did a fine job of organizing and getting their voices heard."That was the rueful conclusion Monday from the President of Public Knowledge. She was conducting a postmortem on her blog to explain why their last minute efforts to pass the Orphan Works Act failed last week. Public Knowledge is one of the key special interest groups driving orphan works legislation. And while interested parties around the country were being told all week that the bill was dead, she now confirms that there was a secret last minute push to pass it: "[W]ith the country's financial crisis raging [she writes] and Congress in the middle of deliberations over a bill to rescue our financial institutions, there was still an opportunity to get a bill done. But how? The best option was to get either House Courts, Internet and Intellectual Property Subcommittee Chairman Berman or House Judiciary Committee Chairman Conyers to take the Senate bill that passed and put it on the 'suspension calendar,' which is the place largely non-controversial legislation gets put so that it will get passed quickly. There can be no amendments to bills placed on the suspension calendar, but it needs a 2/3 majority to pass (italics added). "On Saturday, September 27," she continues, she and others "were on the phone imploring the members to move the bill...": "The negotiations went on for hours and hours on Thursday into Friday, but in the end, PK, working with the user community (libraries, documentary filmmakers, educational institutions and the College Art Association) could not agree with [sic] on language with the House staff. Late Friday afternoon, the House voted in favor of a bailout bill and everybody went home. Time had run out." http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1783 Public Knowledge has a "Six Point Program" to undo existing copyright law. "Orphan Works Reform" is Number 5. http://www.publicknowledge.org/node/1245 And while they're "disappointed" they weren't able to pass the bill this session, she advises supporters to "focus on what positive things came out of the process, so [they] can move forward quickly next year." PK says artists have learned their lesson In her opinion, one of the "positive things" to "come out of the process" is that: "[V]isual artists, graphic designers and textile manufacturers who opposed orphan works relief now understand that they must change their business models." (Italics added.) Artists "must change their business models"? Is that a sound we hear from inside the Trojan Horse? Whatever happened to the claim that this bill was only a minor tweak to copyright law - to let libraries and museums digitize their collections of old work - or let families duplicate photos of grandma? That was the argument lawmakers heard last spring, when the bill was rolled out suddenly, scripted for quick and easy passage. But now that the anti-copyright lobby has had to fight for it, they've dropped their guard. Now it's time to openly lecture artists that the world is changing and we'd better get used to registering our work with privately owned "databases" -- at least if we want to ensure that our works won't become orphaned. But of course that was the agenda all along. PK says not all artists are misguided
PK's President wants Congress to know that not all artists are "misguided" - only those that oppose the bill. Currently, 80 professional groups do. By contrast, she cites the Graphic Artists Guild as an example of artists who have learned their lesson. She praises GAG as "enlightened," because GAG supported the House version of the bill. She quotes a recent letter from GAG's President in which he admonished artists to "get real about this Orphan Works scare": "I don't think Orphan Works is going to have a dramatic influence on how we do business [he wrote], but I hope it has awakened us all to the importance of tending to business issues. If we as a community invested a fraction of the energy we've expended on an apocalyptic vision of Orphan Works into protecting our own creations, protesting unfair contracting practices or writing letters to low-paying publishers, we'd be in a far better market position than we are today. The fact is that we give away more in the every day practice of our businesses than the government could ever take from us." We replied to the GAG letter weeks ago, when it was first circulated to artists. We obviously disagree. Indeed, we'd point out that what the community of artists is doing by opposing this bill is "protecting our own creations":
A full response to the entire GAG letter is here: The Orphan Works Act was based on a premise and a conclusion:
The Orphan Works Act was based on recommendations by the Copyright Office. But the Copyright Office studied the specific subject of orphaned work. They did not study the business models of artists who are alive, working and managing their copyrights. That means there can be no meaningful conclusions drawn from their study to dictate that such artists must change their business models. Our amendments have never been considered.
Please post or forward this message to any interested party.STOP THE U.S. ORPHAN WORKS ACT NOW. |
| Next > |
|---|
