[x]

deviantART

 
:iconniashikyo234:

~NiaShikyo234

says They be hatin
ProfileGalleryPrintsFavesJournal
Sign up to follow this artist's work

Orphan works legislation

Sat Apr 12, 2008, 10:18 AM
  • Mood: Annoyed
Okay everyone you need to stop settle down and relize everyone is getting pretty worked up about something that does not really affect those who are continuesly active on DeviantArt or other places. Ive had many journals in my inbox reporting about how "Art theif is becoming legal" Pretty much not very true. Through some research and looking up some definitions there is not a way (even if this legislation is passed) that an art theif can just take your work without consequences. By referring to Orphan works, the original 3 page article that everyones been freaking out about (that quite a few people are posting) is misinformed and misleading.

The article in reference: [link]

In this article the writer Mark Simon is saying that you could lose all copyright to your works and they could become orphan works. Technically, that is not true. An orphan work is a creative work (such as a photograph, drawing, sketch etc.) where the artist or original owner can NOT be found in anyway what so ever. For those on DeviantArt you put your works under an account that you (hopefully) are usually active on and your the original owner of all your works that are copyrighted through DA. If anyone were to steal these, even if this was a passed law it would still be ILLEGAL!

Now for those who still are a bit unclear about what an orphan work is here is a more clear definition:

A Orphan Work is one that has been abandoned or the original owner of the creative work can not be found. Someone can then legally become the owner so this work of creativity does not disapear and die from the world.

For further clarification, and actually I recommend you read this other journal: [link]

Thank you for those who read this journal and have become more clear on this issue that everyone is in fear of.

13 Comments

Devious Comments

love 0 0 joy 0 0 wow 0 0 mad 0 0 sad 0 0 fear 0 0 neutral 0 0

~Nightingale628:iconNightingale628: Apr 12, 2008, 4:04:54 PM
Thank you for the clarification :)
But actually, my biggest concern is how this law could be easily abused.
For example, you said that that Deviantart protects your work from theft. But what if the thief takes your work from DA, put it on his/her website, and then YOU get accused of art theft? I see this happening already, and a few victims actually got their works deleted/banned because of this. (Like *KL-chan for example, but thankfully she's unbanned now.)
So, the bill itself might not do much, but the people who abuse it could cause some kind of crisis regarding to the ownership of the works. And then chaos will prevail.

--
REINDEERS ARE REAL
REINDEERS ARE REAL
REINDEERS ARE REAL
REINDEERS ARE REAL
~NiaShikyo234:iconNiaShikyo234: Apr 12, 2008, 4:12:12 PM
That is a very good point and sadly the easiest way to prevent it from happening would most likely be to have watermarks on your artwork no matter how ugly it looks and to also keep date records of when your art was posted but theres not much I can really say about that issue anyway. =(

But Im glad I was able to help you understand this more ^^

--
........./) /)
........( . .)
........c(")(")
~Nightingale628:iconNightingale628: Apr 12, 2008, 4:21:33 PM
Watermarking is a good idea, however, it is actually quite possible to photoshop out such watermarks. D:

And, although I'm not concerened about MY works at the moment, I am concerned about the bill. The bill might state that only abandoned works can be used, but it could unintentially imply that people could use other people's stuff for free. And, like I said before, potential thieves can work this law to their favor.

--
REINDEERS ARE REAL
REINDEERS ARE REAL
REINDEERS ARE REAL
REINDEERS ARE REAL
~NiaShikyo234:iconNiaShikyo234: Apr 12, 2008, 4:28:41 PM
It is true. However that all depends on how they actually word the law to imply that and pretty much, as sad as it is to say, many laws currently can be bent to either party's favor. Sadly we may just have to leave it up to congress to perfect how the law would be worded to best not imply the use of others creations.

--
........./) /)
........( . .)
........c(")(")
~cardboard-jukebox:iconcardboard-jukebox: Apr 13, 2008, 9:38:15 AM
I still don't see how any good could come of this. In essence, you're still taking someone else's work, and then taking all profit from it. Could you please explain what benefit this could possibly have to me? Otherwise it still seems like legalized art theft to me.

--
98% of Deviants don't know the difference between "your" and "you're." If you're one of the 2% who wants to punch 'em, put this in your sig.
~NiaShikyo234:iconNiaShikyo234: Apr 13, 2008, 9:46:33 AM
Technically what they're saying is they want to pass a law that permits someone can profit from an orphan work which is an artwork where the original creator can not be located. Technically you are taking someone else's art work and benefiting from it but what the law is trying to get at is to keep those abandoned creations in the world. What the law is trying to do is pretty much saving artwork.

For personal benefit how ever there doesnt really seem to be much. However for benefit of art itself there could be a lot more creative works out there now that arent just thrown away and overlooked.

--
........./) /)
........( . .)
........c(")(")
~cardboard-jukebox:iconcardboard-jukebox: Apr 13, 2008, 9:52:28 AM
Hmmm, I don't know. This still doesn't seem to be in the best interest of the artist. If the artist wanted their work known, I don't think they'd have abandoned it in the first place. Anyway, you probably don't want to hear this so I'll go.

--
98% of Deviants don't know the difference between "your" and "you're." If you're one of the 2% who wants to punch 'em, put this in your sig.
~NiaShikyo234:iconNiaShikyo234: Apr 13, 2008, 10:48:20 AM
lol yea theres that too but who knows it may also be a situation where the artist did but in a strange turn of events died or something and never got to. And I dont mind but Im glad I could have been some help to you (if I was)

--
........./) /)
........( . .)
........c(")(")
~cardboard-jukebox:iconcardboard-jukebox: Apr 13, 2008, 1:52:49 PM
Yes, a little. Because of you I sought out what the bill actually was and now understand better. But, I still disagree with it, and think it only invites trouble.

--
98% of Deviants don't know the difference between "your" and "you're." If you're one of the 2% who wants to punch 'em, put this in your sig.
Previous Page12Next Page

Journal History

Site Map