*Why defend the indefensible?* I think a lot of us here lean towards the view that it's copyright tout court that's indefensible. michael
--- On Sun, 5/18/08, bob catchpole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: bob catchpole <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Fwd: Mickey Mouse Bill > To: "NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity" > <[email protected]> > Date: Sunday, May 18, 2008, 5:10 PM > Hi Rob, > > Why defend the indefensible? > > Rob Myers wrote: > > > Automatic possession of copyright *is* in line with > the rest of the world. > > Yes, but ONLY in the States it doesn't mean anything > unless the work is registered. What kind of right is that? > > http://photobusinessforum.blogspot.com/2008/05/orphan-works-2008-wolf-in-sheeps.html > > > The Orphan Works bill ensures that everyone still pays > damages, but that they do so fairly. > > That rubbish Rob, there's no chance of damages if the > work isn't registered. ONLY in the States! > > > The registry system is optional > > The registry system is PERVERSE. Non-participation allows > infringers to use your work with impunity. > > > The registry system is optional and is designed to > build on services like DACS (I forget the US equivalent) > > A registry system ONLY exists in the States. DACS, a > designers and artists association in the UK, is likely > horrified at the Orphan Works Bill. > > Actually, the American registry system is a form of state > intervention in the market place that isn't tolerated > anywhere else. > > Bob. > > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Rob Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity > <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, 18 May, 2008 3:02:50 PM > Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Fwd: Mickey Mouse Bill > > bob catchpole wrote: > > Rob Myers wrote: > > > > > Registration only affects damages where > copyright is infringed. > > > > So if someone uses your work without permission and > you haven't > > registered you're not entitled to damages. ONLY in > the States. > > It is possible to register afterwards and claim damages on > the basis of > that but I believe this has issues. > > > Why not > > come into line with the rest of the world? > > Automatic possession of copyright *is* in line with the > rest of the world. > > > Just get rid of the need (and > > expense, $30 a time) to register. > > You can register copyrights in the UK. Establishing the > date of > publication can be useful. > > > Currently many working photographers in America are > compelled to do the > > same as Seth Resnick: "Every image that I shoot > is registered before it > > ever leaves my office." To us outside the States > this seems ludicrous - > > time-consuming, expensive and a perversion of an > automatic universal > > right. And in the Land of the Free!... > > > > > The purpose behind the “visual registries” > provisions is to help > > artists keep > > > ownership information associated with their > works... > > > > To help artists? Artists are automatically owners of > their work. Nowhere > > else do they need to register the fact. > > Artists receive copyright on completion of the work in the > US the same > as everywhere else, and this copyright allows them to > prevent other > people from copying their work (and thereby profiting from > it) the same > as everywhere else. > > Orphan works *are* a genuine problem for society that need > tackling, > even if the current bill is not perfect. The bill can be > improved, and > Public Knowledge have suggestions for this. > > The bill is not pro-corporate. Currently only big > corporations can > afford the risk of publishing old work with unknown > copyright status. > Damages could wipe out an individual or a smaller > organization. The > Orphan Works bill ensures that everyone still pays damages, > but that > they do so fairly. > > The registry system is optional and is designed to build on > services > like DACS (I forget the US equivalent) that enforce > copyrights and fees > under the current system. Most professional artists and > designers > already belong to such a scheme. > > - Rob. > _______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > > > __________________________________________________________ > Sent from Yahoo! Mail. > A Smarter Email > http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html_______________________________________________ > NetBehaviour mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
