As you know, I usually handle the subjects in my articles with a sense of humor. That is not the case this month. I find nothing funny about the new Orphan Works legislation that is before Congress.

As an artist, you have to read this article or you could lose everything you've ever created!

An Orphaned Work is any creative work of art where the artist or copyright owner has released their copyright, whether on purpose, by passage of time, or by lack of proper registration. In the same way that an orphaned child loses the protection of his or her parents, your creative work can become an orphan for others to use without your permission.

If you don't like to read long articles, you will miss incredibly important information that will affect the rest of your career as an artist. You should at least skip to the end to find the link for a fantastic interview with the Illustrators' Partnership about how you are about to lose ownership of your own artwork.

Currently, you don't have to register your artwork to own the copyright. You own a copyright as soon as you create something. International law also supports this. Right now, registration allows you to sue for damages, in addition to fair value.

What makes me so MAD about this new legislation is that it legalizes THEFT! The only people who benefit from this are those who want to make use of our creative works without paying for them and large companies who will run the new private copyright registries.

These registries are companies that you would be forced to pay in order to register every single image, photo, sketch or creative work.

It is currently against international law to coerce people to register their work for copyright because there are so many inherent problems with it. But because big business can push through laws in the United States, our country is about to break with the rest of the world, again, and take your rights away.

With the tens of millions of photos and pieces of artwork created each year, the bounty for forcing everyone to pay a registration fee would be enormous. We lose our rights and our creations, and someone else makes money at our expense.

This includes every sketch, painting, photo, sculpture, drawing, video, song and every other type of creative endeavor. All of it is at risk!

If the Orphan Works legislation passes, you and I and all creatives will lose virtually all the rights to not only our future work but to everything we've created over the past 34 years, unless we register it with the new, untested and privately run (by the friends and cronies of the U.S. government) registries. Even then, there is no guarantee that someone wishing to steal your personal creations won't successfully call your work an orphan work, and then legally use it for free.

In short, if Congress passes this law, YOU WILL LOSE THE RIGHT TO MAKE MONEY FROM YOUR OWN CREATIONS!

Why is this allowed to happen? APATHY and MONEY.

Artists have apathy and corporations have money.

We need to be heard in order to protect our incomes, our creations and our careers. GET OFF YOUR ASS!

That means writing letters to our congressmen and representatives. That means voicing your opinion about how we need copyright protection, as we've had since 1976, that protects everything we create from the moment we create it. This is the case around the world.

However, an Orphan Works bill is also in the works in Europe. I was speaking recently with Roger Dean, the famed artist of the Yes album covers, and he is greatly concerned with what will happen if Orphan Works bills become law.

"This will devastate the livelihood of artists, photographers and designers in a number of ways," Dean says. "That at the behest of a few hugely rich corporations who got rich by selling art that they played no part in the making of, the U.S. and U.K. governments are changing the copyright laws to protect the infringer instead of the creator. This is unjust, culturally destructive and commercial lunacy. This will not just hurt millions of artists around the world.

"On the other side of the coin, what argument will a U.S. court have with a Chinese company that insists it did its research in China and found nothing? If the cost of this is onerous for a U.S.-based artist, what will it be like for artists and small businesses in emergent economies?"

If an artist whose work is as famous as Roger Dean's is concerned with this legislation, it should be of great concern for all of us.

The people, associations and companies behind the Orphan Works bill state that orphaned works have no value. If that were true, no one would want them. However, these same companies DO WANT your work, they just don't want to pay for it. If someone wants something, IT HAS VALUE. It's pretty simple.

Some major art and photography associations, or I should say, the managers of the associations, support this bill. The reason they support it is that they will operate some of the registries and stand to make a lot of money. Some have already been given millions of dollars by the Library of Congress. Follow the money and you will see why some groups support this bill of legalized theft of everything you have ever created.

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.

Brad Holland: If a user can't find a registered work at the Copyright Office, hasn't the Copyright Office facilitated the creation of an orphaned work?

David O. Carson: Copyright owners will have to register their images with private registries.

BH: But what if I exercise my exclusive right of copyright and choose not to register?

DOC: If you want to go ahead and create an orphan work, be my guest!

This cavalier and disrespectful dialogue should have you seeing red. Who the hell does he think he is? Carson should be fired and RUN OUT OF WASHINGTON!

None of this could happen with our current laws. Our current laws work and they protect us and our creations.

The only people who will benefit from the copyright law change are those who can't create work on their own or companies who stand to make a lot of money from using our works of art. They make contributions to congressmen, which is why they get what they want. We need to stand up and be heard. Every one of you need to write your senators and representatives. We have to protect our livelihoods. It's that serious.

Plus, the technologies being developed for locating visual art don't work well enough. On March 13, 2008, PicScout, the creators of one of the software applications used in the registries, stated to the House IP subcommittee:

"Our technology can match images, or partial information of an image, with 99% success."

A 1% margin of error is huge when you consider the millions of searches performed for art every day. That means for every million searches, 10,000 images could be orphaned.

Plus, this only takes into account images registered on their system. If you have registered all your work on another system, they won't be searched here and, even though you may have spent thousands of dollars registering your creations, a new or unused directory could orphan everything you've ever created.

This is just one of the many reasons why INTERNATIONAL LAW FORBIDS COERCED REGISTRATION as a condition of protecting your copyright. The United States is about to break international law by making us register our works. The people behind the bill say it's not forced registration, but you won't have any rights unless you register. THIS IS SEMANTICS! Of course, this is forced registration and we can't stand for it!

There are many, many other problems with the Orphan Works legislation. As a creator, YOU MUST understand what is going on.

For additional information on Orphan Works developments, go to the IPA Orphan Works Resource Page for Artists.

This is not something that is going to go away easily. We need to be vocal NOW!

This legislation has been beaten or delayed for the past two years and they will keep trying until it passes. This is no time to be quiet and see what happens. What will happen depends on you. Send e-mails and call your congressmen. Ownership of your own creations depends on it.

Roger Dean sums this up well. "Where are the colleges and universities in all this? Has the whole world gone to sleep?"

GET ON ORPHAN WORKS E-MAIL LIST

To be notified of the latest information on the Orphan Works bill and when to contact your legislators, send an e-mail and ask to be added to the Orphan Works list.

AUDIO INTERVIEW LINK

I have recorded a fantastic interview with Brad Holland of the Illustrators' Partnership regarding this bill and what it means to us as artists. Please listen and learn more about how you may lose ownership of all your art and photos. This article and the recorded interview are available for anyone to use in print or online. Please forward this information to every person and group you know so that we can work together and protect our creations and livelihoods.

Mark Simon is an award-winning animation producer/director and speaker. He speaks around the world on subjects about art, animation and TV production. His copyrighted companies may be found online at www.SellYourTvConceptNow.com and www.Storyboards-East.com. He may be reached at marksimonbooks@yahoo.com.

Portions of this article use information and phrasing provided by the Illustrators' Partnership.

mag.awn.com/article_view.php

**************************************************

Orphan Works Act of 2006 (Introduced in House)

HR 5439 IH

109th CONGRESS

2d Session

H. R. 5439

To amend title 17, United States Code, to provide for limitation of remedies in cases in which the copyright owner cannot be located, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

May 22, 2006

Mr. SMITH of Texas introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

---

A BILL

To amend title 17, United States Code, to provide for limitation of remedies in cases in which the copyright owner cannot be located, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Orphan Works Act of 2006'.

SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON REMEDIES IN CASES INVOLVING ORPHAN WORKS.

(a) Limitation on Remedies- Chapter 5 of title 17, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

`Sec. 514. Limitation on remedies in cases involving orphan works

`(a) Limitation on Remedies-

`(1) CONDITIONS- Notwithstanding sections 502 through 505, in an action brought under this title for infringement of copyright in a work, the remedies for infringement shall be limited under subsection (b) if the infringer sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that--

`(A) before the infringing use of the work began, the infringer, a person acting on behalf of the infringer, or any person jointly and severally liable with the infringer for the infringement of the work--

`(i) performed and documented a reasonably diligent search in good faith to locate the owner of the infringed copyright; but

`(ii) was unable to locate the owner; and

`(B) the infringing use of the work provided attribution, in a manner reasonable under the circumstances, to the author and owner of the copyright, if known with a reasonable degree of certainty based on information obtained in performing the reasonably diligent search.

`(2) DEFINITIONS; REQUIREMENTS FOR SEARCHES-

`(A) OWNER OF INFRINGED COPYRIGHT- For purposes of paragraph (1), the `owner' of an infringed copyright in a work is the legal or beneficial owner of, or any party with authority to grant or license, an exclusive right under section 106 applicable to the infringement.

`(B) REQUIREMENTS FOR REASONABLY DILIGENT SEARCH- (i) For purposes of paragraph (1), a search to locate the owner of an infringed copyright in a work--

`(I) is `reasonably diligent' only if it includes steps that are reasonable under the circumstances to locate that owner in order to obtain permission for the use of the work; and

`(II) is not `reasonably diligent' solely by reference to the lack of identifying information with respect to the copyright on the copy or phonorecord of the work.

`(ii) The steps referred to in clause (i)(I) shall ordinarily include, at a minimum, review of the information maintained by the Register of Copyrights under subparagraph (C).

`(iii) A reasonably diligent search includes the use of reasonably available expert assistance and reasonably available technology, which may include, if reasonable under the circumstances, resources for which a charge or subscription fee is imposed.

`(C) INFORMATION TO GUIDE SEARCHES- The Register of Copyrights shall receive, maintain, and make available to the public, including through the Internet, information from authoritative sources, such as industry guidelines, statements of best practices, and other relevant documents, that is designed to assist users in conducting and documenting a reasonably diligent search under this subsection. Such information may include--

`(i) the records of the Copyright Office that are relevant to identifying and locating copyright owners;

`(ii) other sources of copyright ownership information reasonably available to users;

`(iii) methods to identify copyright ownership information associated with a work;

`(iv) sources of reasonably available technology tools and reasonably available expert assistance; and

`(v) best practices for documenting a reasonably diligent search.

`(b) Limitations on Remedies- The limitations on remedies in a case to which subsection (a) applies are the following:

`(1) MONETARY RELIEF-

`(A) GENERAL RULE- Subject to subparagraph (B), an award for monetary relief (including actual damages, statutory damages, costs, and attorney's fees) may not be made, other than an order requiring the infringer to pay reasonable compensation for the use of the infringed work.

`(B) EXCEPTIONS- (i) An order requiring the infringer to pay reasonable compensation for the use of the infringed work may not be made under subparagraph (A) if--

`(I) the infringement is performed without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage and primarily for a charitable, religious, scholarly, or educational purpose, and

`(II) the infringer ceases the infringement expeditiously after receiving notice of the claim for infringement,

unless the copyright owner proves, and the court finds, that the infringer has earned proceeds directly attributable to the infringement.

`(ii) If the infringer fails to negotiate in good faith with the owner of the infringed work regarding the amount of reasonable compensation for the use of the infringed work, the court may award full costs, including a reasonable attorney's fee, against the infringer under section 505, subject to section 412.

`(2) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF-

`(A) GENERAL RULE- Subject to subparagraph (B), the court may impose injunctive relief to prevent or restrain the infringing use, except that, if the infringer has met the requirements of subsection (a), the relief shall, to the extent practicable, account for any harm that the relief would cause the infringer due to its reliance on having performed a reasonably diligent search under subsection (a).

`(B) SPECIAL RULE FOR NEW WORKS- In a case in which the infringer recasts, transforms, adapts, or integrates the infringed work with the infringer's original expression in a new work of authorship, the court may not, in granting injunctive relief, restrain the infringer's continued preparation or use of that new work, if the infringer--

`(i) pays reasonable compensation to the owner of the infringed copyright for the use of the infringed work; and

`(ii) provides attribution to the owner of the infringed copyright in a manner that the court determines is reasonable under the circumstances.

`(C) TREATMENT OF PARTIES NOT SUBJECT TO SUIT- The limitations on remedies under this paragraph shall not be available to an infringer that asserts in an action under section 501(b) that neither it nor its representative acting in an official capacity is subject to suit in Federal court for an award of damages to the copyright owner under section 504, unless the court finds that such infringer has--

`(i) complied with the requirements of subsection (a) of this section;

`(ii) made agood faith offer of compensation that was rejected by the copyright owner; and

`(iii) affirmed in writing its willingness to pay such compensation to the copyright owner upon the determination by the court that such compensation was reasonable under paragraph (3) of this subsection.

`(D) CONSTRUCTION- Nothing in subparagraph (C) shall be deemed to authorize or require, and no action taken pursuant to subparagraph (C) shall be deemed to constitute, an award of damages by the court against the infringer.

`(E) RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES NOT WAIVED- No action taken by an infringer pursuant to subparagraph (C) shall be deemed to waive any right or privilege that, as a matter of law, protects such infringer from being subject to suit in Federal court for an award of damages to the copyright owner under section 504.

`(3) REASONABLE COMPENSATION- In establishing reasonable compensation under paragraph (1) or (2), the owner of the infringed copyright has the burden of establishing the amount on which a reasonable willing buyer and a reasonable willing seller in the positions of the owner and the infringer would have agreed with respect to the infringing use of the work immediately before the infringement began.

`(c) Preservation of Other Rights, Limitations, and Defense- This section does not affect any right, limitation, or defense to copyright infringement, including fair use, under this title. If another provision of this title provides for a statutory license when the copyright owner cannot be located, that provision applies in lieu of this section.

`(d) Copyright for Derivative Works- Notwithstanding section 103(a), the infringing use of a work in accordance with this section shall not limit or affect the copyright protection for a work that uses the infringed work.'.

(b) Conforming Amendment- The table of sections for chapter 5 of title 17, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

`514. Limitation on remedies in cases involving orphan works'.

(c) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall apply only to infringing uses that commence on or after June 1, 2008.

SEC. 3. REPORT TO CONGRESS ON AMENDMENTS.

The Register of Copyrights shall, not later than December 12, 2014, report to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate on the implementation and effects of the amendments made by section 2, including any recommendations for legislative changes that the Register considers appropriate.

SEC. 4. INQUIRY ON REMEDIES FOR SMALL COPYRIGHT CLAIMS.

(a) In General- The Register of Copyrights shall conduct an inquiry with respect to remedies for copyright infringement claims seeking limited amounts of monetary relief, including consideration of alternatives to disputes currently heard in the United States district courts. The inquiry shall cover infringement claims to which section 514 of title 17, United States Code (as added by section 2 of this Act), apply, and other infringement claims under title 17, United States Code.

(b) Procedures- The Register of Copyrights shall publish notice of the inquiry under subsection (a), providing a period during which interested persons may submit comments on the inquiry, and an opportunity for interested persons to participate in public roundtables on the inquiry. The Register shall hold the public roundtables at such times as the Register considers appropriate.

(c) Report to Congress- The Register of Copyrights shall, not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, prepare and submit to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate a report on the inquiry conducted under this section, including such recommendations that the Register considers appropriate.

thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z