|
|
new copyright law makes it easier to steal
About Truespace Archives
These pages are a copy of the official truespace forums prior to their removal somewhere around 2011.
They are retained here for archive purposes only.
new copyright law makes it easier to steal // Roundtable
Post by Tibbar // Mar 2, 2006, 10:00am
|
Tibbar
Total Posts: 1
|
I'll preface this by saying that the trueSpace community has reported several cases where people's artwork was stolen and sold on eBay or paraded on others' websites as their own work. Now this new law should catch your interest.
Just because people may respond to this message, don't assume they're actually going to write to Congress. So grab a paper a pencil and start drafting if you care what's happening!
Sources:
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread.php?t=323636
http://www.illustratorspartnership.org/index.php
The 1976 law stated that anything you create is basically copyrighted at the moment of its creation. Congress may pass a new "orphan" copyright law that says works (especially illustrations and photos) made in the last 28 years and future that do not contain proper identification or authorship can be used royalty-free. Basically, "creative wannabes" could steal your work off the web, remove your logo or signature, and sell/use the art, claiming that he or she couldn't find the author. This new law makes it harder for you to to sue.
The Lobbyists:
The people pushing this law are mainly members of the so-called "Free Culture" (including but not limited to GPL Open Source, Creative Commons, etc.) and museums. It's OK to make free software or art content, but these groups don't have a right to force everyone else to make their works free. Artists need to make a living.
The Hypocrisy:
RIAA and MPAA sue individuals for sharing music and movies. With the orphan law, this makes it easier for the same entertainment companies to steal individuals' "orphaned" work.
Advice for writing to Congress (from IPA)
-Make it clear that you’re an artist and that you believe your small business will be endangered by placing limitations on remedies for infringement.
-Make it clear that you will never have the resources to police infringement of your work - which could occur at any time anywhere in the world.
-Make it clear that your work could be orphaned by others, no matter how diligently you do the right things to protect it.
-Make it clear that your work has significant commercial value. |
Post by SiRender // Mar 2, 2006, 10:41am
|
SiRender
Total Posts: 38
|
The 1976 law stated that anything you create is basically copyrighted at the moment of its creation. Congress may pass a new "orphan" copyright law that says works (especially illustrations and photos) made in the last 28 years and future that do not contain proper identification or authorship can be used royalty-free. Basically, "creative wannabes" could steal your work off the web, remove your logo or signature, and sell/use the art, claiming that he or she couldn't find the author. This new law makes it harder for you to to sue.
The Lobbyists:
The people pushing this law are mainly members of the so-called "Free Culture" (including but not limited to GPL Open Source, Creative Commons, etc.) and museums. It's OK to make free software or art content, but these groups don't have a right to force everyone else to make their works free. Artists need to make a living.
[...]
Yea, this should be unconstitutional to draft a law that removes existing rights. Might as well pass a law that states unless I write my name on all my posessions with a permanent marker then someone walking down the street can steal it. :mad:
Going forward though it might be useful to create a law say starting in 2010 the default would be non attributed work would be freely distributable -- after some grace period for developers and artists to prepare themselves).
I'd have to see how they legally say you have to attribute the status of the work before I'd go along with any of this. If it is some sort of crypto signed meta data then it sounds good to me. Most of these laws are just vague enough to be useless for normal people and make money for lawyers. |
Post by Alien // Mar 2, 2006, 11:03am
|
Alien
Total Posts: 1231
|
Another example of American stupidity [no, I'm not calling all Americans stupid] causing strife for the rest of the world. :rolleyes: |
Post by Burnart // Mar 2, 2006, 1:08pm
|
Burnart
Total Posts: 839
|
Surely by posting to a site such as this or Renderosity or other such sites as long as the details in your profile are accurate so that you can be identified as the poster then the origin is clear ............ hang on that doesn't work ........ trying to get your head around just the net component of this gets complicated real quick. It really is case of the little guy getting screwed again. As a non-American I can only hope those of you who are US citizens get stuck into your congressman - for all our sakes. |
Post by spacekdet // Mar 2, 2006, 1:17pm
|
spacekdet
Total Posts: 1360
|
Another example of American stupidity [no, I'm not calling all Americans stupid] causing strife for the rest of the world. :rolleyes:
See Also: Creative Commons 'Who we Are' (http://creativecommons.org/about/people)
Open Source: Board of Directors (http://www.opensource.org/docs/board.php)
Sometimes the only exercise some folks get is leaping to conclusions. |
Post by Alien // Mar 2, 2006, 1:36pm
|
Alien
Total Posts: 1231
|
See Also: Creative Commons 'Who we Are' (http://creativecommons.org/about/people)
Open Source: Board of Directors (http://www.opensource.org/docs/board.php)
Sometimes the only exercise some folks get is leaping to conclusions.
Not sure what you're getting at here. What I said about American stupidity - what I meant was that due to America's prominence & influence over world events, it seems to take less effort on behalf of those who do cause trouble to make trouble for the rest of the world. My apologies if it was perceived to mean anything else. |
Post by chrono // Mar 2, 2006, 5:37pm
|
chrono
Total Posts: 0
|
Not sure what you're getting at here. What I said about American stupidity - what I meant was that due to America's prominence & influence over world events, it seems to take less effort on behalf of those who do cause trouble to make trouble for the rest of the world. My apologies if it was perceived to mean anything else.
LOL! As if the UK didn't use it's own influence over the centuries even more reckelessly & arrogantly. I'd like to point out that many of the company's involved in this are NOT all American owned or based either they do know though that if one influenctal nation gets it passed then other businesses will attempt to push this through.
Tibbar thanks for posting that date! That clarifies something that I found fishy to begin with. The time that they want covered. 28 years turns into 1978 only 2 years after the Copyright Law was passed. That makes it a clearly contemptable act against the orginal protective law!! |
Post by Alien // Mar 2, 2006, 5:57pm
|
Alien
Total Posts: 1231
|
LOL! As if the UK didn't use it's own influence over the centuries even more reckelessly & arrogantly.
True, the UK has certainly done its fair share of that in the past, but I don't think it's quite as bad these days.
I'd like to point out that many of the company's involved in this are NOT all American owned or based either they do know though that if one influenctal nation gets it passed then other businesses will attempt to push this through.
Fair point. I just realised this is straying too far into the realm of politics, which I myself have previously said is not a good idea to discuss [far too much potential for arguments], so I'll bow out. |
Post by ProfessorKhaos // Mar 3, 2006, 5:11am
|
ProfessorKhaos
Total Posts: 622
|
If I recall, one of the recently "stolen" artworks was properly attributed to the author via signature. The thieves just cut the signature off the top of the picture and proceeded to sell it as their own. It would be easy enough to prove the copyright existed but the seller could always avoid a fine by claiming the source they got it from was devoid of signature already.
P.K.
P.S. Stereotypes will generally get you into trouble regardless of the motivation (including the tongue in cheek political ones) |
|
