OUCH : UK changes copyright law "Orphaned Works"

[ricktas]

Overnight in the United Kingdom, something happened that is causing quite a stir. The UK introduced an Act called the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act.

One component of this is about photography. It uses 'orphaned works' as being now a public domain item, without copyright. The big issue here is that sites like Instagram and Facebook strip EXIF data when you upload your photos, thus someone else can come along, claim the work is 'orphaned' cause it has no owner details attached and claim it, make money of it, etc, with no recourse for the owner.

More details here : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/29/err_act_landgrab/

Photographers will be required to register their copyright (at a price) over their creative works, to protect themselves and their works.

[fess67]

Sad. I suppose the only way is to either keep your works off the web or upload them in such low quality that ripping them off is unlikely to be useful. Of course none of us want to display our photography in poor quality so I think back to option 1 and stay away from the sites that strip your details.

[ameerat42]

It does sound bad. I suppose it affects everybody, not just Britons. Anyway, it looks like this will not pass quietly into benightedness:
note the promise of a "firestorm" [of protests].

Anyway, whereas there were a wealth of wherefores, I could not find an obvious why.
Any legal eagles with scalpels care to dissect and clarify?
At this stage - and likely at most future ones - I will refrain from giving a second hoot.
:(m.

[arthurking83]

Easy solution:

Don't post photos onto sites that exposes images to the public in such a manner.

This should do two things.

1. help to protect your IP
2. force websites such as these to enforce better IP protection for the creators(if less people upload images and traffic slows appropriately).

[Mark L]

1. help to protect your IP
2. force websites such as these to enforce better IP protection for the creators(if less people upload images and traffic slows appropriately).

Though I suspect majority of people posting majority of photos don't know much (or care) about copyright.:(

[Mathy]

Though I suspect majority of people posting majority of photos don't know much (or care) about copyright.:(
True, but I think we forget that there are many young people who don't actually know what copyright is/means. In a world of downloadable music, movies and images, I suspect the notion of ownership has become somewhat lost.

PhotoWatchDog has posted this to FB, and I've only just caught up. What's not clear is what happens to images that are Watermarked? Does this not count as a stamp of ownership, or are they orphans?? I can understand how FB etc can strip EXIF data, but can they strip/ignore a Watermark on an image :confused013

Bring on the Firestorm of protest :D

[pixy]

Orphaned photos,according to the act,are photos that after a diligent search does not find the creator of the works, then they can be used, if you sign up to any web hosting site you identity is on that site.

Jack.

[ricktas]

Orphaned photos,according to the act,are photos that after a diligent search does not find the creator of the works, then they can be used, if you sign up to any web hosting site you identity is on that site.

Jack.

Yes, but if I take a copy of your photo and stick it on facebook, suddenly your photo is an orphan! The Act also does not define what is regarded as a 'diligent search'. So once your photo (my copy of it) is on facebook and shared around, someone sees one of those copies, checks for EXIF, checks for watermark..nup. Ok search done, orphaned work..woohooo!

[enseth]

So does Watermarking fix the problem?

[ricktas]

So does Watermarking fix the problem?

We do not know yet. The law needs to be tested in court to see.

[Kym]

So does Watermarking fix the problem?

It won't hurt! It would at least allow a prima facie case in favour of the © owner.

[ameerat42]

There's nothing for it: TAKE BAD IMAGES:2disgu:

[Lance B]

Yes, but if I take a copy of your photo and stick it on facebook, suddenly your photo is an orphan! The Act also does not define what is regarded as a 'diligent search'. So once your photo (my copy of it) is on facebook and shared around, someone sees one of those copies, checks for EXIF, checks for watermark..nup. Ok search done, orphaned work..woohooo!

But then couldn't it then be proven that your photo was hosted on a site (with the EXIF etc intact) previous to someone else posting it on facebook and therefore proving that that other person had stolen it. You would also know who the person was that was responsible for stealing your photo as it would be on their facebook account. I mean, they can track terrorists and other criminals that are way more stealthy than a simple act like this of stealing.

[ricktas]

But then couldn't it then be proven that your photo was hosted on a site (with the EXIF etc intact) previous to someone else posting it on facebook and therefore proving that that other person had stolen it. You would also know who the person was that was responsible for stealing your photo as it would be on their facebook account. I mean, they can track terrorists and other criminals that are way more stealthy than a simple act like this of stealing.

Yes, but the third party who used the image is the one you would want to chase, and they have done all they need to, to try and find the owner, thus you have no recourse with the person who is making the money off your photo. There would be two issues here, the person who 'stole' the image is one case, and the third person who used it for gain is the other case. Gets messy..eh?

[ricktas]

http://www.stop43.org/pages/news_and_resources.php

Stop43 has been setup to try and get the UK government to amend the legislation.

Which is British? Orphan Works and ECL breach foreigners' rights under the Berne Convention. Flag images © 2012 Pete Jenkins & Jeff Sedlik. Text & Logo © 2010 Paul Ellis. All Rights Reserved. Free for use digitally and in print to support and report the Stop43 campaign against changes in copyright laws against the interests of creators. All other rights reserved. Flag images © 2012 Pete Jenkins & Jeff Sedlik. Text © 2012 Paul Ellis. All Rights Reserve

*used with permission as granted above*

[Bear Dale]

I wonder if something like this is on the drawing board at Canberra?

[cupic]

The Is the Govt Kowtow to the Corporations

[sunny6teen]

too bad if your cameras can't record exif data

- - - Updated - - -

too bad if your cameras can't record exif data

[ricktas]

too bad if your cameras can't record exif data

- - - Updated - - -

too bad if your cameras can't record exif data

I reckon that would only be film camera's and you can add EXIF to those easily enough. EXIF editors are easy to get.

[sunny6teen]

I reckon that would only be film camera's and you can add EXIF to those easily enough. EXIF editors are easy to get.

one of the great benefits of digital and possibly the least recognised...not having to jot the info down :)

[DonUnder]

There's nothing for it: TAKE BAD IMAGES:2disgu:

Way ahead of ya :lol: