tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16899684.post5190343485099889954..comments2023-09-23T00:37:29.396-07:00Comments on Mom's Cancer Blog: Orphan WorksBrian Fieshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16347700145666751363noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16899684.post-59378794819335776542008-05-27T08:42:00.000-07:002008-05-27T08:42:00.000-07:00Thanks for the pointer, Mike. An interesting persp...Thanks for the pointer, Mike. An interesting perspective on the issue. As I say, I can see both sides, and that's a fair argument for the other.<BR/><BR/>Michael Conan, I don't know French and so can't tell if your post is Spam or a genuine request for advice. If it is, please feel free to write me at brianfies@comcast.net and I will do the best I can. And thank you for the compliments.Brian Fieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16347700145666751363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16899684.post-63953982475892732212008-05-26T04:19:00.000-07:002008-05-26T04:19:00.000-07:00Bonjour Je trouve ton blog génial j'aimerait vraim...Bonjour Je trouve ton blog génial j'aimerait vraiment avoir ton talent bravo ton blog déchir grave pourrait tu me donné des petit conseil pour savoir un peut déssiné? en espérant avoir une réponse de ta par je te dit a bientot j'espere? Voici Mon EMAIL Msn michael.conan@hotmail.frAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16899684.post-22460117556827047962008-05-24T06:00:00.000-07:002008-05-24T06:00:00.000-07:00... and, as it happens, on one of my next morning ...... and, as it happens, on one of my next morning stops, I found this article by Gigi Sohn at HuffPost.<BR/><BR/>http://tinyurl.com/4z3h59<BR/><BR/>The whole thing is worth reading, if only as a starting point to find a different POV. But here's the critical part: "If a copyright holder reappears after a user has done a diligent search, then the copyright holder is entitled to reasonable compensation."<BR/><BR/>Which resolves one of my points. Here's another: "If the normally big media-friendly Copyright Office (or even worse, Congress) were to define precisely what is a diligent effort, it is likely to be one which would require the type of resources only the big companies have (they want to use orphan works, though few of their works are orphaned)."<BR/><BR/>As I say, it's not definitive, but it sure is thought-provoking.Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16807727819590358834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16899684.post-60133052071096384622008-05-24T05:22:00.000-07:002008-05-24T05:22:00.000-07:00There are two troublesome aspects to this, one pra...There are two troublesome aspects to this, one practical, one philosophical:<BR/><BR/>1. Practically speaking, I have used out-of-copyright materials such as Andrew Lang's re-tellings of classic fairy tales with illustrations by H.J. Ford. Certainly, I marked my versions as copyrighted because they had been (gently, gently) edited for modern audiences. But it would never occur to me to consider Ford's illustrations as my own. This to me is nonsensical -- copyright the new presentation, yes, but not the original parts. I would suggest that the same thing might be applicable here -- If I can't find the owner of something, I can use it, but it doesn't become mine. And I damn well better have made a "diligent" search or I pay a royalty.<BR/><BR/>2. Some years ago, somebody died of e-coli from fresh apple cider, and the FDA now requires cider to be pasteurized -- which robs it of its flavor, since part of fresh cider is a slight tang of early fermentation. The reason this stupid rule went through is the Dole and Mott and the other giants of the industry can't bottle and ship "live" cider anyway. If an e-coli outbreak in packaged salad (which has happened) had prompted a rule to boil lettuce, those corporate lawyers would have shot it down in an instant. I can't help but think that Disney and friends are huddling behind the Sonny Bono Law watching this with a shrug -- they have their bunker and don't care about the individual artists who might be vulnerable to this.Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16807727819590358834noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16899684.post-8167252075269389812008-05-22T11:10:00.000-07:002008-05-22T11:10:00.000-07:00Sherwood, terrific example. What are the odds of y...Sherwood, terrific example. What are the odds of you finding that photo? I hope the Mueller Org does the right thing; maybe they'll even offer to pay you for its use! I don't know Boxer's and Feinstein's positions, but don't see how a politely worded note urging them to oppose the bill could go wrong.<BR/><BR/>Terry: funny, I just answered a question like this for someone else. As I told him, I am not a lawyer, nor have I been syndicated. However, based on my experience and what I've learned talking to pros, I think copyright registration is unnecessary for a comic strip submission. If a syndicate likes your idea enough to consider, it's a lot easier and less risky for them to contract with <I>you</I>. After all, you're the source of this great concept! On the other hand, if registering it gives you peace of mind, it's not difficult so go ahead. There's no harm; I just don't think there's much benefit, either.<BR/><BR/>The information required is basic: name, address, contact info. Box 5 asks for "Type of Authorship in This Work" and I checked "text" and "illustration." They'll also need a copy of the work itself. Go to www.copyright.gov and look through the forms and FAQs. I see there that the cost is $45 to register via mail and $35 electronically. And good luck!Brian Fieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16347700145666751363noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16899684.post-58877526328301919722008-05-22T10:56:00.000-07:002008-05-22T10:56:00.000-07:00I created a comic strip I plan to send to the synd...I created a comic strip I plan to send to the syndicates and was wondering if you thought I should register it before. You always hear about ideas for movies and TV shows being ripped off and I wouldn't want that t ohappen! I can't read all the boxes on your form but it doesn't look hard to fill out. Do you think its a good idea, and how much would it cost?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16899684.post-22512373929414124752008-05-22T00:11:00.000-07:002008-05-22T00:11:00.000-07:00In this era of wide and instant electronic publica...In this era of wide and instant electronic publication, such an over-lenient definition of "orphan" is going to impact us ordinary e-citizens as well as professional creators.<BR/><BR/>Here's a personal case in point that I just became aware of today:<BR/><BR/>More than three years ago, I submitted a picture of my cat Alnitak to the humor site mycathatesyou.com. The guy who runs that site (who has to be one of the most twisted, brilliant, prolific, funny people on Earth) published it on <A HREF="http://www.mycathatesyou.com/cats/id/3018" REL="nofollow">his site.</A> Cool; Al gets his fifteen minutes of fame.<BR/><BR/>This evening, though, while proctoring an exam and idly Googling, I ran across that picture in <A HREF="http://themuellerorg.com/" REL="nofollow">this suspicious-looking site.</A> (It's in the "About Us" section, unless they've pulled it after my first request that they do so.)<BR/><BR/>Clearly, whoever is in charge of "The Mueller Organization"'s website found Al's picture on mycathatesyou, copied it, and used it. Under the new law, all he or she would have to do is note that mycathatesyou doesn't publish the names of its submittors, and so there was no way of knowing whose photo that was, so it was an orphan.<BR/><BR/>As things are now I can at least bluster at "The Mueller Organization" with some slight sense of legitimacy. If S2913 goes through, though...<BR/><BR/>Bottom line: this can be bad news for anyone who creates anything in the new age of instant publication.<BR/><BR/>Do you have any info on how our Senators, Feinstein and Boxer, stand on this bill? I'd fire off a letter right now, but would rather have a sense of their predispositions, if any, before I do so.Sherwood Harringtonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09575868746160608731noreply@blogger.com