JOIN OUR MAILING LIST
  • Home
  • Portugal 2023
  • About
  • Gallery
    • This Was STC Santorini 2023
    • This Was STC Miami 2021
    • This Was STC Santorini 2018
    • This Was STC Miami 2016
    • This Was STC Santorini 2015
    • This Was STC Miami 2015 – Temple House
    • This Was STC Miami 2014
    • This Was STC L.A. 2013
    • This Was STC Bahamas 2013
    • This Was Miami – STC Oct 13-14, 2012 Seminar / Workshop
    • This Was STC Miami 2012
    • This Was STC Vegas 2011 – 2
    • This Was STC Vegas 2011 – 1
    • This Was Miami 2011
  • Model Search
  • Store
  • Blog
  • Contact

Blog

Playboy Illustrator Seeks to Defeat Copyright Law Changes

Posted on: 07-22-2015 Posted in: Photography

Meet Brad Holland – Besides being a talented and highly acclaimed artist, Brad Holland is also quite an expert and activist in copyright law. Holland has been very outspoken against changes in the copyright laws that would govern so-called “orphan works.” In my humble opinion, we all should be on his side when it comes to opposing the proposed changes to the law being recommended by the US Copyright Office related to orphan works.

Let Me Draw You a Picture – Holland is the winner of 30 gold medals from various graphic arts organizations, and twice received the Playboy Editorial Award, and was nominated by the New York Times in 1977 for a Pulitzer Prize. Holland is a self-taught artist whose illustrations have appeared in the New York Times, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, Time and Rolling Stone, but perhaps Holland is best known for his work for Playboy magazine, which began after Holland met Art Paul the art director of Playboy magazine in 1967.

When Did I Become an Orphan, Mom? – An orphan work is a copyright protected work for which copyright owner is indeterminate or the copyright owner is unable to be located or contacted. (e.g. someone that would like to obtain permission or a license to use the copyrighted work, is unable to determine the identity of the copyright owner or is unable to locate or contact them).

iPad--ad-290It seems to me that the term “orphan” was chosen to make it sound like creator of the work abandoned it in a basket on the doorstep of a convent, and that nobody really wants it or cares about it, and it would be better off in someone else’s hands. But that’s not the case, when you dig deeper. It seems like this in an effort to grab the rights of many copyright holders in a wholesale fashion. Proponents of changing the copyright laws for orphan works seem to be arguing out of both sides of their mouths… On the one hand, they argue that works are valuable to society, but on the other hand, nobody should have to worry about the possible liability for infringing those copyrights, because the true owners of the copyright are too hard to find (and it is perhaps too expensive to properly obtain the copyrights under the current law), therefore the only remedy is to substantially cut off their valuable rights. To me, this argument is internally inconsistent.

Orphan Works and Mass Digitization – Deja Vu All Over Again – In 2006, Congress considered changing the copyright laws for orphan works, but the bill died in committee. The bill was revived under a new name and in 2008 it was passed by the Senate unanimously, but it died in the House of Representatives. Brad Holland has been credited for helping to kill the 2008 bill by testifying before Congress against the proposed change to the law. Once again, there is an effort underway at the US Copyright Office to change the law regarding orphan works, and they have recently published a report titled “Orphan Works and Mass Digitization” which examines and makes recommendations for changing the laws governing orphan works and mass digitization (e.g. Google Books that seeks to digitize entire libraries of copyrighted works).

I Need It Tomorrow! – According to Artists Alert: From the Illustrators Partnership: “Because of our past opposition to orphan works legislation, the Copyright Office has issued a special Notice of Inquiry on Visual Works [related to the Orphan Works and Mass Digitization report]. In it, they acknowledge that visual artists face special problems in the marketplace and they’ve asked artists to respond to five questions.” The deadline for American artists to submit responses online is July 23, 2015 (i.e. tomorrow)! Follow this link to submit you own.

Bottom Line for Photographers – The orphan works and mass digitization report is very lengthy, and there is a lot of territory covered by the 5 questions posed by the Copyright Office in its Notice of Inquiry (See the 5 questions, at the end of this article). To cut to the chase, first I would like you to focus your attention on Question number 2, because I think it may strike a deep chord with many STC photographers. Then, I would like you to read Holland’s excellent reply that he submitted to the Copyright Office in a letter dated July 15, 2015 (excerpted and quoted verbatim below). I think Holland’s scenario analysis of the proposed changes to copyright law will grab your attention… he got my attention, and I intend to submit a letter online to the Copyright Office before the deadline. Or, to hear a very in-depth (1.5 hour) discussion on the topic by Holland, watch this YouTube video “Everything You Know About Copyright is About to Change.” I learned a tremendous amount by listening to it.

Excerpt from Brad Holland letter to US Copyright Office dated July 15, 2015

RE: Notice of Inquiry, Copyright Office, Library of Congress
Copyright Protection for Certain Visual Works (Docket No. 2015-01)

 

Question 2. “What are the most significant enforcement challenges for photographers, graphic artists, and/or illustrators?”

“The two major challenges to copyright enforcement are a.) the high cost of legal fees
in an infringement lawsuit; and b.) the orphan works policies now being proposed
again to Congress.

a.) Currently, the only way most illustrators can afford to sue an infringer is to find a
contingency fee lawyer. I asked a full-time copyright litigator to explain the changes
that would result from orphan works legislation. Here’s how she explained the
situation:

Scenario One: Under current law, a copyright owner who has registered
his copyright can get statutory damages and attorneys fees. As a result,
it is possible to find a contingency fee lawyer to take these cases (i.e.,
copyright owner doesn’t have to pay lawyer). In addition, the copyright
owner usually finds that he gets more in settlement than he pays in legal
fees.

Scenario Two: If a copyright owner has NOT registered his copyright,
he can only get actual damages. It is usually impossible to find a
contingency fee lawyer for these cases. Moreover, it is often not wise for
the copyright owner to litigate these cases anyway, because the
settlement value is so small.

Under the orphan works legislation, ALL infringement scenarios would
be, as a practical matter, Scenario Two.

That’s because under an orphan works scenario, ANY infringement might turn out to
be an orphan works infringement. So unless all copyright attorneys were forced by law
to handle such cases pro bono, they would have no incentive whatsoever to take ANY
infringement case. In effect, orphan works law would be delivering a decisive legal
advantage to all infringers, including bad actors.

b.) I asked another attorney to explain how a copyright small claims court would work:

By limiting remedies, the orphan works proposals would create a nofault
license to infringe. So let’s look at a hypothetical small claims action
that I might be obliged to bring in the future. In the 1990’s, I licensed a
series of pictures for one-time use for a corporate annual report.
Copyright notice and credit are almost always omitted by art directors for
annual reports and almost always for advertisements, in spite of the
wishes of the artist to preserve his credit. Now, let’s say I registered my
copyright in the work as part of a group registration, the title of which
was based on the annual report. I subsequently licensed some of these
pictures for exclusive use in various ads in the United States and I make
it a practice never to license my work for inexpensive or distasteful
products.

But let’s say an infringer finds the annual report. He likes the pictures,
sees no credit, and does a good faith search that fails to identify me as
the owner of the copyright. He begins selling cheap products bearing my
art. Under current copyright law, my remedies would include statutory
damages, attorneys’ fees, impoundment, and injunction for this flagrant
infringement because it’s damaged my exclusive right to license my work
in high-end markets.

But in small claims court, my remedy would be what? Reasonable
compensation for use of my work on cheap items, and even this would
be limited by whatever maximum the small claims court might set, and it
would be constructed not to deprive the infringer of the profits he made
in reliance on a so-called failure to locate me.

Without the deterrent of statutory damages and attorneys’ fees, and
without a permanent injunction against repeat offenses by the same
infringer, this experience would now act as an incentive for the infringer
to exploit other uncredited, and therefore effectively orphaned, images
by other artists. In effect, he has discovered that infringing artists is a
rational business decision, and this would be the same for other
infringers.”

Read Dana L. Manner’s inquiry letter to the Copyright office.

Article by: Dana L. Manner
Attorney & Photographer
Miami, FL

 

US Copyright Office Notice of Inquiry Questions

  1. What are the most significant challenges related to monetizing and/or licensing photographs, graphic artworks, and/or illustrations?
  2. What are the most significant enforcement challenges for photographers, graphic artists, and/or illustrators?
  3. What are the most significant registration challenges for photographers, graphic artists, and/or illustrators?
  4. What are the most significant challenges or frustrations for those who wish to make legal use of photographs, graphic art works, and/or illustrations?
  5. What other issues or challenges should the Office be aware of regarding photographs, graphic artworks, and/or illustrations under the Copyright Act?

The US Copyright Office recently published a report titled “Orphan Works and Mass Digitization,” which examines and recommends potential solutions for the issues of orphan works (i.e. the use of copyrighted images when the owner cannot be found) and mass digitization (i.e. projects like Google Books that digitize vast amounts of copyrighted works).

Here’s a copy of the report:

1-749111ecbe

KAROLINA-ZIENNA-DUO-568

shop-stc-click-pointer-2-568STC-LA-seminar-568-banner© 2015 Copyright ShootTheCenterfold.com. All rights reserved.

  • Popular Posts
  • Related Posts
  • Write for us sponsored posts
    Write for us sponsored posts
  • Learning how to take the best photography
    Learning how to take the best photography
  • Sarah Lyons - From STC Attendee to FHM Cover Model
    Sarah Lyons - From STC Attendee to FHM Cover Model
  • How Your Photography Portfolio Can Help You Avoid Rejection
    How Your Photography Portfolio Can Help You Avoid Rejection
  • Write for us sponsored posts
    Write for us sponsored posts
  • Learning how to take the best photography
    Learning how to take the best photography
  • Sarah Lyons - From STC Attendee to FHM Cover Model
    Sarah Lyons - From STC Attendee to FHM Cover Model
  • How Your Photography Portfolio Can Help You Avoid Rejection
    How Your Photography Portfolio Can Help You Avoid Rejection
  • (3) Comments
  • (0) Trackbacks
  1. Bill07-22-15

    The Playboy illustrator would be wiser to Copyright their material in some other country. But, still register it with a ISBN. As why do you think so many companies are leaving the USA? Cheaper wages, but to lands where gov’t have better control of the people. Plus, their leaving because of tax issues as look at the flight from California. California has an abundance of wealthy people that probably are here with a dual citizenship. Which in the days ahead, the U.S. Gov’t could easily just say “Sorry & Leave”. A bit like how Russia sold those mills in Alabama as they know how the USA functions. Hence, look at the land grab Russia just did in lieu of payment from Ukraine and ask yourselves how is Ukraine going to pay back that Billion dollars the USA gave them? You think Greece has problems. Wonder if the Greeks demanded a Billion dollars from the USA, would the USA give it to them vs the IMF loans. I’ll bet you Russia takes more of Ukraine vs US Dollars.

    (reply)
  2. Bill07-22-15

    Some one could fight this, but the Government is pushing this and It’s just a matter of time when it will pass. Long after some are dead and gone. Hence, this is a bit like my local library where they used funds to build amphitheater in the back. Which seems kinda odd as wouldn’t a book mobile and a cover for it make better sense for all the old people who can’t get to the library any more. So how are these senior citizens suppose to read a book? Their tax dollars and they can’t even get a few books to read. I guess, they all have a Bible. But, if their atheist their screwed.

    (reply)
  3. Bill07-22-15

    Would you mind deleting that.

    (reply)

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Twitter Feed

    Twitter not configured.

Archives

  • February 2025
  • August 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • April 2022
  • September 2021
  • June 2021
  • April 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • September 2010

Search Blog

Recent Posts

  • Write for us sponsored posts Write for us sponsored posts
    02-20-2025
  • Learning how to take the best photography Learning how to take the best photography
    02-20-2025
  • Sarah Lyons - From STC Attendee to FHM Cover Model Sarah Lyons - From STC Attendee to FHM Cover Model
    08-17-2023

Popular Posts

Every photographer has a story to tell …
© 2011-2023 Shoot The Centerfold. All Rights Reserved
  • Privacy Policy
  • Customer Support
  • Ordering Details FAQ
  • Payment Methods
  • Return Policy FAQ
  • License Agreement
TwitterStumbleUponRedditDiggdel.icio.usFacebookLinkedIn