Stop Legalised Theft of Copyrighted Works Petition (UK)

Stinger88

I've seen a link going around art communities asking for people to sign this petition. The fact that its on Direct.gov.uk is probably proof enough that its genuine.

I've had a bit of a google and can't find much info on it as the details of the legislation haven't been released yet, so if you find any please share. Would like to get to the bottom of it. I signed it anyway. Sounds pretty shitty.

https://submissions.epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/49422

Stop Legalised Theft of Copyrighted Works

Responsible department: Department for Business, Innovation and Skills

A new legislation that has been rushed through parliament with no thought has now reached royal assent. This legislation means that photographers and illustrators alike will see their artworks legally taken and used for another's own gain.

Unless your works are registered or plastered with a watermark, anyone can use your copyrighted work for their own commercial and personal gains provided they have made a small effort to search for the original owner. If no owner can be found, they are free to do with it whatever they want.

There is nothing to stop people simply removing data embedded in digital files and pleading ignorance to the original author of the work.

The details have not yet been finalised, meaning there is little time left to put huge pressure on our government. Write to your MP and demand their objection.

Sign this petition now and share it with all you know to demand the UK Government make a U-turn and abort this legalised theft of digital artworks.

artquest

I wanted to sign the petition but since I'm not from the UK it wont let me! That sounds really crappy though. I really hope the legislation doesn't go through.

Justin Meisse

Is it Orphan Works legislation? It seems weird that they don't actually reference what it actually is - having some sort of legal status on what to do with orphan works is a good thing otherwise they are just going to disappear from history.

ysalex

Yeah I'm not sure, but after some research, this seems like an overreaction. Companies still have to prove that they have made a diligent effort to obtain the name or company of copyright owners before they are allowed to use the work. Legally, if you take them to court and they can't prove due diligence, then they are held to the same copyright laws and penalties as they always were.

This law seems to simply protect orphaned works from obscurity, and not much else. The US and Canada has had these laws for a while now.

Someone feel free to slap me if I'm wrong and please let me know why. Genuinely curious what the fear is here.

Kurt Russell Fan Club

People could have a very hard time arguing that they'd done sufficient research if a simple Google image search or a search on TinEye would tell you where it was from.

Snacuum

I hope this wouldn't simultaneously block the use of orphan works by organizations that legitimately have reason to obtain copies, such as museums, libraries and archival societies.

Brendan

Kurt Russell Fan Club wrote: »

People could have a very hard time arguing that they'd done sufficient research if a simple Google image search or a search on TinEye would tell you where it was from.

Exactly; spending 15 minutes running it through a handful or reverse image searches, and Google Image searches for what it is, should return a source 95% of the time, and a decent lead the other 5% of the time.

For a large company to be using it, they'll generally know what it is, every bit as much as the person who made it. Average Joe probably wouldn't recognize an exact place or object by name though, but the source and the professionals might.


The flipside is this: if the original artist finds their stuff used 'unfairly' under this, and hasn't been contacted for permission, it'd be a simple matter to sue the pants off the company that used it by using a bunch of small children on laptops demonstrating how easy it was to find the original author.

teaandcigarettes

As far as I'm aware, this is simply meant to bring the copyright legislation closer to what it is like in the rest of the world. From what I understand, the copyright laws are extremely strict in the UK. Freakonomics have a very interesting show about this particular issue:http://www.freakonomics.com/2013/01/17/who-owns-the-words-that-come-out-of-your-mouth-a-new-freakonomics-radio-podcast/

Whoever made this petition, seems to have their own agenda. There is no mention of the name of the legislation and it's impossible to do any research. I really doubt it's been "rushed" through, considering that people were complaining about the UK copyright law for ages.