Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/05/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]At 06:30 PM 5/11/2008, you wrote: >You can, I believe, register more than one picture for the $45 >fee. You can register a whole page full of pictures, dozens and >dozens of them, for one fee. That's right. And that's the way it's always been. But less than 2% of photos are currently registered. The point is that all creative work should be considered copyrighted as soon as it is completed. According to current worldwide law (Berne Convention) it is. However, in the USA, in order to claim damages or legal fees in case of infringements, the photos have to be registered with the USA copyright office. That's the way it has always been and photographers concerned with copyright protection (a minority) have registered their photos religiously. The new bill, now before Congress, reverses that. What the new bill says is that anything is fair game to use any way UNLESS it has been registered with the copyright office (or other independent agencies that are lining up to offer registration for a fee) Anything not registered is considered an Orphan Work. Under the proposed law, even if your work is registered, the burden of proof for infringement would be with you. You would have to find any of your photos that are violating your copyright. You would have to file a claim, at your expense, and, even if the infringer is found to have infringed upon your copyright, they would only have to pay a "reasonable" fee determined by the court. There is nothing about this bill, either the House or Senate version, that is good for photographers. Everything in it is a major step backward in copyright protection. I cannot imagine any photographer supporting this bill. Tina Tina Manley ASMP, NPPA, EP, PI http://www.tinamanley.com