Discussion: Orphan Works

[mr_pikachu]

Hopefully you didn't come to this thread expecting to read about Oliver Twist 2: Orphan Works. ...Actually, maybe that would be appropriate for the subject matter. Weird.

Alright, so there's apparently a lot of stuff going on with a proposal to add "orphan works" legislation to copyright law in the U.S. and Europe. Some people like the idea, saying that it will make it easier for people to make productive use of others' creative works when the creator simply cannot be contacted. Others are rising up against it, claiming that it will strip artists of their rights unless they undergo expensive litigation (which isn't guaranteed to be successful).

This has major ramifications for us writers. If you believe one side of the argument, anyone who wants to use another person's work but can't contact them to get permission will be able to do so. Say, for instance, you wanted to use a famous quote in a guide to writing technique, but the author of that quote had died. You would be able to use that quote, provided you gave all credit to that person, etc., etc.

If you side with the proposal's opponents, however, then anything you create can be used freely by anyone as an "orphan work" unless you register it with multiple registries, each of which has its own fee. New registries could pop up at any time, orphaning everything you've registered, and successful artists could quickly go out of business from the cost of registering all their work. And if someone were to violate your rights and publish something that was properly registered, then even a court battle (which would further drain your resources) might be unsuccessful, especially if you think the judicial system is flawed.

I have not fully looked into the proposal; actually, it's very difficult to do so, as I can't find any bill that has been formally introduced for this session. (In the U.S., the most recent attempt at "orphan works" legislation was H.R.5439 which may be a useful point of reference.) But here you have the two sides of the argument.

To give you something further to ponder, here's a deeper explanation of each side: pro-orphan works vs. anti-orphan works. It may be better to read the latter article first, as the former one is pretty much a response; I haven't found anything significant from the anti-legislation people shooting back yet.

I'm no legal expert, so I'm not going to say which side is right and vice-versa... at least, not without looking further into the issue. But considering the impact any laws of this nature could have, presenting the debate is more than worth the time it took to craft this post. Everything could change dramatically... be aware, and discuss.