Sign the copyright petition

Merc said:
Signed.

Well done to John for posting the link. Who gives a toss if he changed his mind? Don't we all? Find it hard to believe that people take the time to post links to old threads.
Click to expand...

When someone with strong and sometimes unpopular views suddenly changes their mind without any apparent reason, aren't you curious to ask why?
 
Steve Smith said:
You don't want that.

"Nick Griffin. He looks like someone stretched luncheon meat over a toad" - Russell Howard


Steve.
Click to expand...

That gag is about as funny as Russell Howard - how do these guys get jobs as comedians?
 
Signed and twitted.

Ian.
 
Is there a chance this thread could be visible site-wide? Just in case there are people who never visit the general forum?
 
WillNicholls said:
Just had this back of House of Commons so those concerned over wording need not worry:

"... Having read your petition, I can't see that it is unclear in what the aim is, so I am confident that it will be understood by Members of Parliament if it is considered for debate. "
Click to expand...

Good stuff.

I have just over 12000 followers on Twitter, mostly photography and media types, and have tweeted a few times about it now. Hopefully at least some of them are signing up too :)
 
Last edited:
Hi, All done and dusted.(y)
 
WillNicholls said:
The viral-ness of this petition has slowed slightly!
Click to expand...

That was always going to happen. What matters is the efforts yesterday got us an extra 13,000 signatures.

These things happen in waves. This is probably the upper limit we can get with word of mouth. The next jump will come from a solid plug from a credible news site.
 
I've just signed this and it's currently at 19,162.
 
I was the 19, 316 th name to the petition.(y)
 
I've signed it, and its great that it's receiving such support.

I hate to put a dampener on it but professional photographers and their representatives have been fighting this for months, possibly years, and have been totally ignored.

The government has an agenda which has been completely disproven and yet it seems very unwilling to shift.

Another very unfortunate fact is that the details are SO technical that the average MP (that's about 95% of them) will not be able to understand them.
 
jerry12953 said:
I've signed it, and its great that it's receiving such support.

I hate to put a dampener on it but professional photographers and their representatives have been fighting this for months, possibly years, and have been totally ignored.

The government has an agenda which has been completely disproven and yet it seems very unwilling to shift.

Another very unfortunate fact is that the details are SO technical that the average MP (that's about 95% of them) will not be able to understand them.
Click to expand...

It may be a dampener and I was aware of the pro tog stance but if it's just pro togs objecting than they are a minority and unlikely to be taken seriously at least if a few more folk get involved there is a better chance of a response.

As far as your average MP point, to be fair the average MP doesn't understand the majority of bills put before them and vote the way they're told to, at least if it's brought to their attention they may give these things a second look. It's not much but it's a start.
 
Done.

Having been obliged to spend the best part of a year extracting payment from someone who thought himself above the law, whose defence was "had no idea the images were copyrighted or that use of them would infringe copyright" (& this despite the fact that my copyright legend embedded in each), can you imagine just how difficult & costly these things will be to pursue if the law is changed in this manner ?

Please, please, do yourselves a favour & sign this petition NOW
 
I've signed the petition, as I agree in principal that work should remain mine by default rather than only if I say so, but what I'm not so sure of is whether or not it's really going to be as big a problem in practice as people think.

For pro's, I understand the argument that it could destroy their market because there may be a surplus of genuinely orphaned work, which people will use instead of paying a pro. Well, even setting aside the question "isn't that exactly what happens now?", if technology now allows people who are not interested in making money from their shots to produce something just as good as the pro's can (big if), then that's just progress; it's no different to the printing press replacing scribes; sad, but inevitable, and not a reason to artificially support a market that's gone.

BUT, I do think pro's still have added value to offer and sell, in which case I can't see how this act affects them too badly? All they need to do is register their work in case someone strips the EXIF, (just like I have to register a design for something physical if I don't want it nicked, or have to patent an invention I come up with - this principal is NOT as unprecedented as people are making out), and they're just as covered as before. Arguably more so, because now there is a central place to register their interest.

The UK may be unique in doing this, but doesn't that mean that the UK is the only place where photographers have the additional protection of being able to register their work, in case someone tries to pass it off as orphaned?

So the only problem I can see for a pro is the time and cost involved in registering his work. That's a new business cost that all his or her competitors will also have, so shouldn't really be an issue should it?

As an amateur I don't want my stuff nicked either, yet the time and cost involved in registering is more of an issue because it comes straight out of my pocket.

But I think that's covered by this statement from the PLUS Registry's home page:

"PLUS membership is free, and allows you to add a Registry listing. The Registry operates on a co-op model, funded by optional contributions from “Supporting Members,” who receive a unique PLUS ID and access to additional features.

The PLUS Registry………….will allow registration and search using third-party applications and plug-ins. PLUS will provide an Application Programming Interface (API) supporting bi-directional connections with authorized applications."

So, it'll be free, you'll be able to do it in bulk, and there will be API's available. Thus, potentially all I have to do as I upload to Flickr (direct or from Lightroom), is tick a box that says "register at PLUS". That'd be it, job done, so maybe the petition we need is one directed at Flickr and Adobe, demanding that they make use of that API?

I think?

I'd like to write to my MP, but at the moment it'll not be to object to the law, rather to ask for safeguards to make sure registration remains available and free to amateurs, and to make sure that "diligent efforts" need to be a lot more than just a quick check of the EXIF data; they need to include a check at the registry, and the law needs to make sure that only genuinely orphaned works can be used free. Before doing that I'd like to know if I've misunderstood?
 
Last edited:
I guess because at the moment, if you find an image you want to use, it can be a nightmare to find out who owns it. With the new law, it should be much easier, and you don't run a risk of being prosecuted so long as you've made every effort.

The pros won't like it, so need to up their game, but there IS a huge resource out there that could benefit the economy if it were easier to use.

Of course we need to make sure users DO make every effort, but it will be a lot easier to find the owners who are bothered about their copyright, taking away a lot of the "didn't know/couldn't find out" excuses.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top