I think you misunderstand what this bill is proposing to do.
What bill? Name it -- it will either start with HR or SR, and have some series of numbers after it. It's not that hard. (If there is a bill, of course.)
Essentially, it says, "You are NOT PROTECTED unless you register."
Can you show me a bill that says this?
All those laws and copyright statements you posted will be ignored under this bill.
I'd like to read this bill.
So how do you PROTECT anything you ever draw, write, or post? By registering through PRIVATE COMPANIES and putting your works into their databanks. Now, it isn't "the moment you step away from the canvis," or "the moment you hit the post button," replace those words with, "the moment you pay to register..."
(It's hard to argue with what the meaning of a bill is when it only exists in their heads, but I think this is an attempt to argue that reforming copyright to solve the orphan work problem would lead to a requirement for de facto copyright registration. The poster might want to read the full comments threads to see those issues discussed independently of an imaginary bill, but if there were indeed a bill that proposed to do all of these things, such as dismantle the doctrine of slander of title, withdraw from or violate the terms of the Berne Convention, hand over the registry of copyright to private companies, rather than the government (I think that's a new claim -- yay telephone), ignore model release forms (for for-profit uses, even!), make the well-established concept of "orphaned work" an irreversible state, etc., etc., etc., it would be highly unlikely to pass in either house of the legislature.
We could take this step by step to discuss the absurdity, but just thinking in terms of what effect this would have on commercial publishing, it becomes obvious that such bill would never become law, if it were ever to even make it out of committee: essentially anyone could play shenanigans with the [I'll ignore the bit about private companies] copyright registration system to declare copyright on anyone else's work, and would also lose copyright protection in other countries unless specifically registered in their country, and quite likely threaten the nation's standing in WIPO. The MPAA and RIAA lobbyists throwing a hissy-fit, or WIPO/UN pressure, tends to have a much stronger effect on Congressional decisions than Internet hissy-fits.
Re: Um... hard faith there
What bill? Name it -- it will either start with HR or SR, and have some series of numbers after it. It's not that hard. (If there is a bill, of course.)
Essentially, it says, "You are NOT PROTECTED unless you register."
Can you show me a bill that says this?
All those laws and copyright statements you posted will be ignored under this bill.
I'd like to read this bill.
So how do you PROTECT anything you ever draw, write, or post? By registering through PRIVATE COMPANIES and putting your works into their databanks. Now, it isn't "the moment you step away from the canvis," or "the moment you hit the post button," replace those words with, "the moment you pay to register..."
(It's hard to argue with what the meaning of a bill is when it only exists in their heads, but I think this is an attempt to argue that reforming copyright to solve the orphan work problem would lead to a requirement for de facto copyright registration. The poster might want to read the full comments threads to see those issues discussed independently of an imaginary bill, but if there were indeed a bill that proposed to do all of these things, such as dismantle the doctrine of slander of title, withdraw from or violate the terms of the Berne Convention, hand over the registry of copyright to private companies, rather than the government (I think that's a new claim -- yay telephone), ignore model release forms (for for-profit uses, even!), make the well-established concept of "orphaned work" an irreversible state, etc., etc., etc., it would be highly unlikely to pass in either house of the legislature.
We could take this step by step to discuss the absurdity, but just thinking in terms of what effect this would have on commercial publishing, it becomes obvious that such bill would never become law, if it were ever to even make it out of committee: essentially anyone could play shenanigans with the [I'll ignore the bit about private companies] copyright registration system to declare copyright on anyone else's work, and would also lose copyright protection in other countries unless specifically registered in their country, and quite likely threaten the nation's standing in WIPO. The MPAA and RIAA lobbyists throwing a hissy-fit, or WIPO/UN pressure, tends to have a much stronger effect on Congressional decisions than Internet hissy-fits.
[continued, damn comment limits...]