The problem with an age-based trigger is that firstly, some things can't be dated easily, but also that a lot of orphaned work comes from the "death" of a corporate copyright holder, and the subsequent impossibility of determining who has the authority to grant permission on the copyright. This happens far more than it should -- there's cases of studios/production companies going out of business, and the director of a film wanting to purchase rights to his work but unable to find who actually owns them after the distribution of the corporate assets.
There's also the issue of individuals dying intestate with no apparent heirs. What happens then? Do we just wait 70 years to use the work? I think most people would agree that that solution isn't ideal. (Artists really should have wills that cover this scenario, but very few people have wills, honestly.)
I do agree, though, that the responsibility for determining if a work is orphaned should be on the entity that wants to use it, and not on the artist. I haven't had a chance to read over the full bills yet, but will try to soon.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Image database is part of Leahy's official version of the bill
Date: 2008-05-01 05:45 am (UTC)There's also the issue of individuals dying intestate with no apparent heirs. What happens then? Do we just wait 70 years to use the work? I think most people would agree that that solution isn't ideal. (Artists really should have wills that cover this scenario, but very few people have wills, honestly.)
I do agree, though, that the responsibility for determining if a work is orphaned should be on the entity that wants to use it, and not on the artist. I haven't had a chance to read over the full bills yet, but will try to soon.