It's not right, but it's okay

Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE

The concept of copyrighting often becomes a vague and distant idea when one considers the innumerable amount of readily available images in the world. With two clicks of a mouse a person can instantly have their very own copy of an original piece without the hassle of paperwork. A Google Image search will provide thousands of images in less than thirty seconds all without ever leaving your seat.  With so many options to getting your picture needs satisfied immediately it becomes difficult to remind oneself of the more legitimate process of legally acquiring an image. Most internet users usually respond to this alternative with a general reaction of “oh yeah, that’s right I forgot all about copyrighting”. With access to the internet the principle that information can be contained and controlled receives more of a comical response most likely ending with a scoff other than anything else. Laws become more like guidelines open to interpretation and consequences begin to sound like empty threats. As shocking as this may be for many, copyright laws still exist and are in fact laws with regulations and repercussions that are applicable in this day and age.

                United States federal copyright laws began in May 1790 when James Madison proposed a provision““to secure to literary authors their copyrights for a limited time.” The first work  was registered merely two weeks after the founding of the law proving the legislative act to be functional. The claims were at first handled in the U.S. district courts by clerks but as time passed more people began to make use of the copyright function and in 1870 it became centralized in the Library of Congress. In 1897 the Copyright Office then became its own department in the Library of Congress in turn creating the position of Register of Copyrights. Presently the Copyright Office can be found in Washington D.C. and currently employs approximately 475 people. In a year the Office registers half a million claims, records more than 11, 000 documents, and collects a quarter billion dollars in license funds for later distribution to copyright holders. In comparison to having clerks in the U.S. District Courts performing these claims it would be a safe to say that as the years have gone by the usage copyright laws has exponentially grown adapting itself to fit the modern needs of the public while at the same time creating more positions for workers.  Despite the common belief that copyrighting is an outdated law it still proves to be thriving.

                The Copyright laws were originally created to encourage creativity while at the same time protecting the rights of the creator. As time passes the copyright law is amended accordingly such as when photographs and photographic negatives were added to protective works in March 3, 1865. Registration has also evolved overtime now allowing a person to electronically register their work since July 1, 2008 thereby facilitating the entire process. In the last few years one of the most important acts to have been passed is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. This act protects companies such as Google from being liable for any kind of infringement of the copyright law. The act states that when companies such as Google are notified of the infringement they will either terminate the user account or remove the content from their services. Despite the immediate connection the internet provides, to file a complaint of infringement to Google is a lengthy and time consuming process making it more difficult for creators of any kind to protect their work. Assuming the complaint towards Google is legitimate the company will remove all material related to the subject matter and at times may pay for all the costs involved such as the attorney fees.

                In the context of images the creator of the piece is generally reimbursed and his work protected with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act yet none of the people breaking the copyright law are actually held accountable.  Continuing with the Google example, if many people had been using Google images to see an image, save it, or reproduce it without permission from the artist or photographer involved then they are all culpable for infringing upon the copyright law. Yet with the images being so readily available on the internet to so many millions of people it becomes nearly impossible to hold each person accountable for their crime.

Many times the moral issues involved in copyrighting are not taken into account by the law itself. For instance, many teachers use Google or other resources to provide their class a more effective learning experience at the cost of artist who painted or photographed the image. Should these educators be held accountable for such a breach of the law? Ultimately these issues are dealt with the artist themselves or the venues carrying the piece.  At times an artist feeling that their monetary gain is not in danger by an educator who is not profiting from their work will have no problem sharing their image with students. At times educators will blatantly admit to taking images from Google and using them in their PowerPoint’s or class discussions such as many art professors do for every class knowing that the chances of being discovered are so minimal they barely consider the task itself as taking risk.

When it comes to more dated images it becomes less of a problem for anyone wishing to obtain a copy of the image. Usually the artist will have passed and the rights of the image will belong to a venue rather than a venue, an artist, and a photographer.  If one wanted to use this image they would contact a venue which in reference to art or photographs will most likely be a museum. A person would then write a written statement asking for their permission to reproduce the image. The venue will then make an informed decision depending on the purpose behind the distribution of the image. If the image were to be published in an educational article that would most likely not create a large profit they would not charge an immense fee. Although, if the publishing of the image is for a book that has intentions of selling many copies the museum would ask publishers how many copies are expected to sell and depending on the answer they receive they would present a certain price for allowing the image to be displayed. Each the time the image is reproduced the author would pay the required fee. For example, if the image is on page 40 and then on page 88 the author would pay the museum fee twice.  If the artist of the image is alive then the author would need his permission as well as the venues which are why modern art is considered very difficult to reproduce. The fees behind the copyrighting of these images are not usually inexpensive which does not allow for many authors who rely on images for their articles or novels to publish again.  For this reason many published authors that use images will admit to retiring from the publishing business due to the costs.

                Copyright laws were created to protect the artist and their work. Currently this is not always the case as many times it becomes more of a financial battle than a discussion about the piece. Originally the intentions behind the copyright law were noble and there will always be a need for protection against those who choose to profit from another’s work but for the moment copyright laws are not as effective as they appear. With the internet offering endless possibilities towards image theft a grey zone is created in which images are not as protected as they should be. Other times the images are overly protected which in turns discourages new art, such as books, from being created. Copyright laws are essential in a modern society yet because it is modern society flexibility must also be present within the law. Images have been a part of the world for many years and will continue to be for many more years to come with the assistance of copyright laws to protect them.

Sources

1.       U.S. Copyright Office, . "A Brief Introduction and History." U.S. Copyright Office. August 2009. Library of Congress, Web. 16 Feb 2010. <http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1a.html>.

2.       U.S. Copyright Office, . "Can I Use Someone Else's Work? Can Someone Else Use Mine?." U.S. Copyright Office. 06 Oct 2009. Library of Congress, Web. 16 Feb 2010. <http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/>.

3.       Google , . "Digital Millenium Copyright Act." Google. 2010. Google, Web. 16 Feb 2010. <http://www.google.com/intl/en-GB/images_dmca.html>.