Orphaned Art Legislation - Important Update

**Aahx** · 25-Jun-2008, 09:31

Yeah... thats good to hear. The letter I got from one of my senators made it pretty plain she was in full support of the bill, despite anything I may have to say about it.

Guess I know who not to vote for when she comes up for re-election.

**cyrus** · 25-Jun-2008, 13:41

There's another issue to consider why this bill may be GOOD for photographers.

Suppose one rainy morning, you can't get out of the house but you feel the itch to photograph something. So, you put a daisy in a glass of water, and shoot it. Well, guess what. Though the daisy is not protected by copyright, the glass is. If you try to sell the photo that has the glass in it, you're violating the copyright of the fella who designed the glass. So, you're technically obligated to first track him down and get his permission (or whomever he sold his copyright to.) If you can't find him, then you can't use his glass. And if you do use it, and he finds out, well ...

**Clay Turtle** · 19-Jul-2008, 20:53

Originally Posted by cyrus

There's another issue to consider why this bill may be GOOD for photographers.

Well, guess what. Though the daisy is not protected by copyright, the glass is. If you try to sell the photo that has the glass in it, you're violating the copyright of the fella who designed the glass. So, you're technically obligated to first track him down and get his permission (or whomever he sold his copyright to.) If you can't find him, then you can't use his glass. And if you do use it, and he finds out, well ...

And just how does using a glass or glass vase infringe upon the copyright of the vase? One would patent a glass making process & one may copyright the design but is there a copyright on the glass, itself? I don't think that car buffs (photographer's) get a release from auto manufacturers to use there auto's in classic car mags?