My friend Robert Krausankas of copyright-trolls.com sent me a link to an article about a new UK Copyright law that could have a devastating impact on photographers’ rights. The new Act(called the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act, which received Royal Assent) states that all “orphaned works” can be used for free by anyone. An orphaned work is any creative work (not just photos) whose authorship cannot be attributed with due diligence. Since that will rarely happen to films, TV shows, recorded music, and such other works of art, this law will have its greatest immediate impact on digital photography. The article, called “IS the UK Government Trying to Kill Off Photographers?,” can be found at photothisandthat.co.uk.
Imagine if I re-post a digital image sent to me by a friend of mine but I do not attribute it to anyone, and a third party sees it and likes it. If I don’t respond to that third party’s requests about who owns the copyright in the photo, that image could be considered an “orphaned work.” That third party could then use it on a website, a TV commercial or however they see fit. Considering the millions of images uploaded without attribution or connection to the copyright holder, this could cause UK photographers to lose valuable copyrights.
Particularly frustrating for photographers is that many social media websites strip away the metadata imbedded in the photo which shows the authorship. Even watermarking the image only affords some protection as that can be deleted or cropped out and then re-posted and found that way by a third party with no knowledge of the watermark or metadata.
What’s unusual about this bill is that UK copyright law already favors a person who used a work of art innocently – UK copyright law states that the only recourse against an innocent infringer is that they must cease and desist from use of the work and that the copyright holder is not entitled to damages. So why make it even harder for artists to protect their work?
I have been fighting digital image warehouses like Getty Images for the past five years over their extortionate, threatening letters to innocent folks who did not know they were infringing on anyone when they used an image put on their website by some web developer they hired or bought from a website template company. I have often lamented on the site extortionletterinfo.com for protection for US innocent infringers like the one in the UK Copyright law. (Here, even innocent infringers are subject to a damages claim). But this goes too far. At the very least, the law should include a provision that only the copyright holder can delete metadata they inserted to establish authorship. The author of the UK article, Edmond Terakopian, suggest this as well. He also asks UK citizens to fight the passage of the Act by contacting Members of Parliament who have to vote it in before the Act can become Law. Will this is an admirable plea, it appears futile as he also reports that no Act which receives Royal Assent has failed to become legislation since 1979.
Many US photographers have their works published abroad and hold copyrights in the UK. They would be wise to register their images in the UK Copyright Office as further protection against losing their rights do this unnecessary and overbroad piece of legislation.
Last time I checked, the rap on why terrorists do what they do is the they “Hate our way of life,” they “Hate our Freedom.” The Constitutional rights we give to criminal defendants is integral to our way of life and principal to our freedom from government over-reaching. Tsarnaev is an American citizen who committed a crime on American soil. He should be given all the rights granted to us in the Bill of Rights. If these rights can be taken away from him how can we guarantee that they won’t be taken away form another person who commits a crime here with some connection to a foreign interest. (not that there’s any evidence yet released that Tsarnaev’s crime was connected to a foreign interest). In addition to the talking heads, many folks (including friends of mine) have posted on Facebook that they can’t believe we will have to spend money to try a him and get him a lawyer, etc. He should have been shot in the boat, he should be hung from Copley Square, he should be made to join his brother, etc etc. But there’s a lot more to the true American way of life than gorging on food court meals in some Mega Mall. Many of the people who are making these posts are the same ones who hold the Founding Fathers as omniscient demi-gods whose original words must forever be the guiding principles of our society. Well, these rights were in their top ten list. Criminal defense rights make up a significant part of the Bill of Rights. Because Adams, Jefferson and Franklin all realized that the government’s greatest power is the ability to lock up those who may oppose its positions or speak up against its policies. They carefully crafted a series of protections to insure that those accused of crimes had written guarantees to create a system that protects the innocent and provide fairness even to the guilty. We stop upholding those principles, or choosing when and where to apply them and the terrorists win. With each right we remove or weaken we will become more like the tyrannical countries or regimes or regions they come from. 
NCBA’s unique program allows homeowners concerned about foreclosure matters or are already in the foreclosure process involving property in Nassau County, to meet one-on-one with a volunteer attorney for free legal guidance, to receive loan modification assistance and bankruptcy information – all in one room. The program is made possible in part by grants from the NYS Office of the Attorney General. I have been a participating for about a year now assisting as a Spanish interpreter (I know nothing about this area of the law) when needed. The experience has been a real eye-opener about the need for legal services for the poor and the depth and severity of the foreclosure crisis. 
The Warren court decided Brown v. Board of Education (in which Warren insisted and fought for unanimity) desegregating American schools. Was there ever a more clear “states-rights-issue” than education? Warren said- who cares about States’ rights if those rights violate the right to Equal Protection under the Constitution? Brown applied to schools, but soon the Court enlarged the concept to other state actions, striking down racial classification in many areas -Warren insisted all of those be unanimous as well. That driving force led Congress to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. In Gideon v. Wainwright, the Court held that the Sixth Amendment required that all indigent criminal defendants receive publicly funded counsel. Though he rode to the Governorship of California on his record as a tough prosecutor, he was wary of police abuse. In Miranda v. Arizona required that certain rights of a person interrogated while in police custody be clearly explained, including the right to an attorney (still called the “Miranda warnings”). Mapp v. Ohioprevented prosecutors from using evidence seized in illegal searches. It was the Warren Court that outlawed school prayer in Engle v. Vitale which was as gutsy a decision as the Supreme Court had ever seen at the time. Warren was also behind the Court’s decision in Griswold v. Connecticut which announced to the country that its citizen’s enjoyed “a constitutionally protected right of privacy.” Griswold led directly to Roe v. Wade which was decided after Warren left the bench. Believe it or not I could go on as the Warren Court was behind even more landmark decisions during the 16 years he served on the Big Bench. But you get the picture by now I imagine.