The Pyramids Aren't Alone

[Sysmom]

All right, not too long ago I read how Egypt was going to copyright the image, and faithful re-creations of the pyramids. And I scratched my head, thinking it a tad odd.

So ... here I am having dealt with copyrights online and offline for over 2 decades now, and I found the Technical Wiki at iStockPhoto. It serves as the copyright and trademark violations database for iStockPhoto - and it's eye-opening.

http://www.istockphoto.com/tutorial_copyright_list.php

Everything from coins from the US Mint, to buildings in California state parks, to monuments. From publicly owned things to privately owned ones, and things that look like they could be older than 1923 (the UNC building?) ... all these business, government agencies, and institutions maintain copyrights, and/or publication rights to an amazing slew of things.

Really, I had NO idea. I'm mildly amused... and entertained.

http://www.istockphoto.com/tutorial_copyright_list.php

deb

[kbob]

Yep-soon it's going to be a crime to look at stuff without paying a fee...sigh.

here's the earlier article:

Copyright extended past 3000 years?!?!?!

BTW-I get a "You do not have permission to view this page" error when visiting your provided link...

To me the sad part is that for all but the most iconogrphic images and works, copyright works against the original creators. Our pastor remembered a really nice youth oriented play from years ago, and wanted to perform it. Wanting to do the right thing, he ran down the original author of the play, and wrote to ask permission to use it.

You know what happened, don't you?

The original author of the work said, "thanks for your interest, but I no longer own the copyright to that work. And the current copyright holder has abandoned it, leaving it out of print. I'm really sorry, but I can't help you. I must get 10-20 requests a year to use it, and I can't help them. Selling the copyright was the most foolish thing I've ever done!"

Hmmmm....

I know that when I've tried to buy copies of CD's for friends of one hit wonders or Christian acts that are no longer recording, they're just not available anywhere, for any price. Sure, you might find something on ebay once in a while, but generally not. And of course buying used materials doesn't help the copyright holder...

Personally, I think that they just need to stop, take a deep breath, and figure out something new here.

Can you imagine a reunion tour of the Original Petra, DeGarmo & Key, and Whiteheart? Say in another 5-10 years?

No original artwork, songs, lyric sheets, chord sheets, and publicity photos would be available. For that matter, they might not even be able to play some of the songs...or even any of them.

The reunion tour might have to record all new music just to be able to play. Some of the original songs are with closed and or abandoned labels, while most have been bought up by large labels. The large labels would likely not see enough money in a tour that might sell 10,000 or so cd's, and so not bother re-issuing the songs.

At what point do the lawmakers realize what a farce copyright has become? Perhaps when they start getting sued over family photos, because the image of their new mansion is copyrighted by the architect? How 'bout when the ad company that created their ads for the last campaign sues them for re-using the iconography, pointing out that the contract reserved those rights?

How 'bout we all band together and buy out the copyrights for major places where politicians like to congregate-say near the WW II memorial-and sue them for infringement when they show up for veterans and memorial day photo ops?

I'm sure there are outs for all those uses-many would have been considered to be works for hire, for example-but that's where we seem to be headed.

Sigh...rant off.

Nice post though!

[shayward]

It looks like the copyright landscape is ripe for a massive change. The change won't come through legislation because our law-makers are... "out of touch", shall we say. Same with most of the labels.

Artists are getting fed up and are starting to take things into their own hands.

http://www.songwriters.ca/studio/proposal.php

http://www.rpmchallenge.com

RIAA, which was great at creating standards for audio recordings and did many wonderful things in the first half-century of modern music, has outlived its usefulness by failing to adapt to the modern age.

Labels, which have been robbing artists blind for years, can't handle consumers robbing them. Some labels have even tried to sue their own artists for offering free music.

It looks like the SAC is proposing exactly what I said 10 years ago: Downloading is a problem without a solution so digitize the whole catalog in high-quality and charge between $5 and $10 a month through ISPs. Track which music is being downloaded and divy up the money accordingly.

I don't download music - I buy it on CD... even though it hasn't yet been declared illegal in Canada. And I don't endorse performing anything illegal. Nor do I endorse theft. Christians ought to obey the law where it does not conflict with a direct moral teaching of scripture.

But given the digital landscape of today, it is time to adapt. So long as their are smart marketing folks, artists will still be able to make a buck

[Sysmom]

kBob, you may have to sign in to iStock Photo for the Tech Wiki, I forgot I was signed in.