Please also pass the link to this blog post or the survey to other artists you know who live in the UK and ask them to also complete the survey
This is why the survey has been set up
The UK Government has launched an important consultation on copyright which proposes a number of significant changes to copyright in the UK and to the protection and remuneration visual artists currently enjoy.The survey covers:
DACS is keen to gather responses from you which will help us to shape our contribution to the consultation.
You can also respond directly to the Government's consultation here: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/pro-policy/consult/consult-live/consult-2011-copyright.html
The survey should take around 15 minutes to complete.
PRIVACY
All responses are anonymous and will remain confidential and will only be used for the purposes of informing DACS' response to the Government's Consultation on Copyright. No personal data will be passed onto any 3rd party organisation.
This survey will close at 5pm Friday 17 February.
- extended collective licensing
- orphan works
- moral rights (eg what other people can do to or with orphan works if the originator has not been identified - as happens when images become detached from information about the originator)
- codes of conduct for collecting societies
- copyright exceptions
My response included the following statements
There's a vast difference between the quality of images used to generate revenue and those needed for educational purposes. All public institutions holding images of works which are funded or supported via public revenue should be obligated to provide web ready images for educational use. This is an area where orphan works could be used more widely - it doesn't impact on current artists. Also it's very important for the legislation to recognise that education does not just take place in regulated educational institutions. Education is what happens when people learn - and that can be self-directed and internet based
The changes need to avoid favouring big business at the expense of the individual artist. If anything the emphasis should be the other way round. Also any system needs to avoid being burdensome on individual artists in terms of paperwork or expense. One only needs to look at the average income of most visual artists to realise there is absolutely no scope to create an economic burden. Hence why any changes need to protect those who create. This must avoid big business (or big public institutions) seeking to make money off individuals who haven't got the resources to defend themselves against those who breach their copyright and moral rights.
Please leave a comment telling us what you said.
Thanks to a-n whose article alerted me to this survey
Link: Copyright - Resources for Artists
Done and going to share now!
ReplyDeleteThat's the ticket!
ReplyDeleteIf copyright is so important and noble, why do we unconsciously repeat and propagate ugly rumors and untruths? Why do we allow gossip?
ReplyDeleteOff topic comments which may be seen by some as seeking to provoke are rarely allowed on this blog.
ReplyDeleteHowever the issue is about protecting the truth.
It's also worth noting that communities don't tolerate those that stray too far when using words. Communities all over the world have also created laws relating to slander and libel to deal precisely with the problems of people distorting the truth in words.
This is not a debate about matters other than those relating to copyright and the protection of artists' interests.
Hence this line of commenting finishes with this post.