Advocacy Alerts

 

White House Releases Plan to Protect Intellectual Property Rights.

On Tuesday, June 22, 2010, the White House released the first Administration Strategic Plan on Intellectual Property Enforcement. To develop this plan, the administration worked with governmental agencies and received significant input from the public, companies, industry groups, unions, consumer groups and academics, including the Graphic Artists Guild and The Copyright Alliance, of which the Guild is a member.

This Strategic Plan makes intellectual property enforcement a priority by dedicating appropriate resources and expertise, and putting the right processes in place. Specifically, the administration will:

• Lead by example by making sure that the Federal government does not purchase or use illegal products; 
• Be transparent in how it develops and implements policies, how information is shared and reported at home and abroad, and through specific efforts such as increased information sharing with rightsholders and victims;
• Ensure efficiency and coordination of enforcement efforts across Federal, state and local levels, domestically and overseas, through means such as shared databases and increased coordination of investigation and training efforts;
• Enforce international rights by combating foreign-based websites and other entities that violate intellectual property rights, by increasing enforcement with trading partners and support businesses in overseas markets, including China;
• Secure the supply chain to stop illegal products from coming into the country by ensuring that law enforcement has the authorities that it needs, by encouraging voluntary cooperation by the private sector to reduce infringement occurring in the physical and the online world and by vigorously investigating and prosecuting criminal activity where warranted; and
• Collect good data, such as analyzing jobs and exports that are generated by intellectual property-intensive industries to help drive future decisions and action and in order to build an open and fair environment for American intellectual property rightsholders.

The IPEC (Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator) and the interagency committee on intellectual property enforcement will create four specific working groups to focus on government procurement, counterfeit pharmaceutical drugs, international capacity building and training, and the economic impact of intellectual property-intensive industries. The IPEC will continue to seek and receive feedback from the public as it works to implement the Strategic Plan. The Copyright Alliance was invited to submit the remarks it made in March to the next oversight hearing this week for inclusion in the public record. These comments are available here.

A fact sheet and the complete report are available for download here. 

Graphic Artists Guild Sues Google

Today,  the Graphic Artists Guild joined several other creative sister organizations and individual visual artists to file a class action lawsuit against Google, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The full release follows. To download a pdf of the complaint, click here.

 

Copyright Protection in Digital Era a Cultural Priority

NEW YORK – Today the Graphic Artists Guild joined several other creative sister organizations and individual visual artists to file a class-action lawsuit against Google, Inc. in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.  The Guild’s leadership says they’re determined to protect artist rights and the future of American culture by defending the copyright protections guaranteed among the first provisions of the U.S. Constitution and codified in U.S. copyright law.

At issue is Google’s recent digitization of books numbering in the millions for the benefit of the Google Library Project. Most of the books included protected visual works.  Google has negotiated a settlement with text authors and other rights holders whose work was unlawfully digitized but left thousands of visual artists without any compensation.  The Guild maintains that Google’s move sets a dangerous precedent in a digital era that has made copyright infringement a commonplace event.

“Most of the copyright infringement since the advent of the Internet has been on a relatively small scale that still robs our economy of millions of dollars every year,” Guild President and suit complainant John Schmelzer said.  “Institutionalized copyright infringement from Google not only threatens the future of an $8 billion industry, it undermines the very fabric of American culture.”

Copyright protection was among the first guarantees the American founding fathers deemed necessary for the survival and growth of a vibrant country.  Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution enumerates Congress’ top priorities and specifically orders the promotion of the useful arts by securing a creative’s exclusive right to their work.  This directive resulted in the Copyright Act that has been in force since 1790.

The Guild and dozens of other creative sister organizations have defended against numerous challenges to copyright protections for decades, but the dawn of the digital era has enabled copyright infringement to reach a level never before seen.  The music industry alone estimates that 95 percent of musical Internet downloads are pirated.  The perpetrators of these and millions of other thefts sometimes do so out of ignorance of the law, but the Google Book Search represents a cognizant violation of law on an industrial scale.

Meanwhile, the Guild recently responded to a request for commentary from Ms. Victoria A. Espinel, U.S. Intellectual Property Coordinator, about ways to strengthen intellectual property rights.  Espinel is a new executive-level appointee whose position was mandated by the Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2008.  The law signed by President George W. Bush on October 13, 2008 is intended to bolster U.S. intellectual property law. 

“On the one hand, we’re given hope the government will make intellectual property theft a top priority for law enforcement,” said Guild Executive Director, Patricia McKiernan. “On the other hand, we’re fighting in court to prevent what should be a clear violation of existing law. ”

Ms. McKiernan and the entire Guild leadership noted in their response to Ms. Espinel’s request for commentary that graphic art is used on and with virtually every product sold and service produced in the U.S.  Foreign infringers are virtually untouchable by U.S. rights holders and likely cost the U.S. economy billions in lost revenue. 

During a time of gaping deficits, the U.S. cannot afford to allow the free usurpation of cultural work that in many ways defines American life, the group contends.  It’s particularly egregious when the threat to American culture and industry comes from a domestic source like Google that’s subject to U.S. law.

Other complainants in the case include The American Society of Media Photographers (ASMP), the Picture Archive Council of America (PACA), the North American Nature Photography Association (NANPA), Professional Photographers of America (PPA),  photographers Leif Skoogfors, Al Satterwhite, Morton Beebe, Ed Kashi and illustrators John Schmelzer and Simms Taback.

 

The Guild Responds to the Administration's Request for Input.

 

 

We Changed Our Orphan Works Website Name

The Orphan Works blog, www.orphanworksnews.com, is being renamed to All Things Copyright, www.allthingscopyright.com. This allows us to keep you and everyone else updated on copyright issues as they come up. Don't worry; we'll still cover Orphan Works news on that blog as well.

 

 

The Graphic Artists Guild is Now on Twitter!

Follow us on Twitter (@gaguild) for news and updates on information important to your world.

 

Artists Deliver Letter to White House Requesting Copyright Protection

MORE THAN 11,000 ARTISTS SIGN LETTER ASKING ADMINISTRATION TO SUPPORT ARTISTS' RIGHTS
 

Washington, D.C. - A delegation of emerging artists in The Copyright Alliance's grassroots network of creators today delivered to the White House a letter signed by more than 11,000 artists nationwide. The letter asks President Obama and Vice President Biden to pursue policies supportive of artists' rights. 

The artists met with Kalpen Modi and Greg Nelson, key personnel on technology and the arts in the White House Office of Public Engagement.

"On behalf of more than 11,000 creators of all kinds and from all 50 states, we are honored to deliver this letter, which simply asks that the Administration remember the importance of creators to our culture and our economy," said Lucinda Dugger, Director of Outreach Initiatives.

"Copyright, the basic tenet that allows these artists and millions of others like them to earn a living from their work, is increasingly under attack. The goal of this effort is to remind our nation's most powerful leaders that creativity and art and entertainment don't just happen. They require investment, hard work and talent."

The delegation included Chad Cameron, an illustrator from San Francisco (and Graphic Artists Guild member); Jonathan Ifergan, a musician with the band Color Radio from Chicago; Margot MacDonald, a singer/songwriter from Washington, DC; and Natalie Neckyfarow, an actress from Charlotte currently living and working in New York City. 

"These are not multimillionaires stalked bypaparazzi. Yet they are achieving success in their own ways, in anenvironment fostered by creators' rights under copyright law," saidExecutive Director Patrick Ross. "They are the faces of copyright, asampling of the more than 11 million Americans who work incopyright-related industries today. 

"The Obama Administrationrepeatedly has opened its doors to artists showcasing their talents. Weare gratified the Obama Administration has opened the White House doorsto creators concerned with copyright infringement and its toll onartists nationwide," he said.

Signers include authors,photographers, songwriters, graphic designers, filmmakers, musicians,publishers, jewelry designers, web designers, photojournalists,illustrators, video game developers, architects, cartoonists,composers, playwrights, voice actors, animators, sculptors, paintersand videographers.
   
Creative works are a key contributor toAmerica's economy.  In 2007, copyright industries in the U.S.contributed $1.52 trillion to the nation's GDP.  They employed over 11million workers and represented over 43 percent of the U.S. economy'stotal real growth between 2006 and 2007.  [Source: Copyright Industriesin the U.S. Economy, the 2003-2007 Report; Stephen E. Siwek, EconomistsInc. for the International Intellectual Property Alliance].

Complete text of the letter and signatures can be viewed at www.copyrightalliance.org/letter.

 

 

 

International Authors’ Forum Meeting Calls for International Cooperation and Communication

 

Coinciding with the 2009 IFRRO [International Federation of Reprographic Rights Organizations] Annual General Meeting in Oslo, Norway, an International Authors Forum was held in Oslo on Tuesday morning, October 20. The meeting focused on media concentration, authors’ rights and contracts. These are the very same issues the Graphic Artists Guild has promoted in the United States since its inception in 1967 and why the Guild was present at the meeting.

Speakers addressed “the growing usage of unfair contracts for authors in all parts of the world,” “the lack of opportunities for co-operation between authors groups both nationally and internationally,” and “the need for a global international organizational network representing authors.” Representatives from 60 authors and creators organizations, mostly from North America and Europe, attended.

Mats Lindberg of BUS (the Visual Arts Copyright Society in Sweden) organized the meeting, and Trond Andreassen of NFF (the Norwegian Non-fiction Writers And Translators Association). Helge Rönning of Kopinor (the Norwegian Reprographic Rights Organization) spoke on the ways in which media is concentrating in the literary field. Bernt Hugenholtz, an intellectual property attorney in the Netherlands, spoke on boiler-plate contracts used by media conglomerates and the prevalence of all-rights and work-for-hire contracts.

The group also discussed formulating an “official” position statement calling for authors and creators groups to communicate with each other and educate their membership about all-rights contracts, work collectively towards more fair contracts with publishers, and educate consumers about the importance and value of copyright to the livelihood of creative professionals.

Graphic Artists Guild National President John Schmelzer and National Advocacy Committee Chair Lisa Shaftel attended.

The group agreed to meet again next year, in conjunction with the 2010 IFRRO Annual General Meeting. The Graphic Artists Guild has been a member of IFRRO for more than a decade, and has worked with them to facilitate the rights and concerns of artists around the world.

 

 

 

Photographers File Judiciary Committee Statement

 

Philadelphia, PA… The American Society of Media Photographers (ASMP), joined by the Graphic Artists Guild, the Picture Archive Council of America, and the North American Nature Photography Association, has filed a statement for the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee hearing on “Competition and Commerce in Digital Books.” The statement, which has been added to the hearing record, represents the interests of thousands in the visual artist community.

This action follows the group’s recent objections filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The court filing was in opposition to the proposed settlement of the consolidated copyright infringement actions initiated against Google by the Authors Guild, Inc. and the Association of American Publishers, Inc. The group’s objections assert that the rights of photographers and other visual creators are virtually excluded from the proposed $125 million settlement. ASMP and the previously mentioned trade associations represent thousands of photographers, graphic artists, and other copyright owners who have joined forces to oppose the settlement.

According to ASMP Executive Director Eugene Mopsik, “We decided to take the additional step of filing our statement after studying the proceedings of the hearing as part of our continuing interest and involvement in the proposed settlement. We felt strongly that the interests of our members and the visual arts community as a whole were being disregarded.” ASMP believes that the proposed Google settlement has far-reaching consequences for the work product and livelihoods of creators of visual images.

ASMP General Counsel Victor Perlman said, “We thought it was vital to inform Congress of the important issues at stake for the vast majority of photographers and graphic artists whose works have been and continue to be digitized without authorization. And, based on the Statement of Interest filed by the Department of Justice on September 18th, we are hopeful that many of the questions we have raised will be addressed by the courts and by Congress.”

The following documents were filed by ASMP:
Statement to the House Judiciary Committee
Plaintiff’s brief
Exhibit A, Plaintiff statements of objection
Exhibit B, identifying the Plaintiff organizations
Exhibit C, original class action complaint
Exhibit D, first amended class action complaint
Exhibit E, second amended class action complaint

Founded in 1944, ASMP is the leader in promoting photographers’ rights, providing education in better business practices, producing business publications for photographers, and helping to connect purchasers with professional photographers. ASMP has 39 chapters across the country and its 7,000 members include many of the world’s foremost photographers. More information is available at www.asmp.org.

The Graphic Artists Guild promotes and protects the social, economic and professional interests of its members. More information at www.graphicartistsguild.org.

Founded in 1951, PACA, the Picture Archive Council of America, represents the vital interests of image archives of every size, from individual photographers to large corporations, who license images for commercial reproduction. PACA leads advocacy, education, and communication efforts on copyright and standard business practices that affect the image licensing industry. More information at www.pacaoffice.org.

NANPA, the North American Nature Photography Association, is the first and premiere association in North America committed solely to serving the field of nature photography. More information at www.nanpa.org.

 

Google Settlement Delayed

 

Judge Denny Chin, the judge overseeing the Google Books settlement has agreed to plaintiffs' request for a delay of the final hearing scheduled to approve the controversial settlement, which is being reworked by the parties. The American Association of Publishers and the Authors Guild asked the court to delay the final fairness hearing on the proposed agreement, which needs court approval to go ahead.

The groups requested the delay in the proceedings so they could address copyright and antitrust issues raised by the Department of Justice in a brief filed last week. It has been criticized because some say the settlement would give Google too much power to set book prices.

As a result, the settlement is in the process of being reworked, and Judge Chin agreed to give the parties more time to do so following a request from the plaintiffs filed earlier this week. "Under all the circumstances, it makes no sense to conduct a hearing on the fairness and reasonableness of the current settlement agreement, as it does not appear that the current settlement will be the operative one," Chin wrote in a letter sent to both parties.

The Graphic Artists Guild, the American Society of Media Photographers, the Picture Archive Council of America, the North American Nature Photographers Association, and distinguished photographers Joel Meyerowitz, Dan Budnik, Pete Turner and Lou Jacobs also filed on objection on September 9, 2009. Collectively, they represent the entire class of visual arts rights holders whose work was arbitrarily seized without compensation and whose legal representation was then withdrawn from the settlement process without notice. The current settlement does not cover the rights of artists or photographers.

Judge Chin has called for a "status conference" to be held on October 7, 2009 – the original date for the hearing – to determine "how to proceed with the case as expeditiously as possible.”

Google did not object to the delay.

For more information about the objection the Guild filed, see below.

Graphic Artists Guild Files Objections in Google Books Settlement

NEW YORK – The Graphic Artists Guild joined several other visual arts rights holders’ trade groups and prominent individual photographers in filing objections to the $125 million class action settlement with Google Books for copyright infringement. The papers filed with the New York District Court last Wednesday seek to deny approval of the settlement, throw out an earlier complaint that excluded artists from settlement terms and request a new legal counsel and class representative be appointed to represent the interests of those filing the objections in the matter.

Among the group’s most ardent complaints is the lack of any compensation now or in the future for most visual arts works contained within the books Google digitized without permission, the settlement’s potential to set market prices far below already depressed valuations, and the breach of fiduciary duty by class counsel.

In addition to the challenges made in the documents, Guild President John Schmelzer says that many Guild members believe Google’s “steal first, pay later” strategy is a strong-arm negotiation tactic designed to minimize cost for the Internet giant believed to be worth about $150 billion.

The group filing the documents includes the American Society of Media Photographers, the Picture Archive Council of America, the North American Nature Photographers Association and distinguished photographers Joel Meyerowitz, Dan Budnik, Pete Turner and Lou Jacobs. Collectively, they represent the entire class of visual arts rights holders whose work was arbitrarily seized without compensation and whose legal representation was then withdrawn from the settlement process without notice.

Visual arts rights holders whose work is within the digitized books had been part of the class action suit against Google since June 2006. However, when the Second Amended Complaint forming the basis of the current settlement was filed in October 2008, visual arts rights holders were suddenly and mysteriously excluded. No notice or rationale was ever provided for the abrupt alteration, which now gives province only to visual arts rights holders who are also the written authors of the book, e.g. children’s books or photography books.

The redefinition of the wronged visual arts rights holders’ class became the basis for the Guild and others to claim that current counsel had abandoned its fiduciary responsibility and to ask for different representation in the case.

Since visual arts rights holders have exactly the same copyright protections and rights as others who are party to the settlement, failure to recognize and preserve artists’ rights will do unprecedented harm to the visual arts rights holders industry’s ability to defend their rights in the future, the documents contend. The practical effect will be a de facto ceiling for compensation by infringers such as Google and others anywhere in the world. This is a dangerous precedent for individual creative people or small groups of people who already have a distinct disadvantage when bargaining with large corporate entities for fair pay.

At least 42 groups and individuals have withdrawn from, or sought to object to, the Google Books settlement that not only denies visual arts rights holders’ compensation for the initial acquisition of work, but also precludes any collection of royalties or damages for future use or theft.

The settlement provides $45 million for the establishment of a Book Rights Registry that will collect and pay revenues for the use of work of those included in the agreement. Classes not named in the settlement, such as most artists and photographers, would not be eligible for this compensation mechanism.

“After hearing the particulars of this settlement at the intellectual property conference where the agreement was announced,” Schmelzer said, “I asked the Authors Guild’s attorney whose pocket the visual artists share would be coming out of - the writers' and publishers', or Google’s, and which of the parties would we have to sue to get that share. The answer appears to be that there was no consideration given to the visual components of the copied material in the settlement. All parties should be ashamed."

“Digitizing books, especially old and out-of-print books, to provide greater access for people around the world is a noble idea. However, there are intellectual property rights involved in such an endeavor, and copyright laws were shamelessly disregarded. Google’s approach of, ‘It’s easier to beg forgiveness than to ask to permission’ is despicable,” Lisa Shaftel, the Guild’s National Advocacy Chair, said.

Schmelzer and others in the Guild suspect the entire incident has been a negotiation tactic of “steal now, pay later” in which the power of the rights owner is severely diminished from the outset. It’s difficult, if not impossible, to demand full payment for something the payer already has in their possession, which is why the group is petitioning the court for relief.

Guild Executive Director, Patricia McKiernan, said, “Infringement is a major issue for our members and all visual arts rights holders. If this agreement goes forward, the likelihood of negotiating a fair and just compensation for infringement will no longer exist. This settlement would set a precedent that would harm a vital and important class of creative authors.”

The following documents were filed by the group:

Plaintiff’s Objection Brief

Exhibit A, Plaintiff statements of objection

Exhibit B, Identifying the Plaintiff organizations

Exhibit C, Original class action complaint

Exhibit D, First amended class action complaint

Exhibit E, Second amended class action complaint

There have been a number of accounts on the Internet and elsewhere reporting that passage of Orphan Works (OW) legislation is imminent. The Guild’s contacts on the Hill are extensive and constant. We have been assured by Congressional staff that no OW bill is imminent, nor is it expected in the near future. We will continue to monitor the situation and keep you posted

 

Your Right to Unionize Is Being Jeopardized.

The Employee Free Choice Act (HR.1409 /S.560) was introduced in the 111th Congress in the Senate on March 10, 2009 by Representative George Miller (D-CA) and Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA). This federal legislation would ensure that workers have a free choice and a fair chance to form a union. The Guild continues to support this legislation, and urges members to contact their Congressional representatives in the House and Senate to support the bill.

An excellent explanation of this legislation can be found on the American Rights At Work web site.

The same bill was previously introduced in the 110th Congress in 2007, and passed the House of Representatives but failed to pass the Senate by nine votes. Click here for details on this earlier version of the legislation.

The copyright office proposes changing fees as of August 1, 2009.

Unless Congress disputes the proposed fee hikes, most fees charged by the Copyright Office will be raised. Some fees, however, will be lowered, and online registration fees will remain the same.

• VA mail-in registration currently $45; will be raised to $65.
• Recordation of a document, including a transfer of copyright and a notice of termination (single title) currently $95; will be raised to $105.
• Additional titles (per group of 10 or fewer titles) currently $25; will be raised to $30.
• Online registration of published works with mail submission of deposit copy will increase to $50.
• Additional certificate of registration currently $40; will be lowered to $35.
• VA online registration will remain at $35.

Complete information can be found on the U.S. Copyright Office Web site at http://www.copyright.gov/docs/fees.html.

ALERT – Read this before you work with Simon & Schuster.

Perpetuity Contracts – DO NOT SIGN contracts with Simon and Schuster granting all rights in perpetuity until you learn about the repercussions. Click here for more info.

When you register your work with the Copyright Office…

Save money by registering online with eCO; online registration fee for VA is $35. Mail-in registration fee for VA is $45. The Copyright Office will be phasing out paper registration forms mailed to you from the Copyright Office, and forms will only be available as a PDF download. When you print out the PDF form on the Copyright Office web site, print it on both sides of one sheet of paper, not as two one-sided sheets. The Copyright Office has been rejecting Registration Forms printed on two sheets.

The Copyright Office doesn’t save the deposit copy of your work with your registration forever. When you request a duplicate of your copyright registration certificate, they provide only the certificate. Always save a hard copy of the image you register with the paper registration certificate!