Orphan works in the United States

Last updated
Seal of the United States Copyright Office US-CopyrightOffice-Seal.svg
Seal of the United States Copyright Office

An orphan work is a work whose copyright owner is impossible to identify or contact. [1] This inability to request permission from the copyright owner often means orphan works cannot be used in new works or digitized, except when fair use exceptions apply. Until recently, public libraries could not digitize orphaned books without risking being fined up to $150,000 if the owner of the copyright were to come forward. [2] This problem was briefly addressed in the 2011 case Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, but the settlement in that case was later overturned.

Contents

History

The orphan works problem arose in the United States from the Copyright Act of 1976, which eliminated the need to register copyrighted works. Instead, according to 17 U.S.C.   § 102, all "original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression" [3] are automatically granted copyright protection. This Act made obtaining and maintaining copyright protection substantially easier than the previous Copyright Act of 1909. It also made unnecessary any central recording system to track and identify copyright-holders, but also made it difficult to find or contact the creator of a copyrighted work if the person or organization was not readily known. Thus, any use of the orphaned work outside of what is permitted as fair use is potentially a violation of copyright. Potential users of orphaned works are often not willing to take on that risk of copyright violation, so they may individually investigate the copyright status of each work they plan to use. [2]

To some, this scenario is not in the public interest; it limits works that are available to the public. It also discourages the creation of new works that incorporate existing works. Creators who want to use an orphan work are often unwilling to do so for fear that they will have to pay a huge amount of money in damages if the owner ever appears; the risk of additional liability or litigation may be too high. This makes the work of historians, archivists, artists, scholars, and publishers at times more difficult and costly than necessary. [4] The issue arises in Wikipedia, where the copyright owner of a photo that would have illustrated an article may be unknown.

Libraries and archives do have limited privileges to make copies of certain orphan works under section H of 17 U.S.C.   § 108.

In January 2006, the United States Copyright Office released a report on orphan works. [1] This report was the culmination of a year-long study conducted by the office, based on open forums from the public to collect input. [5]

In it, the Copyright Office states that new legislation is desperately needed to address the orphan works problem. The report proposed that if a nonprofit organization such as a library used an orphan work and the copyright owner came forward, then the library would be exempt from huge copyright infringement fines as long as it stopped using the orphan work right away. Commercial uses of an orphan work in which the owner came forward would only be charged a "reasonable compensation" [1] of the profits, and use of the work would be allowed to continue. [6]

The Office's proposed solution was criticized from both sides. Some academics thought that it favored publishers, and disfavored archivists and scholars. [6] Authors objected that the definition of orphan works would include many works that are being actively exploited, and would deprive authors of income from those works. [7]

In June 2015, another report was released focusing on orphan works and mass digitization. [8]

Orphan works legislation

Beginning in May 2006, various legislative bills have been introduced in Congress aimed at addressing the issue of orphan works. [9] As of 2016, Congress has not yet passed any legislation. [10]

In 2018, the Music Modernization Act established a framework for orphan work sound recordings to be used: the user must submit the orphan work to the United States Copyright Office, at which point any copyright holder will be given 90 days to come forward and object to its use. If no rights holder emerges, or if the user successfully establishes the use is a noncommercial fair use of the recording, the recording may be used freely. [11]

Attempts to make orphan works available

The University of Michigan (UM) is leading the HathiTrust orphan works project, [12] an initiative to make orphan works published between 1923 and 1963 on HathiTrust available to the UM community. [13] However, the project was put on hold as of September 2011 in the wake of a lawsuit filed against HathiTrust, UM, and four other member universities by the Authors Guild, Australian and Canadian authors' organizations, and eight authors to stop them from "reproducing, distributing and/or displaying" copyrighted works. [14] This case was settled in HathiTrust's favor in Authors Guild, Inc. v. HathiTrust on January 6, 2015.

The Internet Archive in October 2017 started making available online some orphan works published between 1923 and 1941 inclusive, forming a collection called the "Sonny Bono memorial" (after Sonny Bono, an entertainer and advocate for perpetual copyright for whom the Copyright Term Extension Act was named). [15] The effort is made possible by 17 U.S.C. § 108(h) when applied according to some actionable criteria proposed by scholars. [16]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright</span> Legal concept regulating rights of a creative work

A copyright is a type of intellectual property that gives its owner the exclusive legal right to copy, distribute, adapt, display, and perform a creative work, usually for a limited time. The creative work may be in a literary, artistic, educational, or musical form. Copyright is intended to protect the original expression of an idea in the form of a creative work, but not the idea itself. A copyright is subject to limitations based on public interest considerations, such as the fair use doctrine in the United States and fair dealings doctrine in the United Kingdom.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fair use</span> Concept in United States copyright law

Fair use is a doctrine in United States law that permits limited use of copyrighted material without having to first acquire permission from the copyright holder. Fair use is one of the limitations to copyright intended to balance the interests of copyright holders with the public interest in the wider distribution and use of creative works by allowing as a defense to copyright infringement claims certain limited uses that might otherwise be considered infringement. The U.S. "fair use doctrine" is generally broader than the "fair dealing" rights known in most countries that inherited English Common Law. The fair use right is a general exception that applies to all different kinds of uses with all types of works. In the U.S., fair use right/exception is based on a flexible proportionality test that examines the purpose of the use, the amount used, and the impact on the market of the original work.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Publication</span> Content made available to the general public

To publish is to make content available to the general public. While specific use of the term may vary among countries, it is usually applied to text, images, or other audio-visual content, including paper. Publication means the act of publishing, and also any copies issued for public distribution.

A work of the United States government is defined by the United States copyright law, as "a work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person's official duties". Under section 105 of the Copyright Act of 1976, such works are not entitled to domestic copyright protection under U.S. law and are therefore in the public domain.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Orphan work</span> Copyright-protected work for which rightsholders are positively indeterminate

An orphan work is a copyright-protected work for which rightsholders are positively indeterminate or uncontactable. Sometimes the names of the originators or rightsholders are known, yet it is impossible to contact them because additional details cannot be found. A work can become orphaned through rightsholders being unaware of their holding, or by their demise and establishing inheritance has proved impracticable. In other cases, comprehensively diligent research fails to determine any authors, creators or originators for a work. Since 1989, the amount of orphan works in the United States has increased dramatically since some works are published anonymously, assignments of rights are not required to be disclosed publicly, and registration is optional. As a result, many works' statuses with respect to who holds which rights remain unknown to the public even when those rights are being actively exploited by authors or other rightsholders.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Google Books</span> Service from Google

Google Books is a service from Google that searches the full text of books and magazines that Google has scanned, converted to text using optical character recognition (OCR), and stored in its digital database. Books are provided either by publishers and authors through the Google Books Partner Program, or by Google's library partners through the Library Project. Additionally, Google has partnered with a number of magazine publishers to digitize their archives.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Uruguay Round Agreements Act</span> US free trade law with implications for intellectual property

The Uruguay Round Agreements Act is an Act of Congress in the United States that implemented in U.S. law the Marrakesh Agreement of 1994. The Marrakesh Agreement was part of the Uruguay Round of negotiations which transformed the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) into the World Trade Organization (WTO). One of its effects is to give United States copyright protection to foreign works that had previously been in the public domain in the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988</span> United Kingdom law

The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, also known as the CDPA, is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that received royal assent on 15 November 1988. It reformulates almost completely the statutory basis of copyright law in the United Kingdom, which had, until then, been governed by the Copyright Act 1956 (c. 74). It also creates an unregistered design right, and contains a number of modifications to the law of the United Kingdom on Registered Designs and patents.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright notice</span> Notice to inform consumers of claimed copyright ownership

In the United States copyright law, a copyright notice is a notice of statutorily prescribed form that informs users of the underlying claim to copyright ownership in a published work.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright Renewal Act of 1992</span> United States copyright law

Copyright Renewal Act of 1992, Pub. L.Tooltip Public Law  102–307, 106 Stat. 264, enacted June 26, 1992, is the first title of the Copyright Amendments Act of 1992, an act of the United States Congress that amended copyright renewal provisions of Title 17 of the United States Code enacted under Copyright Act of 1976. The act eliminated the previous requirements under US law that a second term of copyright protection is contingent on a renewal registration with the U.S. Copyright Office. It amended the Copyright Act of 1976.

HathiTrust Digital Library is a large-scale collaborative repository of digital content from research libraries including content digitized via Google Books and the Internet Archive digitization initiatives, as well as content digitized locally by libraries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright Term Extension Act</span> United States copyright law

The Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act – also known as the Copyright Term Extension Act, Sonny Bono Act, or (derisively) the Mickey Mouse Protection Act – extended copyright terms in the United States in 1998. It is one of several acts extending the terms of copyright.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright Act of 1976</span> United States law

The Copyright Act of 1976 is a United States copyright law and remains the primary basis of copyright law in the United States, as amended by several later enacted copyright provisions. The Act spells out the basic rights of copyright holders, codified the doctrine of "fair use", and for most new copyrights adopted a unitary term based on the date of the author's death rather than the prior scheme of fixed initial and renewal terms. It became Public Law number 94-553 on October 19, 1976, and went into effect on January 1, 1978.

The copyright law of the United States grants monopoly protection for "original works of authorship". With the stated purpose to promote art and culture, copyright law assigns a set of exclusive rights to authors: to make and sell copies of their works, to create derivative works, and to perform or display their works publicly. These exclusive rights are subject to a time and generally expire 70 years after the author's death or 95 years after publication. In the United States, works published before January 1, 1929, are in the public domain.

<i>Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc.</i> U.S. copyright law case, 2015

Authors Guild v. Google 804 F.3d 202 was a copyright case heard in federal court for the Southern District of New York, and then the Second Circuit Court of Appeals between 2005 and 2015. It concerned fair use in copyright law and the transformation of printed copyrighted books into an online searchable database through scanning and digitization. It centered on the legality of the Google Book Search Library Partner project that had been launched in 2003.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Public domain in the United States</span>

Works are in the public domain if they are not covered by the intellectual property right known as copyright, or if the intellectual property rights to the works have expired. Works automatically enter the public domain when their copyright has expired. The United States Copyright Office is a federal agency tasked with maintaining copyright records.

<i>Authors Guild, Inc. v. HathiTrust</i> American legal case

Authors Guild v. HathiTrust, 755 F.3d 87, is a United States copyright decision finding search and accessibility uses of digitized books to be fair use.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Recording Preservation Plan</span>

The National Recording Preservation Plan is a strategic guide for the preservation of sound recordings in the United States. It was published in December 2012 by the Council on Library and Information Resources (CLIR) and the National Recording Preservation Board of the Library of Congress. The plan was written by a community of specialists, but is prominently credited to Brenda Nelson-Strauss, Alan Gevinson and Sam Brylawski

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Orphan Works Directive</span>

Directive 2012/28/EU is a directive of the European Parliament and European Council enacted on 25 October 2012 that pertains to certain uses of orphan works. Hence it is often referred to as the Orphan Works Directive (OWD).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act of 2020</span> United States law on copyright remedies

The Copyright Alternative in Small-Claims Enforcement Act of 2020 is a United States law that establishes a small claims court–type system within the United States Copyright Office, known as the Copyright Claims Board (CCB), for copyright owners to seek damages under US$30,000 for copyright violations.

References

  1. 1 2 3 United States Copyright Office (2006). "Report on Orphan Works" (PDF). Register of Copyrights.
  2. 1 2 Varian, Hal (31 May 2007). "Copyrights That No One Knows About Don't Help Anyone". New York Times. Retrieved 22 October 2012.
  3. ↑ 17 U.S.C. 102.
  4. ↑ "Orphan Works". Center for the Study of the Public Domain. Duke University. Archived from the original on 2016-03-17. Retrieved 2012-10-18.
  5. ↑ Keeley, Joe. "Efforts by the U.S. Copyright Office". OrphanWorks.net. Retrieved 22 October 2012.[ permanent dead link ]
  6. 1 2 Foster, Andrea. "Copyright Office Sides With Publishers in Proposal for Handling 'Orphan' Works". The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved 22 October 2012.
  7. ↑ "Orphan Works and Extended Collective Licensing (ECL)". National Writers Union. 22 July 2015. Retrieved 25 February 2021.
  8. ↑ "Orphan Works and Mass Digitization" (PDF). copyright.gov. June 2015. Archived from the original (PDF) on March 20, 2023. Retrieved April 5, 2023.
  9. ↑ "Copyright: Orphan Works". American Library Association. August 2006. Archived from the original on 2006-11-25. Retrieved 2006-11-28.
  10. ↑ "United States Copyright Office".
  11. ↑ Stoltz, Mitch (19 September 2018). "The New Music Modernization Act Has a Major Fix: Older Recordings Will Belong to the Public, Orphan Recordings Will Be Heard Again".
  12. ↑ orphanworks.hathitrust.org
  13. ↑ David Rapp. "HathiTrust Orphan Works Project Grows as University of California, Others Join Up". Library Journal. Archived from the original on 10 June 2012. Retrieved 12 November 2012.
  14. ↑ David Rapp. "University of Michigan Puts HathiTrust Orphan Works Project on Hold". Library Journal. Archived from the original on 17 October 2012. Retrieved 12 November 2012.
  15. ↑ "Books from 1923 to 1941 Now Liberated!". blog.archive.org. Internet Archive Blogs. 10 October 2017. Retrieved 2017-10-14.
  16. ↑ Gard, Townsend; Elizabeth (2017-10-02). "Creating a Last Twenty (L20) Collection: Implementing Section 108(H) in Libraries, Archives and Museums". Rochester, NY. SSRN   3049158.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.