User:Vijwiki/draft

An orphan work is a copyright work where it is difficult or impossible to identify or contact the copyright owner in order for one to make use of that work in a way that requires permission of the copyright owner.

Orphan works
The "orphan works" problem arose in the United States with the enactment of the Copyright Act of 1976, which eliminated the need to register copyrighted works, instead declaring that all "original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression" fall into copyright status. The elimination of registration also eliminated a central recording location to track and identify copyright-holders. Consequently, potential users of copyrighted works, e.g., filmmakers or biographers, must assume that many works they might use are copyrighted. Where the planned use would not be otherwise permitted by law (for example, by fair use), they must themselves individually investigate the copyright status of each work they plan to use. With no central database of copyright-holders, identifying and contacting copyright-holders can sometimes be difficult; those works that fall into this category may be considered "orphaned". The central concern with this issue is that many users of copyrighted works indicate that the risk of liability of copyright infringement, however remote, is sufficient to prompt them to not use the work. This outcome is not in the public interest. The works cannot be made publically available due to the uncertainty over its copyright ownership and status even when there is a living or legal entity claiming ownership of the copyright material. There is also the concern that the economic incentive to create may be harmed because the imposition of additional costs on creators exists as they wish to use existing work material. The risk of additional liability or litigation maybe too high. 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.

Libraries and archives have limited privileges to make copies of certain orphan works under 17 USC 108(h)(1).

Copyright Office study
In January 2006, the United States Copyright Office released a report on orphan works after researching the issue. The situation in the US is a result of the omnibus revision to the Copyright Act in 1976. Specifically, the 1976 Act made obtaining and maintaining copyright protection substantially easier than the 1909 Act. Copyrighted works are now protected the moment they are fixed in a tangible medium of expression, and do not need to be registered with the Copyright Office. Also, the 1976 Act changed the basic term of copyright from a term of fixed years from publication to a term of life of the author plus 50 (now 70) years. In so doing, the requirement that a copyright owner file a renewal registration in the 28th year of the term of copyright was essentially eliminated.

The Office noted that these changes were important steps toward the United States’ accession to the Berne Convention, which prohibits formalities like registration and renewal as a condition on the enjoyment and exercise of copyright. Moreover, there was substantial evidence presented during consideration of the 1976 Act that the formalities such as renewal and notice, when combined with drastic penalties like forfeiture of copyright, served as a “trap for the unwary” and caused the loss of many valuable copyrights. The Copyright Office found that these changes exacerbated the problem of orphan works: a potential user generally must assume that a work one wishes to use is subject to copyright protection, but without the Copyright Office's renewal registration records, cannot ascertain whether the work is still copyrighted or in the public domain.

Marybeth Peters, Register of Copyrights, offered recommendations based on the report. She argues for legislation to address the orphan works problem. She describes that the ultimate goal of the legislation is where good-faith users of copyrighted content can actually move forward with their work when they cannot locate a copyright owner after a long search. She notes that the orphan works problem is pervasive; affecting filmmakers, museum libraries, universities, and the general public. She used an example of a US Holocaust Museum’s congressional testimony where millions of pages of archival documents, photographs, and oral histories they cannot publish or digitize. Her advocacy centers how legislation must address this issue.

The report did recommended that the focus on developing legislative text to address orphan works should not obscure the fact that the Copyright Act and the market place for copyrighted works provide several alternatives to a user who is frustrated by the orphan works situation. Indeed, assessing whether the situations described to use in the comments were true “orphan works” situations was difficult, in part because there is often more than meets the eye in a circumstance presented as an “orphan works” problem. In most cases a user may have a real choice among several alternatives that allow them to go forward with their project that uses a work. This user can make non-infringing use of the work, such as by copying only elements not covered by copyright; making fair use; seeking a substitute work for which they have permission to use; or a combination of these alternatives. Even though some orphan works situations may be addressed by existing copyright law as described above, many are not.

The Copyright office has recommended new legislation which sets out limitations on the remedies that would be available if the user proves that they have conducted a reasonably diligent search and describes a threshold of requirements of a reasonably diligent search. Such a solution would fall short of releasing orphan works into the public domain, like the previous bill, but rather encourage prospective licensors to go ahead with an infringing project knowing in advance the maximum remedy they could be faced with.

Orphan Works Legislation
There are currently no orphan works legislation pending before Congress. Beginning in May 2006, various legislative bills have been introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives aimed at addressing the issue of orphan works by providing limitations of remedies in cases in which the copyright holder cannot be located. As of 2012, none have been passed by vote of the U.S. House of Representatives.

On April 24, 2008, a Senate bill was introduced to Congress. The full text of the Senate version of the 2008 Orphan Works bill (S.2913) is now available and Vermont Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy's introduction of the bill has been posted on his Senate website.

An important aspect of the bill is found in Section 3 which introduces the idea of a Database of Pictorial, Graphic, and Sculptural Works and states:

The Copyright Office must create and undertake a certification process for the establishment of electronic databases of visual works. Certain requirements for any such registry are prescribed. The Copyright Office will post a list of all certified registries on the Internet.

A similar bill (H.R. 5889) was also introduced in the House, which also called for a database of pictorial, graphic and sculptural works.

H.R. 5889, the Orphan Works Act of 2008, was introduced on April 24, 2008 by three Members of the U.S. House of Representatives overseeing intellectual property legislation.

The 2008 legislation permitted limiting different forms of legal remedies, for example levying no statutory damages or attorneys fees, to be imposed against the user of a copyrighted work. However, the following conditions must apply:
 * The user undertook a diligent and good faith search to locate the owner of the work yet could not find him or her
 * When using the work, the user identified a locatable owner as much as possible.
 * If an owner appears and demands the stop of the use of their work, the user stops use, with certain case by case exceptions.
 * The user acted in good faith in searching for and negotiating with the owner on a reasonable royalty for use
 * Paying back royalties for the use on a “willing seller, willing buyer” standard if the use of the work was commercial in nature and satisfied certain categories of uses

Unlike previously introduced bills, the 2008 legislation included the following:
 * A delayed effective date until the earlier of 2013 or the date on which the Register of Copyrights certifies two databases that can be used to search for pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works for these works - it is now 2013 in the 2008 passed Senate version as well)
 * A study of the copyright registration deposit system by the Governmental Accountability Office
 * A requirement for users to file an advance notice of use with the Copyright Office
 * A requirement that uses of orphan works be identified with a special symbol to be created by the Copyright Office
 * Allowing a judge to award extra compensation to the appropriate user if a work was indeed registered

H.R. 5439, the Orphan Works Act of 2006, was introduced by the House Judiciary Committee Intellectual Property Subcommittee Chairman Lamar Smith of Texas on May 22, 2006. A sizable portion of the text was adopted by recommendations from the Copyright Office.

The 2008 House bill carried the same conditions for the appropriate use of a copyrighted work in this circumstance.

The Senate 2008 bill S. 2913, also known as the Shawn Bentley Orphan Works Act of 2008, was introduced on April 24, 2008 by current Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy of Vermont and former Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch.

On May 15, 2008, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to report the bill to the full Senate after adopting an amendment. The bill was now in the position to be voted on the floor of the Senate. The Senate went on to pass S. 2913 on September 26, 2008 by a voice vote under unanimous consent procedures. No Senator objected to the legislation’s passage.

Similar to H.R. 5439, the 2008 legislation carried the same conditions for appropriate use of a copyrighted work.

The House and the Senate never agreed on a final version of the bill, which thus never reached a vote in the House of Representatives and was killed.