Orphaned books

[latepaul]

Originally Posted by rkomar

What is a "license fee"?

A fee you pay in order to license the work for use. The exact amount depends on what type of work and for what use. They don't list the costs on the website but they say in most cases you'll get an estimate during the online application process.

Is there a set percentage of the retail price that is set aside?

I don't know. See above. A lot of the examples seem to be of individual use. e.g. putting on a play where you can't find the author, or derived works, using a photograph or a clip of audio, not re-publishing.

This seems to be a law well-suited to big corporations, who can more easily defer the fees for eight years before claiming them.

I'm not sure why you're talking about deferring the fees. Why would it be in the interest of the rights owner to defer? Or maybe you misread it? You don't have to wait 8 years that's just the maximum time the fees are held for. Indeed you can come forward at any which could be between the time the license was applied for and it being accepted/rejected, in which case it would automatically be rejected and the situation would default to normal.

I would also suspect that it is easier for them to convince the administration that all efforts were made to search for the copyright holder. It seems like a law meant to placate those championing the opening up of orphaned works, while providing the "frictions" that allow the big IP companies to keep control of the market.

Well first, it definitely isn't a trivial thing, it's meant to be a compromise between allowing access to the work and making sure the rights owners, if traceable are given a fair chance to profit from their work based on the existing copyright rules. It's not intended to be a "I couldn't find Joe Bloggs in the phone book so is it ok to copy his novel?". So yes there is some friction.

Second based on what's in the register I don't think "big IP companies" are swooping in and appyling for licenses on lots of works.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by latepaul

A fee you pay in order to license the work for use. The exact amount depends on what type of work and for what use. They don't list the costs on the website but they say in most cases you'll get an estimate during the online application process.



I don't know. See above. A lot of the examples seem to be of individual use. e.g. putting on a play where you can't find the author, or derived works, using a photograph or a clip of audio, not re-publishing.



I'm not sure why you're talking about deferring the fees. Why would it be in the interest of the rights owner to defer? Or maybe you misread it? You don't have to wait 8 years that's just the maximum time the fees are held for. Indeed you can come forward at any which could be between the time the license was applied for and it being accepted/rejected, in which case it would automatically be rejected and the situation would default to normal.



Well first, it definitely isn't a trivial thing, it's meant to be a compromise between allowing access to the work and making sure the rights owners, if traceable are given a fair chance to profit from their work based on the existing copyright rules. It's not intended to be a "I couldn't find Joe Bloggs in the phone book so is it ok to copy his novel?". So yes there is some friction.

Second based on what's in the register I don't think "big IP companies" are swooping in and appyling for licenses on lots of works.

Pretty much by definition there isn't much money to be made with orphaned works. There might be the exception that proves the rule, but mostly we are talking about books that tend to be slightly obscure.

[pdurrant]

Also, note that the amount held in trust for any rights holders will only be the amount of the agreed fee, not the total profit from sales of the book.

[4691mls]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

So? In every other occupation, your family gets nothing after you die, why should being an author be different?

In many types of work, the person doing the work gets paid immediately and in full for the work that was done. The funds can therefore be used right away to feed the worker's kids, send the kids to college, set up a trust fund for them to inherit, or whatever.

Payment for a writer's work may be spread out over many years. Should the writer's kids not be able to receive the full benefit of their parent's work because the money came in over time instead of all at once?

I do think there should be some time limit on copyright - a while back we had a long thread discussing it and opinions on the proper length were all over the place. https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sh...ight=copyright

[mbovenka]

Originally Posted by 4691mls

Payment for a writer's work may be spread out over many years. Should the writer's kids not be able to receive the full benefit of their parent's work because the money came in over time instead of all at once?

Date of first publication + 50 or life, whichever is longer. Or something like it.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by mbovenka

Date of first publication + 50 or life, whichever is longer. Or something like it.

The old US system of a copyright term of 28 years, renewable once for an additional 28 years seemed and still seems reasonable to me. Perhaps a tad longer than ideal, but fair enough to all parties including the public.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by issybird

The old US system of a copyright term of 28 years, renewable once for an additional 28 years seemed and still seems reasonable to me. Perhaps a tad longer than ideal, but fair enough to all parties including the public.

I would do it as 28 years from publish if the author is dead. If the author dies and the the book has been out more then 28 years, it goes into the PD. If the author dies before 28 years have passed, then when 28 years has passed, the book goes into PD. Yes this can give us 28 years or more, but nothing unreasonable. And the House of Mouse would be PD now.

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by 4691mls

In many types of work, the person doing the work gets paid immediately and in full for the work that was done. The funds can therefore be used right away to feed the worker's kids, send the kids to college, set up a trust fund for them to inherit, or whatever.

Payment for a writer's work may be spread out over many years. Should the writer's kids not be able to receive the full benefit of their parent's work because the money came in over time instead of all at once?

I do think there should be some time limit on copyright - a while back we had a long thread discussing it and opinions on the proper length were all over the place. https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sh...ight=copyright

The vast majority of professional authors get paid most of their money upfront. It's only the few books that earn out where the author gets royalties. Up until fairly recently, most fiction writers got paid by the word from newspapers or magazines. Money they got for the actual books was all gravy.

[rkomar]

Maybe I misunderstood the documents, but it looked like there was a one-time fee for the license, as well as a per book fee that is collected and held in case a legitimate rights holder appears. I was under the impression that the per book fee would be returned after eight years along with the one-time fee. Is that not true? Does the administration get to keep the per book fee if there is no rights holder?

I was also not trying to imply that the big IP corporations were republishing orphaned works. Instead, I meant that the "friction" keeping orphaned works out of the market was good for the big corporations because it meant less competition for them.

[Quoth]

Google seems to think they get to decide what is an Orphan work.

[crossi]

I object to the government providing a service to a business (the writer and the publisher both) for free. There ought to be a yearly fee for that service. I'm not talking huge amounts here, just the cost of a latte each year. If it's not worth $5 to the rights holder they must not value it much. For things like diaries that someone doesn't want published at all keep it private like your bank statements. That's what safety deposit boxes are for. If someone gets a hold of it don't worry about copyright infringement charge them with burglary and breaking and entering. Or burn it.

[Hellmark]

I've always been of a mindset that copyright should last the life of the author, and perhaps a small period after to help settle affairs of the estate (that way pending royalty payments at the time of death and such would go to the estate). I do believe that copyright should help further creation, so, let it help them create for as long as they can.