Can't do anything about that since I'm a Canuck. However, Bill C-10 comes under my jurisdiction to complain about, and I damn well hope the Senate is going to bring it down! Sure, there's plenty of films and TV shows that I don't like, but I'm hell-bent against censorship!

I should add my favorite quote about freedom of speech:

"I might not agree with what you're saying, but I'll fight for your right to say it!"

I think it's important though that people do some research and understand not only what the real goal of the Orphan Works is, but also that congress have voted it down twice before and they have yet to be presented with any sort of new revision of it (by my understanding at least). If the scope of what they want it to work for was changed and ensured that people could claim fair payment after discovering their work had been used as an "orphan," as well as protecting parallel development, I would have no problem with it myself.

--
I'm trying to join =Org-infinity Hope I can get in!
Member of *COC--Club
"Write something down every day" - Erick Wujcik

Please critique my work! I want to improve! [link]

Two problems:

"Reasonable compensation" is an ambiguity that at best represents something like fair-market value.

Fair-market value will plummet because contractors will no longer have to hire look-a-likes/sound-a-likes or even hire someone at all. The market will be flooded with a free-for-all for content.

Two more problems:

I create art that I don't want people to sell.

"Reasonable attempts to contact" the creator is another ambiguity that is extremely troublesome.


The system is easily abused by someone claiming to have emailed the creator and the creator can't stop the contractor from using their work.

2 Major problems probably bigger than what you're even mentioning, as valid as they may be:

1) There is no mention of a penalty for "kidnapping" work. By that I would mean someone intentionally removing, covering, or otherwise defacing a signature, watermark, or other identifier, thus forcibly making the work considered an orphan. Such an act or use of work knowing that it has been defaced should not be protected from normal lawsuits for use of the work.

2) Personal photography people have, especially on personal websites and image hosters like photobucket, do not usually have signatures or watermarks, and as these are personal photos and not intended for artistic use, the majority of people would not think to leave an identifier or contact on it. As such, most personal photography would be considered orphans. This raises a big issue, not just about fair compensation, but about invasion of privacy. I'm sure no one wants to see their personal photographs as the image placed in wallets and picture frames in stores.

--
I'm trying to join =Org-infinity Hope I can get in!
Member of *COC--Club
"Write something down every day" - Erick Wujcik

Please critique my work! I want to improve! [link]

No matter how devistatingly handsome you may be.