Pandora’s Box of sorts
was opened by the United Kingdom in the form of the “Enterprise and
Regulatory Reform Act” receiving Royal Assent for consideration as a law. Andrew
Orlowski, Executive Editor of the “Register”, a British technology news and
opinion website, dubbed it as the “Instagram Act“, and entitled it with the
phrase, “all your pics belong to everyone now”.
The clause raising
hackles is the “Orphan Works and Extended Collective Licensing Clause 77”, which
basically allows granting of licenses for orphaned works allowing any act with them that would otherwise be restricted by
copyright and require the consent of the missing owner. The jury is out on
the definition of orphaned work which the act describes as – content
who’s “owner of copyright in it has not been
found after a diligent search made in accordance with the regulations.” The publisher
can obtain a non–exclusive license in respect of a work if after a
"diligent search" they can demonstrate to an independent body that
the owner cannot be traced. A fee would then be payable which would be used to
reimburse the owner if they later made a claim. But as they say, the devil is
in the details. Let’s review the article of the now famous “Instagram Act” and
its implications on social media including second life and a rethink whether
this is a Shakespearean “Much Ado About
Nothing” or is there true merit to the vociferous opposition.
A look at the Act
Posts
