UK Copyright - government theft?

After a late-night debate yesterday, the Digital Economy Bill in its new form continues to represent a threat to photographers as the House of Lords failed to strike out the controversial subsection 116B that gives power to the Secretary of State to transfer a property right - the right to copy - from one person to another without the owner's consent

Now it's not quite as simple as that, because the bill requires a search for the copyright owner.
Sorry, we looked in the cupboard under the stairs and couldn't find them - can we have rights to the photo now?
There is a chance the bill might still be amended, but it's not looking promising.

In the past few years it seems like photographers are getting the shaft in the biggest way in the UK. I wish we could boycott. Photography is such an important commercial skill and service and the people who are best at it are so taken for granted and abused. Imagine if a boycott was possible and there was absolutely no photography in the UK (or any other place that gave photographers too much trouble.) Unfortunately that's not going to happen. Even if the pros boycotted, a whole bunch of amateurs would take advantage to take up the slack.

It's a changing world, friends.

This article at copyrightaction.com "The Digital Economy Bill : what's yours is ours" and "The ICO code : put that camera away, my face is private" conflates the issue of what is "private data" which is the purview of the Information Commissioner which usually protects stored information enforcing the Data Protection Act.

You're right about the amateurs taking up the slack.
The problem is they will be ousted by the mob who will do it for free just to get their photo in print.

Anyone capable of seeing lightning and hearing thunder can take a photograph.
Where there's no requirement for creativity or artistic input, the improvements in P&S technology, intelligent auto, larger sensors, less noise.
You don't even need a dSLR any more - how does that affect the photography market?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SmartWombat

This article at copyrightaction.com "The Digital Economy Bill : what's yours is ours" and "The ICO code : put that camera away, my face is private" conflates the issue of what is "private data" which is the purview of the Information Commissioner which usually protects stored information enforcing the Data Protection Act.

You're right about the amateurs taking up the slack.
The problem is they will be ousted by the mob who will do it for free just to get their photo in print.

Anyone capable of seeing lightning and hearing thunder can take a photograph.
Where there's no requirement for creativity or artistic input, the improvements in P&S technology, intelligent auto, larger sensors, less noise.
You don't even need a dSLR any more - how does that affect the photography market?

---

There's a lot of topics for discussion built in to this topic! I know I've seen some very serious business changes in the past two years and the market has grown but the producers of the original work are making significantly less per item than they did 5 or more years past.

I felt that photography was evolving into a volume market, quality be damned, many years ago.

Paul we might want to start a couple of Open Letters in Viewfinder or elsewhere on this and some other topics.

I've been thinking about one called The Digital Divide about revolutionary change that every few months in digital photography is bringing just technically!

I like that comment about light and thunder.