Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: A proposal for the avoidance of orphan works  (Read 2143 times)
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« on: December 06, 2010, 08:35:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Perhaps this will stir up some interesting ideas and discussion:
http://www.graham-mitchell.com/blog/?p=221
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
KLaban
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1743



WWW
« Reply #1 on: December 06, 2010, 03:32:20 PM »
ReplyReply

Graham

I've used TinEye on many occasions and have identified many copyright infringements; it's a very useful tool. You are right, the technology does exist, but whether in practice it could ever be used to cover more than a fraction of the images out there remains to be seen.

The fight against Orphan Works legislation is on-going but sadly at times feels rather like banging one's head against a brick wall.

For those who are interested the following link to 'Pro Imaging' gives an insight into the struggle.

http://www.pro-imaging.org/content/view/618/234/

    
« Last Edit: December 06, 2010, 03:34:12 PM by KLaban » Logged

feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #2 on: December 06, 2010, 03:50:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Perhaps this will stir up some interesting ideas and discussion:
http://www.graham-mitchell.com/blog/?p=221


Your proposal sounds like an extension of what TinEye already does. Financing the building, hosting and bandwidth for such a gargantuan database is a non-trivial task, though, and probably the biggest obstacle. Also, authenticating the original submitter of each and every photo is actually the copyright holder will get complicated (read: expensive), especially in a global legal sphere.

Moore's Law might make the technical side financially feasible in the foreseeable future, depending on how the service would get financed (ads, contributions, submission/usage fees, etc.).
Logged

Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 06, 2010, 04:02:32 PM »
ReplyReply

Actually it seems that a similar proposal has already been made and taken much further:
http://www.stop43.org.uk/new_thinking/new_thinking/national_cultural_archive.html
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 06, 2010, 04:33:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Your proposal sounds like an extension of what TinEye already does. Financing the building, hosting and bandwidth for such a gargantuan database is a non-trivial task,

It's big, but not beyond what already exists. There are already databases in the petabytes region. 1 petabyte can hold 10 billion 100kB images.

Also, authenticating the original submitter of each and every photo is actually the copyright holder will get complicated (read: expensive), especially in a global legal sphere.

Again I don't see this as an issue. A pro photographer will tend to have the raw file, and other shots from the session which were never published, not to mention they can usually prove they were at the location, they can name the location, they can name the models, etc How often do you hear of anyone pretending to be the photographer of an image and selling usage of it? I've never heard of it happening. By making false submissions a statutory offence, people are very unlikely to bother.
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
feppe
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2909

Oh this shows up in here!


WWW
« Reply #5 on: December 06, 2010, 06:57:33 PM »
ReplyReply

It's big, but not beyond what already exists. There are already databases in the petabytes region. 1 petabyte can hold 10 billion 100kB images.

The point was not that it can't be done; it certainly can and Google and MS already have such gargantuan databases. But Flickr alone has over 5 billion images. My point was that it's very expensive to setup and maintain. I'm talking Fortune 50 company resources here. Datacenter with "just" 1 petabyte costs in the millions in storage hardware alone - add to that setup, software development, maintenance, cooling, security, electricity, etc.

Not sure how TinEye works, but there's certainly a lot of raw CPU power at their datacenters to do the pattern matching on all those images since they don't do bit-by-bit matching - again adding to the cost. We're talking a big warehouse full of cutting edge hardware and software ran by an army of specialized engineers.

If there's no money in running such a database to turn a profit, nobody will do it. Public money is probably not an option, either, given the state of the world economy and cost.
Logged

Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 07, 2010, 01:31:39 AM »
ReplyReply

If there's no money in running such a database to turn a profit, nobody will do it. Public money is probably not an option, either, given the state of the world economy and cost.

It's a rather inexpensive project as public projects go. Anyway, we'll see. Photographers are not normally good at organizing themselves and lobbying.
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad