National TV Photo Contest

Join Now

Every purchase includes a money-back guarantee.

CART

The Copyrite Act and radical photography rights

Blog: #3 of 5 by Curtis Neeley

Previous  |  Next

In case you have not been paying extremely close attention. Copy[rite] laws in the United States were just ruled by the Supreme Court to be required to meet the ENTIRE Berne Convention from articles 1-21. Congress tried partially or to almost make US copy[rite] law comply with the Berne Treaty in 1990 & 1994 but the Supreme Court just ruled that the Berne Protocol has been the controlling copy[rite] law since 1994. This decision by congress was ruled not a violation of the constitution’s copy[rite] clause or to disturb the exercise of free speech.

Prior to this ruling, the Western District of Arkansas District Court ruled that 17 USC §106A, moral rights, do not protect against disparaging internet displays. This ruling is an obvious error and is now appealed and will soon cause the US copy[rite] laws to be addressed as unconstitutional since first written in 1790 when they were passed as a modified but almost verbatim 1710 British Statute of Anne.

The copy[rite] clause alleges to give authors and inventors individual rights to exclusively control publication for a limited time. The copy[rite] clause NEVER, however, recognized individual rights and established the government sanctioned rite to control publication of ideals and creations for the wealthy. The law was unconstitutional the day it was signed and was always deceptive use of the term copy+right without recognizing ANY rights.

The Copy[rite] Act only became continually more deceptive over the centuries including unfair fair-use exceptions in 1976 that made the exclusive permitted uses unconstitutionally vague and indeterminate. With passage of USC 17 §106A in 1990, the rights of photographers to protect some exhibit photography was tacked into USC 17 in an attempt to marginally enforce Berne Article 6bis. USC 17 §106A from 1990 has never been used in courts for photography in the following twenty-two years but is pending before the Eighth Circuit Courts currently and will be before the Supreme Court by next year.

Besides the fact that the SC just ruled the Berne Treaty the current copy[rite] regime of the land, the SC will soon decide the duty of the FCC to affirm decency regulations on television are constitutional. These two fundamental issues will be combined in Neeley v NameMedia Inc, et al. The SC will order the FCC to regulate ALL wire communications as already statutorily required to do. This will include regulating ALL cable TV and ALL internet wire communications. The “Red Lion” spectrum scarcity rational is utterly consistent with the scarcity of networked wires often called “the Internet” for disguise. Besides this backwards, antiquated justification for regulation of decency and the required fairness doctrine, USC §151 has historically remained since 1934 mandating FCC regulation of wire and radio communications. This 1934 Act of Congress is sufficient statutory rational for requiring regulation of wire and radio communications.

Uses of figurenude art photography in a manner that is offensive to the artist and causes the artist shame is a fundamental violation of Article 6bis of the Berne Treaty and was recently ruled by the SC to be entirely constitutional. Besides this SC decision, 17 USC §106A alleges to grant this type moral rights protection although in an unconstitutionally vague manner while violating "equal access" to the law.

All uses of original visual art in a manner that causes shame to the artist is a violation of this “Berne” right now recognized as authoritative by the SC. All rebroadcasts of nudity or other art that includes the identity of the visual artist implies this type display was desired or endorsed by the authoring visual artist! Google Inc and Microsoft Corporation image search engines are illegal now for serial violations of Berne Article 6bis. The FCC allowing nudity to be displayed by wire to the anonymous is already illegal.

Curtis J Neeley Jr. has done and shown nude art and non-nude art since before internet wire communications were first able to display photographs. These nude and non-nude photos are impossible to now control since these are so widely distributed by wire and copied around the earth and usually attributed correctly whether desired or undesired.

Roe v Wade did not result in recognition of anyone’s right to kill a fetus. The right to control the sanctity of a personal uterus was marginally recognized as existing already in the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments. The SC position in Roe v Wade allegedly made a great deal of impact and is still debated and thought wrongly decided by many. Roe v Wade was not wrongly decided but did not adequately describe the right recognized. Roe v Wade will have had a tiny impact compared to the impact that Neeley v NameMedia Inc, et al will have on you unless you are an aborted fetus.

The Copy[rite] Act will be ruled unconstitutional since written and the FCC will be ordered to regulate ALL wire communications including cable television and all internet wire communications.

Neeley v NameMedia Inc, et al will impact the applications of the rule of law more than any court case or act of congress ever has. It could also be entirely ignored and result in absolutely nothing except more legal wrangling with GOOG.

Stay tuned. The pending FCC v Fox, (10-1293) is likely to be decided by the SC before the pending Eighth Circuit ruling although the determination of the court was projected clearly in the oral argument and may be adequately anticipated.

This is more photo/internet/copy[rite] news than easily described.

Subscribe to Curtis Neeley's Blog