Orphan Works

I came across an interesting article in PhotoMedia magazine a few weeks ago called "Custody Battle: Who Owns Orphan Works?" and meant to blog about it at that time, but kept getting distracted. So I'll do so now, as it seems even more relevant given the topic of our recent readings, class discussions and Creative Commons research assignment.

The article deals with legislation

involving the use of works for which a copyright owner can't be found through reasonable efforts. There is, of course, more than one side to the issue: some feel that it is a necessary and overdue - if still imperfect - solution to an ever-growing problem (especially with such wide-spread digital access to media sources), while others feel it is too vague and creates opportunities for people to easily upload images to the internet without crediting the artist or author, calling them orphaned, and thereby safeguarding their free use. I'm not sure what to think, myself. Since I'm new to the field, I don't have a great deal of experience trying to use others' work in my own and acquiring permission to do so. I don't know what all it entails, but from what I've read, it can be extremely difficult to acquire rights to use orphan works, which in many cases have been historically and culturally important. Perhaps I would tend to agree with those who feel this legislation is an important step, but that revisions will need to be made. After all, doing nothing for fear of the potential for causing new problems will not promote progress. Imperfect progress is still progress, isn't it? But then, I am quite inexperienced in these matters. What do you think?