So what is the point of worrying about copyright laws “stifling creativity” WHEN NOBODY ENFORCES THEM ANYWAY?

You want details? Name rank and number? Mail me!

The silver lining:
http://www.tsl-game.com/
is one example, its a free game based on the kings quest series, it was nearly shut down by the copyright holders.

I know the same thing happened to a group makeing a Halo based RTS, you can read the story here
http://kotaku.com/gaming/top/msoft-pulls-plug-on-halo-rts-mod-199568.php

I don’t know if the new proposals will grant protection to works such as this, and I’m not part of the community that creates them, I just play them, but if there is a proposal to protect these fan made games, I’d be eternally grateful if you helped make it happen.

I’d suggest a principle “Out of print means out of (non-commercial) copyright”.
[The USA had a similar proposal for orphaned works: after 20 years, copyright owners must pay a nominal $1 to keep something in copyright]

We also need a clear exemption for photocopying music where you already own the original. (i.e. there’s no lost sale). Eg when my choir wants to tour, we currently have to carry a huge amount of weight, whereas we’d like to photocopy only what we need. As a pianist, I find it helps to have copies of the music over the page, so I can avoid awkward page-turns. And some musical originals are too fragile to play, or too valuable to annotate in pencil. However, all these things are, as I understand, technically illegal.

I buy TV quality pop promos from legitimate suppliers and go about editing them together to produce a hybrid audio video mashup, which I then put onto DVD ready to VJ/DJ at clubs - the punter gets to see and hear cut up AV in a club environment. It’s like a DJ but with pictures - in sync, all mixed up…

Also, I was recently commisioned by a UK-based music television group to do this for shows across their spread of channels.

It’s not just pop music I work with either.

For example, when Ronnie Barker died last year I took some video clips from Two Ronnies sketches (especially the famous ‘fork handles’ sketch) and put it over the audio from Elton John’s ‘Candle in the Wind’. At the points where Elton is about to sing the phrase ‘Candle in the wind’, I replaced the word ‘candle’ with a shot from the sketch where Ronnie Barker says ‘Fork Handles’ for comedic effect - mildly amusing, eh? Illegal too…

According to the current VPL licence the editing of these videos is explicitly prohibited, so what I do to entertain people is illegal!!!

It’s not even like I’m trying to resell this stuff without permission. I play these works in clubs to a crowd. I’d love to be legal.

I would be more than happy to discuss this in-depth with anyone from ORG

Good luck

Genre collaboration and intellectual borrowing have always been rife within the industry (Paul Mccartney freely admitting he borrowed Musical ideas from other artists) and a rigid concept of Intellectual property does not allow for discourse or genuine experimentation.

Most of the artists who use this process are either beginners, or cutting their teeth and “fair use” allows them to learn and demonstrate their production abilities leading to a new generation of artists and for existing artists to consider the possibilities presented to them by this process.

(a) That there is useful creative work to be done in reinterpreting existing work.

(b) That often this new work will bring negligible if any financial reward. It will only be done by lone enthusiasts with negligible overheads.

(c) That even with something as old as 17th century music there are copyright issues surrounding the source material available.

(d) That obtaining certainty that you are not innocently infringing copyright is in practice often extremely difficult, if not impossible, and cannot be undertaken by lone enthusiasts.

The move towards criminalising copyright violation significantly changes the picture. A single fine at the level sought by corporate lobbyists could ruin someone who would currently be able to achieve amicable settlement of an honest mistake under civil law. There will be people who will no longer dare act on common sense.

Large corporations are able to navigate copyright because they maintain expensive teams of copyright researchers and lawyers.

The world would be much fairer if there were some public body - like the Patent Office in its transformed state - which was able, affordably, to act as a clearing house or honest broker for permissions, and even more so if the law permitted a presumption that permission was given if it was not denied within some reasonable period.

With modern communications it would be technically feasible for permission applications to be posted on an internet-accessible database, and for corporations holding copyright to do automated sweeps. It might even be cheaper for them.