I didn't see your message as the "Voice of Dissent;" rather, I think you
provided more reasons that people should write letters to the Copyright
Office. :)
In addition to comments about Orphan Works, the Copyright Office was
seeking comments from creators about difficulties in enforcing their

I have been trying to follow your example of calling out people on Twitter
who don't cite image creators. Keep up the good work! I agree, strength in

I'm not sure what point you were making with regards to Alex Wild's work in
the Ant Man movie; he said he got paid for it.

*Emily S. Damstra*
natural science illustration
Guelph, Ontario
(519) 616-3654
*[log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>*
Twitter: @EmilyDamstra

On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:35 PM, Glendon Mellow <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Hi everyone, Unwelcome-Voice-of-Some-Dissent here,
> We already live in a post-"Orphan Works legislation"-style world. Yes, the
> shape of American law matters. Yes, write letters if you are moved to. But
> in practice artists are already treated as though everyone assumes the work
> is orphaned.
> Consider the case of cartoonist Mathew Inman of the popular site The
> Oatmeal. He was sued by a website that has copies of every one of his
> cartoons *with his name cropped off* posted there by the site's users -
> they sued him for publicly asking him to remove the art and mocking them
> when they didn't. (The suit was later dropped when his fans mobilized and
> donated money to him which he then donated to charities.) If artists can be
> *sued* for asking their work to be removed, we are already at rock bottom.
> This past weekend, entomologist/photographer/Scientific American blogger
> Alex Wild saw one of his ant photos in the Ant-Man movie, and Wild is
> regularly vocal on social media about how many DMCA notices he has to send
> out on a regular basis.
> In addition to writing emails to change potential legislation, there are
> two things I hope to see happen that will help artists make a living in the
> next few years:
>    1. *Technology:* Between Google Reverse Image Search and,
>    reverse image searching is a tool every art student should graduate knowing
>    how to use to protect their art, name, and use. There's a Chrome plugin for
>    it now too. In a different experiment, Getty, Twitter and Instagram images
>    can be embedded on sites in viewers similar to the way YouTube is shared,
>    with links to the source. I think we're approaching a stage when any image
>    on the internet will be identifiable through some sort of
>    search-and-tagging tech we don't quite have yet.
>    2. *Get on social media*: In addition to writing emails, get on social
>    media and defend artists rights - not just your own, but other people's.
>    This is a big listserv and it would be extremely helpful if we had greater
>    numbers calling out journalists, science communicators and large site
>    accounts for abusing image use. Support accounts like @PicPedant, @Hoaxeye
>    and @FakeAstroPix. I call out lack of image credit as much as I can
>    <>,
>    but there's strength in numbers. Over the past several years of blogging,
>    I've heard from a number of popular science journalists that they've been
>    made sensitive to the issue from my own efforts. For a big cultural change
>    to happen, it needs to be more than a handful of people.
> Legislation lags *years* behind culture, and the science communication
> culture could really use more artists being vocal instead of resorting only
> to enforcement by law. And I bet the louder creators are about being
> recognized for their work, the faster we'll see the tech catch up.
> -Glendon
> --
> Glendon Mellow
> Art in Awe of Science
> Find me on
> *Symbiartic, the art+science blog
> <>*
> on the Scientific American Blog Network
> ________________________________________________
> Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the
> instructions at

Need to leave or subscribe to the Sciart-L listserv? Follow the instructions at