About this iReport
  • Not verified by CNN

  • Click to view unclaimed's profile
    Posted April 13, 2014 by

    More from unclaimed

    Moral Rights & Derivative Work


    Dear DeviantART, According to the Digital Millennial Copyright Act, enacted by Bill Clinton for WIPO Treaty Implementation/Enactment/Enforcement, Article 12 of the WCP provides in relative part: THAT: "To remove any electronic rights management information without authority" is illegal and is a punishable crime. This did not stop Brian Gibbs "godofodd" from doing exactly this to my Copyright Protected Gallery; One Unified Panoramic Unique Religious Expression including but not limited to "derivative works," and is fully protected by a myriad of international treaties and domestic laws. The indiscriminate censorship of my scholastic transcripts, legalized/notarized documents, my own familial Coat of Arms, my own wrist X-Ray, my own legal property (sacred regalia ), ect... Is clear evidence that the entirety of my expressive representation (wholistic statement) was directly targeted by godofodd, exposing the discrimination, bias and ignorance I've been complaining about. Canada is a contracting party to the Administered Treaties of WIPO and is bound thereto. http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf Section 104 of the Copyright Act establishes the conditions of eligibility for protection under U.S. law for works from other countries. Section 102(b) of the DMCA amends section 104 of the Copyright Act and adds new definitions to section 101 of the Copyright Act in order to extend the protection of U.S. law to those works required to be protected under the WCT and the WPPT.  Furthermore, I am surprised that DeviantART is not aware of protections afforded to them as an online service provider under the DMCA: "Title II: The Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act creates limitations on the liability of online service providers for copyright infringement when engaging in certain types of activities." This would indicate an overly paranoid thinking on the part of DeviantART. You are protected and so am I, so why the censorship? None of my actions even approach the definitions your policy describes in "Abuse or Sustem Exploit." http://help.deviantart.com/295/ In fact, I've only taken the concept of legally protected "DeviousART" to new heights. Last but not least, why is my Derivative Works Right not recognized and respected as a Moral Right? Please review: Case Western Reserve Law Review - Volume 63 Issue 2, 2012. http://law.case.edu/journals/LawReview/Documents/63CaseWResLRev2.5.Article.Keller.pdf “All writers since immemorial time have been borrowers.”   * “Th[e] utilitarian view of copyrights . . . , embraced by Jefferson and Madison, stands

    Add your Story Add your Story