Share this on:
 E-mail
11
VIEWS
0
COMMENTS
 
SHARES
About this iReport
  • Not verified by CNN

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

    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

    • TAGS:

    What do you think of this story?

    Select one of the options below. Your feedback will help tell CNN producers what to do with this iReport. If you'd like, you can explain your choice in the comments below.
    Be and editor! Choose an option below:
      Awesome! Put this on TV! Almost! Needs work. This submission violates iReport's community guidelines.

    Comments

    Log in to comment

    iReport welcomes a lively discussion, so comments on iReports are not pre-screened before they post. See the iReport community guidelines for details about content that is not welcome on iReport.

    Add your Story Add your Story