It's true that modern cameras include a load of information in the image
file, known as metadata, but that information almost never includes the name of
the copyright owner. (How is the camera supposed to know who is holding it and
whether they are doing "work for hire"?!) As far as I know it's not illegal to
remove the metadata, and often it's rather a good idea to do so in order to
protect the privacy of the photographer. For example, if the camera has GPS and
there's something in the picture a thief might be interested in
...
What this act does is effectively allow any image which does not
have the metadata attached to be treated as an orphan work without further
investigation.
I don't think that's an accurate summary. Have you
looked at the act, or have you just read Andrew Orlowski's idiotic articles? [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|