CA [R] SB 1160 – Workers Compensation

Commentary- It’s important to establish responsibility for not only the injured worker which seems to be set forth much more clearly, but also for those who control the injured workers life in care, ongoing care, and quality of life. This must include employers, insurance adjusters, attorney’s and those who set back the process of diagnosis, healing, and access to proper and timely care for these injured workers without delay, denials, or stall tactics.

Number: CA [R] SB 1160 – Workers Compensation
Updated (Status 09/10/2016) Sponsor: Sen. Tony Mendoza (DEM-CA)
Introduced by Senator Mendoza
(Principal coauthor: Senator Pan)

ca-state-capital-photo-by-twinklev

February 18, 2016

An act to amend Sections 138.4, 138.6, 4610.5, 4610.6, 4903.05, 4903.8, 5307.27, 5710, 5811, and 6409 of, to amend, repeal, and add Section 4610 of, and to add Section 4615 to, the Labor Code, relating to workers’ compensation.

According to the Legislative Counsil Digest existing law establishes a workers’ compensation system, administered by the Administrative Director of the Division of Workers’ Compensation, to compensate an employee for injuries sustained in the course of his or her employment.
Existing law requires the administrative director to develop and make available informational material written in plain language that describes the overall workers’ compensation claims process, as specified.
This bill would require the administrative director to adopt regulations to provide employees with notice regarding access to medical treatment following the denial of a claim under the workers’ compensation system.
Existing law requires the Administrative Director of the Division of Workers’ Compensation of the Department of Industrial Relations to develop a workers’ compensation information system in consultation with the Insurance Commissioner and the Workers’ Compensation Insurance Rating Bureau, with certain data to be collected electronically and to be compatible with the Electronic Data Interchange System of the International Association of Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions. Existing law requires the administrative director to assess an administrative penalty of not more than $5,000 in a single year against a claims administrator for a violation of those data reporting requirements.
This bill would increase that penalty assessment to not more than $10,000. The bill would require the administrative director to post on the Division of Workers’ Compensation Internet Web site a list of claims administrators who are in violation of the data reporting requirements.
Existing law requires every employer to establish a utilization review process, and defines “utilization review” as utilization review or utilization management functions that prospectively, retrospectively, or concurrently review and approve, modify, delay, or deny, based in whole or in part on medical necessity to cure and relieve, treatment recommendations by physicians, prior to, retrospectively, or concurrent with providing medical treatment services. Existing law also provides for an independent medical review process to resolve disputes over utilization review decisions, as defined.
This bill would revise and recast provisions relating to utilization review, as specified, with regard to injuries occurring on or after January 1, 2018. Among other things, the bill would set forth the medical treatment services that would be subject to prospective utilization review under these provisions, as provided. The bill would authorize retrospective utilization review for treatment provided under these provisions under limited circumstances, as specified. The bill would establish procedures for prospective and retrospective utilization reviews and set forth provisions for removal of a physician or provider under designated circumstances. On and after January 1, 2018, the bill would establish new procedures for reviewing determinations regarding the medical necessity of medication prescribed pursuant to the drug formulary adopted by the administrative director, as provided. The bill would make conforming changes to related provisions to implement these changes.

The bill would, commencing July 1, 2018, require each utilization review process to be accredited by an independent, nonprofit organization to certify that the utilization review process meets specified criteria, including, but not limited to, timeliness in issuing a utilization review decision, the scope of medical material used in issuing a utilization review decision, and requiring a policy preventing financial incentives to doctors and other providers based on the utilization review decision. The bill would require the administrative director to adopt rules to implement the selection of an independent, nonprofit organization for accreditation purposes, as specified. The bill would authorize the administrative director to adopt rules to require additional specific criteria for measuring the quality of a utilization review process for purposes of accreditation and provide for certain exemptions. The bill would require the administrative director to develop a system for electronic reporting of documents related to utilization review performed by each employer, to be administered by the division. The bill would require the administrative director, on or after March 1, 2019, to contract with an outside independent research organization to evaluate and report on the impact of provision of medical treatment within the first 30 days after a claim is filed, for claims filed on or after January 1, 2017, to January 1, 2019. The bill would require the report to be completed before January 1, 2020, and to be distributed to the administrative director, the Senate Committee on Labor and Industrial Relations, and the Assembly Committee on Insurance.
Existing law requires every lien claimant to file its lien with the appeals board in writing upon a form approved by the appeals board. Existing law requires a lien to be accompanied by a full statement or itemized voucher supporting the lien and justifying the right to reimbursement, as specified.
This bill would require certain lien claimants that file a lien under these provisions to do so by filing a declaration, under penalty of perjury, that includes specified information. The bill would require current lien claimants to also file the declaration by a specified date. The bill would make a failure to file a declaration under these provisions grounds for dismissal of a lien. Because the bill would expand the crime of perjury, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.
The bill would also automatically stay any physician or provider lien upon the filing of criminal charges against that person or entity for specified offenses involving medical fraud, as provided. The bill would authorize the administrative director to adopt regulations to implement that provision. The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature in connection with these provisions.
Existing law prohibits the assignment of a lien under these provisions, except under limited circumstances, as specified.
This bill would, for liens filed after January 1, 2017, invalidate any assignment of a lien made in violation of these provisions, by operation of law.
Existing law requires the administrative director, in consultation with the Commission on Health and Safety and Workers’ Compensation, to adopt, after public hearings, a medical treatment utilization schedule to incorporate evidence-based, peer-reviewed, nationally recognized standards of care recommended by the commission, as specified.
This bill would authorize the administrative director to make updates to the utilization schedule by order, which would not be subject to the Administrative Procedure Act, as specified. The bill would require any order adopted pursuant to these provisions to be published on the Internet Web site of the division.
Existing law requires a deponent to receive certain expenses and reimbursements if an employer or insurance carrier requests a deposition to be taken of an injured employee, or any person claiming benefits as a dependent of an injured employee. Existing law authorizes the deponent to receive a reasonable allowance for attorney’s fees, if represented by an attorney licensed in this state.
This bill would authorize the administrative director to determine the range of reasonable fees to be paid to a deponent.
Existing law provides that it is the responsibility of any party producing a witness requiring an interpreter to arrange for the presence of a qualified interpreter. Existing law sets forth the qualifications of a qualified interpreter for these purposes, and provides for the settings under which a qualified interpreter may render services.
This bill would require the administrative director to promulgate regulations establishing criteria to verify the identity and credentials of individuals that provide interpreter services under these provisions.
Existing law requires physicians, as defined, who attend to injured or ill employees to file reports with specific information prescribed by law.
This bill would revise those reporting requirements, as prescribed.
This bill would incorporate changes to Section 4610 of the Labor Code proposed by AB 2503, to be operative as specified if both bills are enacted.
Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
This bill would make legislative findings to that effect.
The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.
This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

For more information-
Bill Text
The people of the State of California do enact as follows:
Read the full text –
http://www.cqstatetrack.com/texis/redir?id=56c6cbba47

See references:

State Pain Policy Advocacy Network (SPPAN)
http://sppan.aapainmanage.org/state/california

Los Angeles Network of Care
http://losangeles.networkofcare.org/mh/legislate/state-bill-detail.aspx?bill=SB%201160&sessionid=2015000

LegInfo Legislature CA.Gov
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB1160

CSIMS http://www.csims.org/?page=SB1160
Blog: Daisy Bill http://blog.daisybill.com/sb1160-shakes-up-workers-comp

~Update brought to you by iPain Advocacy Committee, International Pain Foundation internationalpain.org

patient-awareness-internationalpainorg-ipain

Advertisements

Death: Overdose or Suicide?

Dont Say...If I had anything worth betting, I’d bet that many of the documented opioid related overdose deaths were suicides.

How dare I say such a thing? Because in either circumstance the people who should have known better, didn’t. Why didn’t they know? Because they didn’t want to.

No one wants to acknowledge that their child, spouse, parent or partner has a drug problem or is at risk for misuse or abuse and no one wants to believe that even those who appear the strongest, laughing, joking, caregiving, keeping it together for you, would ever take their own lives.

A person seeks medical care to gain something; pain management, acute or chronic, or to manipulate for medications they don’t actually need, but want.

Some people fall through the cracks of not only the medical communities, unintended consequences, access to care, emergency services, but families, too.

I’ll leave this post short and simple.

Ponder that!

National Pain Strategy PAINS Collaborators Meeting Recap – COMMUNITY PAIN CENTER

National Pain Strategy PAINS Collaborators Meeting Recap

By Barby Ingle, Power of Pain Foundation President

On June 29 and 30, 2015, the Pain Action Alliance to Implement a National Strategy (PAINS), a group of over 100 pain collaborators and stakeholders, came together in Washington DC to discuss the National Pain Strategy (NPS). The purpose was to provide attendees an opportunity to discuss the NPS and find areas of agreement on next steps, collaborations, priorities, and to hold accountable those responsible for implementation.As the president of the Power of Pain Foundation, I was invited to participate. I went into the meeting with some preconceived notions based on little happening since the Institute of Medicine’s report in 2011 and didn’t expect much to be accomplished. To my great surprise, the meeting exceeded my expectations. I left the meeting feeling that a path toward implementation of stronger access to care issues was clarified as a result of the meeting. I am excited to be one of the attendees present that will be helping move a chronic pain agenda forward, making a difference in the lives of those living with pain.The goals of the meeting were to encourage collaboration among key pain community leaders, to promote the NPS report and build enthusiasm for it, and to facilitate conversations about how to move forward to implementation of the strategy outlined in the report.For me, the meeting clarified the path ahead for the NPS in terms of priorities,implementation, next steps, funding,leadership and accountability. One of the unintended outcomes from the meeting was the consensus to support the messaging of the Chronic Pain Advocacy Task Force (CPATF). The CPATF is a group of 17 consumer advocacy groups convened by the State Pain Policy Action Network (SPPAN), which is a program of the American Academy of Pain Management (AAPM). As a founding member of the CPATF and the representative of one of the 17 groups involved, I was very proud to see that our work was recognized by this larger group of collaborators and stakeholders. As agreed upon, the core messages are: Chronic pain is a real and complex disease that may exist by itself or be linked with other medical conditions.Chronic pain is both an under-recognized and under-resourced public health crisis with devastating personal and economic impact. Effective chronic pain care requires access to a wide range of treatment options, including biomedical, behavioral health and complementary treatment. Denying appropriate care to people with chronic pain is unethical and can lead to unnecessary suffering, depression, disability, and even suicide.

Read the entire article at:

Source: National Pain Strategy PAINS Collaborators Meeting Recap – COMMUNITY PAIN CENTER

Bracelets; Lockdown; Profound and Letdown

Cross-posted from February 19 at 12:43pm

In the early evening of Valentines Day, February 14, 16, I was placed in handcuffs in front of my residence and transferred to ‪#‎MethodistHospital‬ psychiatric hold where I got to come home the evening of February 16th Initially, I was being transferred to another facility for a 72 hour hold and evaluation after the Dr. said I wasn’t a threat to others, but I was to myself. Upon re evaluation the afternoon of the 16th, the doctor via tele medicine (Robot) allowed me to go home. The bruises on my body (severe) are not self inflicted, but are the consequences of my actions. After being denied 2 types of medications I’ve been on over 10 years (non opioid, anti-depressent/nerve pain and an anticonvulsent, 2 others removed entirely and abruptly January 2015 and reduced from 90 to 30 on Cymbalta at the same time, being continuously delayed, denied, retaking these 2, being denied again, going through the withdrawals over and over and knowing how many of you go through the same or similar, I began to crack. Days prior I filed the appeal, the next day I sought psych help from one of my providers, but was never contacted back. Valentines day started beautifully. My husband set up our patio, and have a vase of flowers for me, coffee and it was peaceful. When I woke that morning, he said “don’t go back” referring to the bedroom. He said” close your eyes” I did. He led me to the patio, the best gift I could have been given. As the early afternoon and sunshine made it’s way in, I was updating hand notes previously taken on a legislative conference to send as minutes. I was listening to music. My emotions began to rise. I was upset that I couldn’t be there for Barby in the loss of her dad, or my mom who’s doing all she can to keep her heart beating, or my dad, or my children, even my sister. I saw that denial letter again as I was highlighting the inaccuracies it contained. I tossed back a 200 ml bottle of vodka. To be specific the $1.99 bottle of Tamiroff (the cheap crap) 40% alcohol by volume. It wasn’t the cause of my actions, but it was the liquid courage to tell it how it was and how it shouldn’t be, however misplaced. I remembered what WC took from me, what I was manipulated into 14 years ago. Something that even possibility, chance or a cure can never bring back and I realized how absolutely stupid I was to listen to my health team at the time. See? I’ve learned and I’ve grown since then and while now I have to tread carefully, I refuse to shut up for me, or for you. And I remember that when my case was initially force closed in 2003, I asked for 1 thing. Just one, and whether my 3 know that or not, I submitted it in writing. I asked for them to apologize to my children.

They’re still waiting

I stood in the street and screamed everything we go through. ‪#‎Chronic‬, ‪#‎IntractabIe‬ ‪#‎Pain‬, ‪#‎CRPS‬, ‪#‎DWC‬ ‪#‎California‬ ‪#‎MTUS‬, denials and delays, I screamed that if you take an opioid, tomorrow you’re defined an addict If you have a drink, guess what? Now you’re an alcoholic. I screamed that records should be maintained accurately and that I was DONE! With irresponsible people fucking up responsible lives. Was my act responsible? Perhaps not, but the cause and reason was.

My tongue was foul.

When I attempted to advocate for myself, speak of compassion and understanding, humanizing people for all, and reveal what I do and that I wasn’t blind to it all, I was considered hallucinating, fabricating, making it up, laughed at, demeaned and ridiculed. Being kind, caring, loving, understanding, respectful, honest, and trustworthy has got me no where. Incline my head to the higher ups as if they’re right, when really I just don’t have the guts to advocate on my own behalf and tell them they’re wrong.

A person (and patient) who’s done everything right has labeled me, defined me, and stigmatized me as someone who’s wrong and who’s done everyone wrong.
They wouldn’t even give me my SCS controller to turn off my stim. Flat increases stimulation. The nurse tried to give me some line about, not right now, she didn’t know what I was talking about, so I tried to tell her. Being dismissed from that made me see even more red, I called her stupid and told her to f off. Then I apologized because even in my upset state, I had the mind to know it really wasn’t her fault, she was just ignorant and uneducated.

I won’t be tolerating inaccuracies in records, healthcare or otherwise. I won’t be tolerating patients not being able to add note to correct the record. I won’t be hiding away under the blankets anymore, while people create their reports to satisfy their own job criteria, yet leave out pertinent information. I’ll be up to make sure you know you better get it right. And that people deserve truth about all else.

I’ll be sharing this story in it’s entirety, there’s so much more than this. My records, PRIUM, tox screen, etc are being sent to the International Pain Foundation. Via iPain someone gets the exclusive. I’ll decide free or fee. Oh and I got on the inside in all of it, now I know what goes on behind those scenes and those doors. I supposedly blew a high alcohol level. But here’s the deal. The bottle is still the same bottle it can’t magically become something else. The amount my body took in wasn’t more than that, I’m 200 pounds, so go figure. I’ve saved that little bottle as a souvenir. Excuses? Not at all. I’m not proud, but nor am I ashamed. My transparency will bring me back up, enough to prove, I haven’t lied, fabricated and I wasn’t on any illicit or illegal drugs which no one believed either.

On the contrary, the truth I’ve told and will tell
Will become me

(This is my #FightSong

… Take back my life song)

If I gave anything that night, I gave 2 things.

1. On command I removed my hands from my mama’s jacket pockets and complied without incident to place my hands behind my back. ‪#‎SacramentoSheriffsDepartment‬. Everyone should do the same in all situations.

2. I’ve given all of you the rest of my life; the one I can’t go back on.
My name is now associated with defiance and lock down.

Nothing else was considered
Sleep disorders, narcoleptic episodes
CSA (my brain doesn’t send the signals to my body to breathe)
Myoclonia
Withdrawal (probably over that by now, but the effects I’m still dealing with)
CRPS (Flare) + and an altered brain from the last 13 months of continuous WC hell.
CRPS (secondary depression, anxiety disorders, PTSD x 2 (diagnosed)

(excluded are internal diagnosis’)

My medication list has been updated each and every time I’m seen by my physicians. Yet, my discharge shows I’m on 11 meds, including Butrans, 5 and 10, a benzo and others. I’m on Lisinopril 1 x a.m, Atorvastatin 1 x p.m, Hydralazine as needed only, BP 180/+, Nuvigil daily, and BuTrans Patch/wk. ‪#‎DignityHealth‬ is linked to all my doctors. The hospital is part of Dignity Health. What’s the point of the EMR, PMP, PDMP or even a computer if it’s not properly used?

Understand why I kept saying “I’m fucking done” I’m done doesn’t equal I’m going to kill myself. I’m over it, doesn’t mean it either. I don’t want to be here doesn’t either. What they all are is some else’s perception and reality I could fart and my son would throw up his hands and say “I’m done!”

Check it out.. My voice will carry, I have the guts to say it, open eyes and touch hearts, contribute to change, maybe not for me, but hopefully for someone else

If I killed myself, I wouldn’t get to say it, now would I?

I’m sure they gave me Cymbalta, Zonegran and Hydralazine in the lockdown. I wasn’t suppose to be given any of those. Only Lisinopril and the Statin. No wonder my head hurts.

I have no regrets
I pray you don’t either.

To be continued…

Sincerely,
Twinkle VanFleet,
Advocacy Director, Healthcare Advisor, Consultant, Speaker, International Pain Foundation (iPain) powerofpain.org/leader-directory

Medtronic Ambassador medtronic.com tamethepain.com
Cureclick Ambassador cureclick.com trialreach.com
SPPAN leader http://sppan.aapainmanage.org
Legislative policy leader
Founder- CRPSA

TwinkleV Feb 23 2016 2

Twinkle V. February 23, 2016

“When no one else believes in you…
.. You better!” ~T

On the 29th of January, I put in for my Cymbalta (30, 1x) and Zonegran (100, 2 x). I went to my grandson’s 10th birthday party yesterday (sick) but I played it like it was something else, I played it off so good and to the point of… shrugs. Yah, slam dunk withdrawal again. Pharmacy kept telling me my doc hadn’t refilled. (A lie) If you didn’t know the truth, say you don’t know. Today I get a letter in the mail from PRIUM. Cymbalta and Zonegran denied. Last January, 13 months ago, I was removed from 2 other medications entirely (one of which was Lidoderm) and reduced from 90 to 30 Cymbalta. I tried. I faked it to make it and I prayed it and played it. but was slipping harder than anyone could ever see, . There’s 1 med left and I know it’s next. Nearly every month I’m delayed, the months I’m not delayed by days, I am by weeks. I’m sure my brain is fried by now. I’m sick all the time from abrupt discontinuation, to trying to re stabilize after getting back on, to slam dunked again. Over and over and over. Those medications aren’t suppose to be slam dunked off of. They aren’t suppose to be abruptly discontinued. They are suppose to be weaned off to prevent seizures and adverse affects that can in some cases include death. Their letter is a lie, it contradicted 12 months ago where it did indicate Cymbalta and Zonegran and now says the CA MTUS doesn’t indicate for the treatment of neuropathic pain. (wrong). It also said because I’ve been treating with a dentist and was ON Norco 5/325 that the Cymbalta and Zonegran didn’t keep me OFF OPIOIDS. A fucking lie. As of the date of that letter. I had 3 dentist appointments. And I suffered and declined med, even tho I took some. I also got permission from my PMD prior to ever getting an RX , filling it or taking it. I have not asked for 1 single extra pill and I didn’t even fill the Rx I had for days later. But know what? It’s a done deal now. TOWER ENERGY GROUP – SCOTT CORNWELL ADJUSTER ARROWPOINT CAPITAL. You might want to get your facts right. You expect us to have ours accurate, yes? Let me see here in 1 year approximately $15,000 a year in medication management times 81 years of age. I’m still only 47. I got your game, you better get mine, too.

This letter said that I failed Lyrica and Neurontin (the reason it now says NO to Zonegran, but that I didn’t fail Carbamazepine or Lamotrigine. You got me stuck on stupid. For real? drugscom says make sure to tell your doctor if you have heart disease, high blood pressure, high cholesterol or triglycerides;
liver or kidney disease; ALL OF THE ABOVE. I get it, compromise one side for the other right? Which really means lower your spending. Sorry idiots, I settled for lifetime medical and didn’t take your money. Go on keep punishing me. Neither of these are NOT indicated for me. I didn’t appeal your last denials (January 2015) and I’m not appealing these either. Oh and by the way, next time you put bull shit in my letters, CA fail first/step therapy REFER TO AB 374 and know that if you’re going to quote taking and failing, you better also note all else that goes with it.

Because I think you failed something else…

Yourselves!

The Travesty of Delays- California Workers’ Compensation SB 863 and AB 1124

https://www.facebook.com/notes/twinkle-vanfleet/the-travesty-of-delays-california-workers-compensation-sb-863-and-ab-1124/10153777634894774

CRPS/RSD and Suicide

https://rsdadvisory.com/2013/05/05/crpsrsd-and-suicide/

January 28 at 11:48am

@CDCgov ‪#‎CDC‬ ‪#‎BSC‬ ‪#‎NCIPC‬ RE: Today’s CDC Public Hearing

I would like to offer that in conversation this last week with Dr. Kolodny and others who advocate against the use of opioid pain care that I attempted to stress the importance of responsibility and education in stating that ”

“So much time proving how bad opioids are when we could have been educating, teaching personal responsibility.” (Twitter only allows so many characters)

A direct reply and quote from Dr. Kolodny

“Education & “teaching personal responsibility” will not make opioids less addictive or more effective.”

Already in today’s call responsibility has been spoken of as well as education several times. He came on and mentioned Guiding physicians. Isn’t guiding educating?

Other therapies can potentially be more harmful, anti depressants, anti seizure medications for the treatment of chronic pain, such as Cymbalta,
Neurontin, Nortriptyline, Amtriptolyne and similar medications also have misuse and abuse potential. When there is misuse, abuse and Overdose is already likely. Surgical intervention is contraindicated in patients with nerve damage, neuropathies, CRPS/RSD. Some of these opioid overdoses were in part due to other medications, mixtures and alcohol, not solely opioid. Integrated and functional restoration programs are important, but few insurances at all, cover them.

Can we try not to stress the decline in white people falling to addiction, when we didn’t seem to be as concerned about blacks, or minorities. many were like, oh well, let them kill themselves, calling them stupid. We’re your kids stupid? I think not. I find it disheartening.
People were people all along. Also personal responsibility is directly related to opioid overdoses. If these children or adults didn’t understand the risk, or what the medication may cause, then education was absolutely necessary by parents, family and spouses first and foremost before the medical community. It becomes a mutual responsibility. Not only the doctor who prescribed it.

If they can’t stop, it’s our responsibility to intervene on their behalf. and attempt to save their lives before it’s too late.

Pain is physical, and pain is emotional. Physical pain seeks quality of life, the emotional pain, those against opioid’s seek comfort for
their loss. Pain doesn’t discriminate.

Physiology also plays a major role in this topic. Lets not sacrifice people for people. Otherwise unintended consequences become intended
consequences. Responsibility in prescribing isn’t a one way street. We seek out the doctor, they don’t seek us out.

~Twinkle V. / Advocacy Director, International Pain Foundation ‪#‎iPain‬

Mid Metatarsal Separation | Lis Franc Separation

https://rsdadvisory.com/2015/12/21/mid-metatarsal-seperation-lis-franc-seperation/

Chronic pain, opioids, addiction and controversy

https://rsdadvisory.com/2016/01/25/chronic-pain-opioids-addiction-and-controversy/

A Call for Action- 2016

A Call for Action 2016 by Twinkle VanFleet

https://rsdadvisory.com/2015/10/14/a-call-for-action-2016/

Overcoming Challenging Obstacles

Excerpts from, Overcoming Challenging Obstacles by Twinkle VanFleet

https://rsdadvisory.com/2015/11/24/overcoming-challenging-obstacles/

(Several pages and paragraphs not included at this time)

 

Full details of this entire experience soon enough, including photos. —> Media, news, social media, video, radio, and and… and  🙂

 

 

Copyrights – Please be advised – Laws and Regulations

“Copyright protection exists from the moment a work is created in a fixed, tangible form of expression. The copyright immediately becomes the property of the author who created the work. Only the author, or those deriving their rights through the author, can rightfully claim copyright. In the case of works made for hire, the employer—not the writer—is considered the author.” The Campus Guide to Copyright Compliance, COPYRIGHT BASICS: WHAT IS COPYRIGHT LAW? Para 1.

So that the information I’ve previously provided in the post at the end of this page isn’t taken as inaccurate or babble, I’ve taken the time to compile the following for you so that there aren’t any misunderstandings. Links have also been provided so that you may learn for yourselves.

The First Sale Doctrine
“The physical ownership of an item such as a book, painting, manuscript or CD is not the same as owning the copyright to the work embodied in that item.

Under the First Sale Doctrine (Section 109 of the Copyright Act), ownership of a physical copy of a copyright-protected work permits lending, reselling, disposing, etc., of the item. However, it does not permit reproducing the material, publicly displaying or performing it, or engaging in any of the acts reserved for the copyright holder. Why? Because the transfer of the physical copy does not transfer the copyright holder’s rights to the work. Even including an attribution on a copied work (for example, putting the author’s name on it) does not eliminate the need to obtain the copyright holder’s consent. To use copyrighted materials lawfully, you must secure permission from the applicable copyright holders or a copyright licensing agent.

Duration of Copyright
The term of copyright protection depends upon the date of creation. A work created on or after January 1, 1978, is ordinarily protected by copyright from the moment of its creation until 70 years after the author’s death.

For works made for hire, anonymous works and pseudonymous works (unless the author’s identity is revealed in Copyright Office records), the duration of copyright is 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation, whichever is shorter.

For works created, published or registered before January 1, 1978, or for more detailed information, you may wish to refer to the public domain section of this guide or request Circular 15 ( “Renewal of Copyright”), Circular 15a (“Duration of Copyright”) and Circular 15t (“Extension of Copyright Terms”) from the U.S. Copyright Office Web site, www.copyright.gov.

Registration and Notification of Copyright
The way in which copyright protection is secured is frequently misunderstood. Copyright is secured automatically when the work is created and fixed in a tangible form, such as the first time it is written or recorded. No other action is required to secure copyright protection – neither publication, registration nor other action in the Copyright Office (although registration is recommended).

The use of a copyright notice is no longer required under U.S. law, although it is recommended. This requirement was eliminated when the United States adhered to the Berne Convention effective March 1, 1989. If a copyright holder wants to use a copyright notice, he or she may do so freely without permission from or registration with the U.S. Copyright Office. In fact, the use of a copyright notice is recommended because it reminds the public that the work is protected by copyright.

A copyright notice should contain all the following three elements:
The symbol © (the letter C in a circle), the word “Copyright” or the abbreviation “Copr.”
The year when the work was first created.
The name of the owner of the copyright.
Example: © 2005 John Doe

Public Domain
The public domain comprises all works that are either no longer protected by copyright or never were. It should not be confused with the mere fact that a work is publicly available (such as information in books or periodicals, or content on the Internet).

Essentially, all works first published in the United States before 1923 are considered to be in the public domain in the United States. The public domain also extends to works published between 1923 and 1963 on which copyright registrations were not renewed.

All materials created since 1989, except those created by the U.S. federal government, are presumptively protected by copyright. As a result, the chances are high that the materials of greatest interest to students and faculty are not in the public domain. In addition, you must also consider other forms of legal protection such as trademark or patent protection before reusing third-party content.”

The Campus Guide to Copyright Compliance, COPYRIGHT BASICS: WHAT IS COPYRIGHT LAW? Para 2-12 https://www.copyright.com/Services/copyrightoncampus/basics/law.html

 


 

 

Twinkle Wood-VanFleet

November 14 at 8:13pm · Edited ·

 

Copyright! For my friends, family and interested parties who continue to be violated.. For those of you whose works are being taken, altered, and your names removed from your pieces.

“Copyright protection exists from the moment a work is created in a fixed, tangible form of expression. The copyright immediately becomes the property of the author who created the work. Only the author, or those deriving their rights through the author, can rightfully claim copyright. ” For works created after January 1, 1978, is ordinarily protected by copyright from the moment of its creation until 70 years after the author’s death. For works made for hire, anonymous works and pseudonymous works (unless the author’s identity is revealed in Copyright Office records), the duration of copyright is 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation, whichever is shorter.

This means that many of my works are covered at an average of 100 years regardless of whether or not you know who it originated from. Those in my name are mine for 70 years after my death.

So while better protection may exist through the Library of Congress, people are not blind to knowing when they steal and alter what is not theirs. I can tell you exactly how to maintain proof without LOC records. Accidental violations sometimes happen when sharing someone elses work, do be mindful in this situation to mark it as “unknown” until which time the author , artist or creator can be credited. Removing credit from images, taking people’s lines from articles, poetry, lyrics and even off their Facebook comments is stealing.

If you think that public domain means you get to have it It does not! The term “public domain” refers to creative materials that are NOT protected by intellectual property laws such as copyright, trademark, or patent laws.

Be advised! ~Twinkle V.

 

(Names, likes, and shares have been removed to maintain privacy; the original is available at its posted location)

Comments

S.W. Thank you for posting this……I’m so tired of stuff being remade with their initials and no credit given to the real maker.

Twinkle Wood-VanFleet You’re most welcome, S! Thank you!

Twinkle Wood-VanFleet All too often, K. They don’t care.

 

Twinkle Wood-VanFleet People create beautiful images and they are taken, altered, or re created as something new. People create amazing works of writing, intellectual thought and re create it thinking if they add a few words it’s theirs. It’s not. They need to cite the original.

 

Twinkle Wood-VanFleet We all learn from somewhere. It’s how knowledge is gained. We take what we learn and re invent our own thoughts, but all of what has been happening to people is too much. Too many people who spend time, their hearts, education, experiences, even their thought process……….. taken.

Twinkle Wood-VanFleet Thank you, S.

 

D O’N Thank you for posting this. I dont share a lot of my poems because of the very reason someone else might publish something I wrote

Twinkle Wood-VanFleet Most welcome D. I know what you mean and it’s a shame that you don’t because you feel you can’t because they won’t be yours anymore. Everything that is yours, remains yours. I risk myself too sharing some, others are protected better. I finally decided that I’m not going to let other people who do these things keep me from what I love, enjoy, find peace and contentment in and what others enjoy reading, too. I know how to keep an eye on my work, where it ends up and any alterations. Most of us who create, whether it be articles, artwork, poetry, etc don’t mind our pieces being shared, all we want is for it to be kept in the original form and credited. It’s the proper way. x

  • November 15 at 10:31am
  • J. W. I often wonder about that in regards to photos I post. I post them for everyone to enjoy, but I would hate for someone to take credit for them. I should probably watermark them, but it kinda ruins the photo…

Twinkle Wood-VanFleet Right J! I’ve seen a few of your photos. Beautiful ones, too. And I know what you mean about watermarks. We just shouldn’t have to, please consider adding your c (name) in an area even though it’s already yours. At least if people use the share button it’s reasonable because it’s tracked directly from you, your original share. But people even removed that. The other day a lady posted a graphic and even though she shared it to me and others, I asked permission to re share, she didn’t even want credit necessarily because sometimes we share to just share, but it was important for me to credit her because for one it’s right and secondly I’m thankful for all I get to see, and I’m appreciative of time and heart each of you put into what you do, and I like to say thank you when I can. I know, well we all know for each other, we’ll never be able to get to everyone’s shares to thank, but when we can it’s nice. I’ll never be able to get to all of yours, there’s no way all of you can get to all of mine or each other’s either (too much activity ol/fb etc) but when we are able it’s nice.

 

D O’N I had someone take poetry I wrote from me and took credit for it.
So it rare that you see my poetry . Sometimes they change the words just a tad.
I would share more if I knew it wasn’t taken.
I will add though that when you do searches for quotes or pictures a lot come up without any ones name on the work.
I like the idea of putting unknown on something that’s not marked but then does it give someone the opportunity to say … I wrote that or that pictures mine ?

Twinkle Wood-VanFleet Yes and no D. Yes in that anyone can claim anything, the opportunity is always there to claim it, no in that when it comes to you being the actual writer up against them taking it or altering the piece they would have to prove it was theirs before it was yours. Most artists have proof simply because they were the ones who created it. Think about this. In this example, I’ll use only FB as an example with something shared that’s been shared no where else.. Something is posted on Facebook for the first time. You, me, someone else. Later at any point it re appears in someone else’s name. A record of proof has already been created. Your proof. Facebook itself is a record of proof in it’s own way. Each post is time stamped. How would the other person be able to claim authorship? The only way they could is to then claim they have an original in hard copy or digital form prior to sharing. Being on FB doesn’t allow others to take. Facebook terms and conditions grants FB uses but not individuals. And there the legal part begins and a judge will decide. Instead of going on and on, here’s a link that can help too, it refers to unknown authors and images from the web toward the end using MLA citations and “according to” http://uca.edu/writingc…/mla-basics/mla-in-text-citations/ smile emoticon

MLA In-Text Citations — Writing Center

MLA style uses in-text citations to give credit to authors when paraphrasing or quoting their ideas. In-text citations include two parts, the lead-in phrase and the parenthetical citation.

UCA.EDU

 


Having spent nearly 40 years as a writer in one capacity or another, I’ve always been quite knowledgeable in this area. Having a publishing business licensed in the City of West Sacramento in the mid 1990’s and studying Corporate Publishing in 2005 assisted my knowledge even further. Every now and then I try to re share this combined knowledge.

There will always be someone who will try to take your original works from you, but remember there are steps they have to go through to prove they owned your words before you did.

I hope the above has eased you and I hope it has informed those who are inclined to snatch what doesn’t belong to them.

 

~Twinkle VanFleet


 

The Campus Guide to Copyright Compliance

COPYRIGHT BASICS: WHAT IS COPYRIGHT LAW?

https://www.copyright.com/Services/copyrightoncampus/basics/law.html

 

United States Copyright Office

A Department of the Library of Congress

http://www.copyright.gov/

 

Library of Congress

https://www.loc.gov/

Image Credit - Library of Congress - https://www.loc.gov/

Image Credit – Library of Congress – https://www.loc.gov/

 

 

 

 

MLA In-Text Citations

http://uca.edu/writingcenter/mla-basics/mla-in-text-citations/