« Where Are We in the 'DVD Replacement Cycle'? |
Main
| Patry: Bridgeport Music Wrongly Decided »
June 05, 2005
Blink ›
UK to Extend Copyright for Pop Songs
News.Scotsman.com reports that the UK is planning to extend copyright protection beyond its current 50 years in order to keep rock 'n' roll classics from entering the public domain in the UK (Long-Playing Plans for Music Copyright Ownership).
[James Purnell, the minister for creative industries] thinks the extra revenue for record companies will allow them to find new acts and develop their talent.
Gee, why stop with the proposed 95 years? Why not develop new acts and talent forever with an infinite extension? Just think of all the playwrights who never were because Shakespeare entered the public domain.
posted by Ernest Miller |
|
# |
0 |
0
- RELATED ENTRIES
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 23
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 22
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 21
- › Kitchen Academy - The Hollywood Cookbook and Guest Chef Michael Montilla - March 18th
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 20
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 19
- › Kitchen Academy - Course II - Day 18
- › Salsa Verde
Ernest Miller pursues research and writing on cyberlaw, intellectual property, and First Amendment issues. Mr. Miller attended the U.S. Naval Academy before attending Yale Law School, where he was president and co-founder of the Law and Technology Society, and founded the technology law and policy news site LawMeme. He is a fellow of the Information Society Project at Yale Law School.
Ernest Miller's blog postings can also be found @
1. Crosbie Fitch on June 6, 2005 08:15 AM writes...
The funny thing is, more online 'pop musicians' would use copyright if it had a shorter term, say 5 years. "So good you want it today? Pay $5. Happy to wait for it to be free? Wait 5 years."
With copyright reinforced toward anachronicity (persuade me that the crude file-sharing systems we have today will not evolve into instantaneous diffusion in 50 years time), the decision to use Creative Commons becomes even more of a no brainer than it already is.
Today copyright is an inverted message:
It says to the fan "I despise you. I milk you as brainless cattle. Because you foolishly respect me, you will pay me. If you worship me I may decide not to sue you for the thief that you are."
It says to the illicit file-sharer "I love you, your wilful flouting of the law. Spread my music to the four corners of the land. Consider my music your reward for evangelising me to my paying customers."
So what does another 50 years say? It says nothing to the illicit file-sharer. To the fan it says "I've changed my mind, you don't even deserve my music when you're deaf. Henceforth, you will be dead long before you can consider to have paid the mortgage on my work!"
Another 50 years is like another coat of varnish on the fully nailed coffin of copyright. The only people getting any benefit are the undertakers.
In other words, who benefits from 50 more years out of artist, art, audience, and publisher?
I'll give you a clue - it doesn't begin with 'a'.
Permalink to Comment