As many of you will know, there are moves afoot (promoted by the recording industry) to extend the copyright term for sound recordings in the UK from 50 to 95 years.
Admittedly, this shouldn't affect traditional musicians too much, but in my view it would be culturally damaging.
Anyone in favour of the extension of the copyright term?
Anyone against the extension of the copyright term?
If you are against the extension of copyright, please sign this e-petition.
It's that bloody Tony Blair's pal Cliff Richard isn't it. What a greedy fecker. Tony was given free holidays at Cliffs Caribean Villa in exchange for a change in the law.
If the only effect is that it gives the MCPS and the PRS more right to harrass owners of small bars and shops, to add to the earnings of Paul McCartney and Elton John, then I'm agin it.
Cliff Richard, nicholas? I thought he was destined to stay with us for ever as one of the Young Ones! Still, I suppose in 95 years time he might well be a Shadow of his former self ...
Why stop at 95 years? Ridiculous. 50 years is plenty time for anyone to make a decent amount.
Corporations never die, as a legal entity, do they?
Greed rules as per usual...
I believe I'm correct in saying that this proposed new EU legislation will not be retroactive and will apply only to those recordings still in copyright on the date of commencement of any national legislation.
I suspect this proposed legislation is to bring the EU into line with what is going on in copyright legislation in the USA. Would any of our friends in the USA like to comment on this?
Comments from the US?
Yeah, we're screwed. Thank Sonny Bono and Disney.
With any luck, you folks will preserve reasonable copyright laws geared toward artists, not corporations.
A couple of organizations in the states (Society of American Archivists and Association for Recorded Sound Collections among them) are working to get legislation passed to address US copyright issues regarding sound recordings. Main issue being that there are hardy no sound recordings in the public domain, regardless of when they were recorded:
Extension of Copyright on Sound Recordings
Extension of Copyright on Sound Recordings
As many of you will know, there are moves afoot (promoted by the recording industry) to extend the copyright term for sound recordings in the UK from 50 to 95 years.
Admittedly, this shouldn't affect traditional musicians too much, but in my view it would be culturally damaging.
Anyone in favour of the extension of the copyright term?
Anyone against the extension of the copyright term?
If you are against the extension of copyright, please sign this e-petition.
http://www.soundcopyright.eu/
# Posted on November 19th 2008 by Mix O'Lydian
Re: Extension of Copyright on Sound Recordings
It's that bloody Tony Blair's pal Cliff Richard isn't it. What a greedy fecker. Tony was given free holidays at Cliffs Caribean Villa in exchange for a change in the law.
# Posted on November 19th 2008 by llig leahcim
Re: Extension of Copyright on Sound Recordings
... the unaccepable face of socialism?
# Posted on November 19th 2008 by Mix O'Lydian
Re: Extension of Copyright on Sound Recordings
Nothing socialist about extending copyright terms.
# Posted on November 19th 2008 by robharper
Re: Extension of Copyright on Sound Recordings
"New Labour" = capitalism, then?
# Posted on November 19th 2008 by Mix O'Lydian
Re: Extension of Copyright on Sound Recordings
Even Cliff Richard is unlikely to last 95 years in this life starting from Summer Holiday...
# Posted on November 19th 2008 by nicholas
Re: Extension of Copyright on Sound Recordings
If the only effect is that it gives the MCPS and the PRS more right to harrass owners of small bars and shops, to add to the earnings of Paul McCartney and Elton John, then I'm agin it.
# Posted on November 19th 2008 by Guernsey Pete
Re: Extension of Copyright on Sound Recordings
Cliff Richard, nicholas? I thought he was destined to stay with us for ever as one of the Young Ones! Still, I suppose in 95 years time he might well be a Shadow of his former self ...
# Posted on November 19th 2008 by Mix O'Lydian
Re: Extension of Copyright on Sound Recordings
Why stop at 95 years? Ridiculous. 50 years is plenty time for anyone to make a decent amount.
Corporations never die, as a legal entity, do they?
Greed rules as per usual...
# Posted on November 19th 2008 by john knoss
Re: Extension of Copyright on Sound Recordings
Yes, folks - vote early and often!!
# Posted on November 19th 2008 by the wounded hussar
Re: Extension of Copyright on Sound Recordings
I believe I'm correct in saying that this proposed new EU legislation will not be retroactive and will apply only to those recordings still in copyright on the date of commencement of any national legislation.
I suspect this proposed legislation is to bring the EU into line with what is going on in copyright legislation in the USA. Would any of our friends in the USA like to comment on this?
# Posted on November 20th 2008 by lazyhound
Re: Extension of Copyright on Sound Recordings
Comments from the US?
Yeah, we're screwed. Thank Sonny Bono and Disney.
With any luck, you folks will preserve reasonable copyright laws geared toward artists, not corporations.
# Posted on November 20th 2008 by reenactor
Re: Extension of Copyright on Sound Recordings
A couple of organizations in the states (Society of American Archivists and Association for Recorded Sound Collections among them) are working to get legislation passed to address US copyright issues regarding sound recordings. Main issue being that there are hardy no sound recordings in the public domain, regardless of when they were recorded:
http://www.publicdomainsherpa.com/public-domain-sound-recordings.html
Secondary issue is the orphan works problem--copyrighted materials that the rights owner cannot either be identified or located.
If nothing else, we can get some public domain recordings here in the US in 2067--w0000 h00000!
# Posted on November 26th 2008 by dr_funkenstein