British Government culture secretary Andy Burnham has recommended that copyright terms for sound recordings should be extended to 70 years, from the current 50 years.
The announcement has brought joy to record labels and UK musicians who had been campaigning for years to have the copyright terms extended. Until recently however, the campaign had fallen on deaf ears.
Burnham added ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
Originally posted by Mez: qazwiz, 5 years is more in perspective with patent laws. Patents in the US expire in 17 years. They required much more effort and funds than a copywright which is only an idea. Some patents require hundreds of millions of dollars to develope.
Artists would need to get off their asses and perform to make a buck. Right now fans are punished with the likes of Robert Plant. He is too good to think of the fans that made him rich and famous. I hope no one ever buys another one of his albums or sees another one of his shows. I have written him off.
I think the 100 years is bad for the music industry.
Most artists already do, as touring is still the only way to make money for 80% of music artists.
The other 20% or so can make it off CD sales and other things.
Originally posted by Mez: qazwiz, 5 years is more in perspective with patent laws. Patents in the US expire in 17 years. They required much more effort and funds than a copywright which is only an idea. Some patents require hundreds of millions of dollars to develope.
Artists would need to get off their asses and perform to make a buck. Right now fans are punished with the likes of Robert Plant. He is too good to think of the fans that made him rich and famous. I hope no one ever buys another one of his albums or sees another one of his shows. I have written him off.
I think the 100 years is bad for the music industry.
exactly my point.. patents are for hardware, the CD player you use has patents the most recent of which is less than 17 years old (patent life) patents can be extended if it is worth the effort, but usually the innovation has evolved to make the item obsolete
the copyright process use to allow for renewals that could be done if the property was worth renewing but the "volgon book of poetry" (a HG2tU reference) type of books wouldn't bother because there is no market so not worth the fee
Thus, while Mr. Adams would want to renew the copyright on "The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Universe".... the book of poems that he describes as "the third worst in the known Universe" would not since no one wants them
I'd rather have the 30's - 40's song "Marzey Dotes and Dozey Dotes" than virtually anything that is being cranked out these days which is the argument they use for the longer period. but why do they need to make it automatic "!00 years" or whatever?
why not return to the old way (here in the USA at least) of allowing a good length of time and then requiring occasional renewal.
this way orphans will be able fall from system while sustainable songs can be renewed
where the system is supposed to enrich the artist that made the song the system steals copyright by virtue of a catch 22, sign away your rights and we will make you a star but don't sign and we will bury you in obscurity
NIN has proved that you don't need a recording contract anymore.... they made about 1.5 million the first week that they gave away the first album... and the other two could be had for a flat $5 to download or get the 3 cd set mailed to you for just $10. so how did NIN make so much? they also offered signed sets and ultra limited sets ($75 - $300 per set) the limited edition $300 sets are all sold out but the $75 sets are still available and I bet will be as long as all artists are still alive (the $75 sets are signed but not a limited edition so if they sell out they can just sign some more)
as I implied earlier, I don't like NIN or their music but I still seeded their p2p release until I had to reimage the disk. I was over 40 copies that I had seeded last time I had checked so probably I transmitted the file 50 or more times before the file got wiped. ALSO it Downloaded to me faster than I've seen any file Download (it was the first time I had seen a 1MBps download from just one file) because there were hundreds of people seeding that file and I had set my client to accept tens of dozens of them... half a dozen of which sent at well over 100KB/s
so, in conclusion.... I'm for anything that will help (and thus encourage) the artist to be productive.... but 100 year copyright ain't gonna do it as long as the record producers
how about 10 years, successively renewable at 2 years less than the previous renewal. that would give 60 years for those that renew.
also how about 20 years renewable an indefinite number of times... BUT ONLY RENEWABLE BY THE ORIGINAL ARTIST (when he dies no more renewals) the recording industry would get them to give them the first 20 years but the renewal allows the artist to sell again or retain as their desire and circumstance permits... keeping the record companies from excessive profiting on the success of their slaves
