UK copyright law extensions in the offing

[geni]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5d5a3132-cb17-11dd-87d7-000077b07658.html

in a digital world, radio stations, mobile phone operators and consumers ensure that music continues to generate revenue far into the future. Why should performers have to watch others profiting from their talent and creativity, especially at the time in their lives when many of them need it most?

Actualy in a digital world it is rather hard to profit from PD works.

Let us be clear, this is not about boosting the wealth of well-known entertainers. Behind those household names is an army of unsung heroes of the music business - the backing singers and session musicians, as well as the large number of featured artists who have never made a vast fortune, whose work continues to be played. Such artists deserve to benefit from others' use of their products during their lifetime.

Acutaly once you take out the big names the payouts tend to be pitiful.

Second, it should absolutely be the case that the person who creates a work has, within their lifetime, control over how their work is used. Should an artist who is a vegan, for example, have to put up with seeing their music used to promote fast food burgers? Or the music of an environmental campaigner being used to promote cars or airlines? I do not think so.

An admision that moral rights are a total failure. I assume they will be removed as part of any change? No?

faced with serious issues, such as on unlawful file-sharing, and other European countries are looking to us to lead the way. We need a workable system of copyright to underpin the long-term health of our creative industries. Mr Gowers's review was a thorough and thoughtful one and we have taken forward his recommendation on illegal file-sharing. But on copyright extension we take a different view.

Gowers contained other elements. Still I suppose confirming it's death clears things up (unforunate there was some good stuff in there). I'm failing to see how extending copyright is going to help with people violateing it.

The writer is secretary of state for culture, media and sport

I think we have a problem. To be fair the extesion isn't his idea he is being leaned on by Charlie McCreevy from europe but thats how it goes.

 

[Spacetime Inhabitant]

The article writer makes a basic error of fact in very first paragraph.

The length of time that sound recordings remain in copyright is a controversial subject and for the past couple of years a debate has raged on whether to extend it from the present 50 years.

Actually, it is much longer than 50 years. It is for the life of the copyright holder + 50 years, which in practice means it can easily be 100 years.
The only legitimate case that can be made is to reduce the current copyright period - to say 20 years from the time the product first published.
It is during this period that the product will generally have its main impact financially and is also when all the minor people connected with its development may be alive and able to use any money from it. After that time, the copyright acts as an anchor on creativity.

 

[geni]

The article writer makes a basic error of fact in very first paragraph.

Actually, it is much longer than 50 years. It is for the life of the copyright holder + 50 years, which in practice means it can easily be 100 years.

There is no situation under UK law that generates life+50. Sound recordings are 50 years flat which is yes something of an oddity.

The only legitimate case that can be made is to reduce the current copyright period - to say 20 years from the time the product first published.

Tying copyright terms to publication is a really bad idea.

 

[Policenaut]

I'm failing to see how extending copyright is going to help with people violateing it.

It won't. The draconian DRM on PC games don't stop piracy but most companies still use it. It only affects and hassles legit buyers who then usually resort to pirated versions anyway or at the least no cd cracks. Unless all games in the future are released through a system like Steam or monthly payments like with MMOs there will be piracy. For all sorts of media I think the way they are released to the public in the future will determine how piracy will or will not continue.

And the whole cutting your internet connection if you download pirated media is not a good solution. Maybe it will curb the biggest sharers in the short term but that's no solution. What are they going to do? Cut off internet for 60 million people in the US who download pirated media?

 

[balrog666]

As always, this is about keeping private control of the original Disney icons.

 

[geni]

As always, this is about keeping private control of the original Disney icons.

The proposed law change will have no impact on that whatsoever. Cliff Richard is a more likely reason.