Greedy song-writers and performers are negotiating an extension of the 50 years (yes 50 years should be enough! - patents get 20 years after all). http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7511224.stm Ageing rock stars and session musicians will keep receiving royalties for their old recordings for the rest of their lives under a European Union plan. Performers currently lose the rights to their recordings after 50 years. Veteran artists like Sir Cliff Richard and Roger Daltrey are among those who have campaigned for it to be extended. The EU has now announced a scheme for copyright on recordings to last for 95 years. EU governments and the European Parliament still need to give approval. Under the current regime, the first rock 'n' roll recordings will go out of copyright in the coming years. That means performers, producers and record labels would no longer get paid for sales or airplay, and the songs could be released cheaply by any record label. Sir Cliff's first hits will go out of copyright on 1 January next year, while The Beatles' catalogue will start to enter the public domain in 2013. Sir Paul McCartney and U2 have also spoken out in favour of extending the copyright. But the EU plan is potentially more important for the thousands of lesser-known band members, session musicians and producers who may be in greater need of an income during their retirement. The proposals were unveiled by European Commission Single Market Commissioner Charlie McCreevy. "A 95-year term would bridge the income gap that performers face when they turn 70, just as their early performances recorded in their 20s would lose protection," his scheme said. ................................................... Well blow me down with a feather! The poor wee souls have no money to rake in in their 70s! What about Engineers and Scientists who make real contributions to society. K.
Song Copyrights and Patents
Started by ●July 17, 2008
Reply by ●July 17, 20082008-07-17
On Jul 17, 3:22�pm, kronec...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:> Greedy song-writers and performers are negotiating an extension of the > 50 years (yes 50 years should be enough! - patents get 20 years after > all). > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7511224.stm > > Ageing rock stars and session musicians will keep receiving royalties > for their old recordings for the rest of their lives under a European > Union plan. > > Performers currently lose the rights to their recordings after 50 > years. > > Veteran artists like Sir Cliff Richard and Roger Daltrey are among > those who have campaigned for it to be extended. > > The EU has now announced a scheme for copyright on recordings to last > for 95 years. EU governments and the European Parliament still need to > give approval. > > Under the current regime, the first rock 'n' roll recordings will go > out of copyright in the coming years. > > That means performers, producers and record labels would no longer get > paid for sales or airplay, and the songs could be released cheaply by > any record label. > > Sir Cliff's first hits will go out of copyright on 1 January next > year, while The Beatles' catalogue will start to enter the public > domain in 2013. > > Sir Paul McCartney and U2 have also spoken out in favour of extending > the copyright. > > But the EU plan is potentially more important for the thousands of > lesser-known band members, session musicians and producers who may be > in greater need of an income during their retirement. > > The proposals were unveiled by European Commission Single Market > Commissioner Charlie McCreevy. > > "A 95-year term would bridge the income gap that performers face when > they turn 70, just as their early performances recorded in their 20s > would lose protection," his scheme said. > ................................................... > > Well blow me down with a feather! The poor wee souls have no money to > rake in in their 70s! What about Engineers and Scientists who make > real contributions to society. > > K.Have you not created something worth protecting? If you don't believe that people should be able to protect their creations and that they should be freely available, then you don't have to protect your own. Feel free to give away anything you create.
Reply by ●July 17, 20082008-07-17
kronecker@yahoo.co.uk wrote:> Greedy song-writers and performers are negotiating an extension of the > 50 years (yes 50 years should be enough! - patents get 20 years after > all). > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7511224.stm > > > Ageing rock stars and session musicians will keep receiving royalties > for their old recordings for the rest of their lives under a European > Union plan. > > Performers currently lose the rights to their recordings after 50 > years. > > Veteran artists like Sir Cliff Richard and Roger Daltrey are among > those who have campaigned for it to be extended. > > The EU has now announced a scheme for copyright on recordings to last > for 95 years. EU governments and the European Parliament still need to > give approval. > > Under the current regime, the first rock 'n' roll recordings will go > out of copyright in the coming years. > > That means performers, producers and record labels would no longer get > paid for sales or airplay, and the songs could be released cheaply by > any record label. > > Sir Cliff's first hits will go out of copyright on 1 January next > year, while The Beatles' catalogue will start to enter the public > domain in 2013. > > Sir Paul McCartney and U2 have also spoken out in favour of extending > the copyright. > > But the EU plan is potentially more important for the thousands of > lesser-known band members, session musicians and producers who may be > in greater need of an income during their retirement. > > The proposals were unveiled by European Commission Single Market > Commissioner Charlie McCreevy. > > "A 95-year term would bridge the income gap that performers face when > they turn 70, just as their early performances recorded in their 20s > would lose protection," his scheme said. > ...................................................I would like to think that ownership of my house will extend at least as long as I and those who inherit it live. A song is private property. Mao wrote that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. Should ownership rights also belong to those who can wrest them? Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. �����������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by ●July 17, 20082008-07-17
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 12:22:14 -0700 (PDT), kronecker@yahoo.co.uk wrote:>Greedy song-writers and performers are negotiating an extension of the >50 years (yes 50 years should be enough! - patents get 20 years after >all). > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7511224.stm > > >Ageing rock stars and session musicians will keep receiving royalties >for their old recordings for the rest of their lives under a European >Union plan. > >Performers currently lose the rights to their recordings after 50 >years. > >Veteran artists like Sir Cliff Richard and Roger Daltrey are among >those who have campaigned for it to be extended. > >The EU has now announced a scheme for copyright on recordings to last >for 95 years. EU governments and the European Parliament still need to >give approval. > >Under the current regime, the first rock 'n' roll recordings will go >out of copyright in the coming years. > >That means performers, producers and record labels would no longer get >paid for sales or airplay, and the songs could be released cheaply by >any record label. > >Sir Cliff's first hits will go out of copyright on 1 January next >year, while The Beatles' catalogue will start to enter the public >domain in 2013. > >Sir Paul McCartney and U2 have also spoken out in favour of extending >the copyright. > >But the EU plan is potentially more important for the thousands of >lesser-known band members, session musicians and producers who may be >in greater need of an income during their retirement. > >The proposals were unveiled by European Commission Single Market >Commissioner Charlie McCreevy. > >"A 95-year term would bridge the income gap that performers face when >they turn 70, just as their early performances recorded in their 20s >would lose protection," his scheme said. >................................................... > > > >Well blow me down with a feather! The poor wee souls have no money to >rake in in their 70s! What about Engineers and Scientists who make >real contributions to society. > > >K.I'll disagree with the previous posters and agree with your sentiment. When patent protection and policies were first developed it was recognized that ownership of Intellectual Property should not last forever, i.e., there should be an expiration date at which time the property became public domain. There are very good reasons for this, and this policy continues in patent law in the US and globally. Generally the laws have recognize that there should be sufficient time for the creator of the property to reap exclusive benefits in order to provide good motivation (and reward) for IP creation. If there is no transfer mechanism to the public domain then the public and society at large gets locked out and (in the case of technology) further evolution of the industry/arts are impeded by restricted access to the property. It's a balance, and the arguments are that the balance should be tilted more to the favor of the creators than it has been historically. The same is true generally of copyrights, and the current schemes have done well for many, many years. Only recently, when wealthy and influential copyright holders wanted to extend their ownership (past what everyone else had been living with for ages) has the system been challenged to extend the duration of the ownership. A big case in point in the US was Disney, who got congress to extend copyright terms so that they could maintain exclusive ownership of Mickey and Goofy et al. There's a tradeoff between exclusive rights and public rights, and the historically proven-out method has been to grant exclusive rights to the creator for a period of time. It is not surprising that as certain creators have gotten wealthy and a lot of money is at stake for them, that they'll argue that the tradeoff should be tilted more in their favor. It may turn out that way, but it means the balance may be getting out of whack. If the same thing happens to patents none of us will be able to build anything without paying a ton of royalties to people who developed technology fifty years ago. And I don't see a big separation in this case between the development of technology and copyrighted arts. Arts build on what's gone on before, just like technology. Restricting access to the foundations means fewer buildings get built. Eric Jacobsen Minister of Algorithms Abineau Communications http://www.ericjacobsen.org Blog: http://www.dsprelated.com/blogs-1/hf/Eric_Jacobsen.php
Reply by ●July 17, 20082008-07-17
kronecker@yahoo.co.uk writes:> [...] > Well blow me down with a feather! The poor wee souls have no money to > rake in in their 70s! What about Engineers and Scientists who make > real contributions to society.That's a really pompous, egocentric, ignorant statement. I happen to believe musicians give us something quite invaluable, and I have absolutely no problem with the creators of music protecting their creations. Now record moguls are another story... -- % Randy Yates % "She's sweet on Wagner-I think she'd die for Beethoven. %% Fuquay-Varina, NC % She love the way Puccini lays down a tune, and %%% 919-577-9882 % Verdi's always creepin' from her room." %%%% <yates@ieee.org> % "Rockaria", *A New World Record*, ELO http://www.digitalsignallabs.com
Reply by ●July 17, 20082008-07-17
On Jul 18, 7:44 am, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote:> kronec...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: > > Greedy song-writers and performers are negotiating an extension of the > > 50 years (yes 50 years should be enough! - patents get 20 years after > > all). > > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7511224.stm > > > Ageing rock stars and session musicians will keep receiving royalties > > for their old recordings for the rest of their lives under a European > > Union plan. > > > Performers currently lose the rights to their recordings after 50 > > years. > > > Veteran artists like Sir Cliff Richard and Roger Daltrey are among > > those who have campaigned for it to be extended. > > > The EU has now announced a scheme for copyright on recordings to last > > for 95 years. EU governments and the European Parliament still need to > > give approval. > > > Under the current regime, the first rock 'n' roll recordings will go > > out of copyright in the coming years. > > > That means performers, producers and record labels would no longer get > > paid for sales or airplay, and the songs could be released cheaply by > > any record label. > > > Sir Cliff's first hits will go out of copyright on 1 January next > > year, while The Beatles' catalogue will start to enter the public > > domain in 2013. > > > Sir Paul McCartney and U2 have also spoken out in favour of extending > > the copyright. > > > But the EU plan is potentially more important for the thousands of > > lesser-known band members, session musicians and producers who may be > > in greater need of an income during their retirement. > > > The proposals were unveiled by European Commission Single Market > > Commissioner Charlie McCreevy. > > > "A 95-year term would bridge the income gap that performers face when > > they turn 70, just as their early performances recorded in their 20s > > would lose protection," his scheme said. > > ................................................... > > I would like to think that ownership of my house will extend at least as > long as I and those who inherit it live. A song is private property. Mao > wrote that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. Should > ownership rights also belong to those who can wrest them? > > Jerry > -- > Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. > =AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF==AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF= =AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF I beg to disagree. By a similar though extended argument we should be paying Mozarts relatives and Beethovens for their work used daily in TV ads and radio world-wide. When the rich get richer they want to change the rules in their favour. I am all for protecting copyright, but it should like everything else have a reasonable shelf-life. Twenty years is enough and should be the same as a patent. K.
Reply by ●July 17, 20082008-07-17
On Jul 18, 7:44 am, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote:> kronec...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: > > Greedy song-writers and performers are negotiating an extension of the > > 50 years (yes 50 years should be enough! - patents get 20 years after > > all). > > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7511224.stm > > > Ageing rock stars and session musicians will keep receiving royalties > > for their old recordings for the rest of their lives under a European > > Union plan. > > > Performers currently lose the rights to their recordings after 50 > > years. > > > Veteran artists like Sir Cliff Richard and Roger Daltrey are among > > those who have campaigned for it to be extended. > > > The EU has now announced a scheme for copyright on recordings to last > > for 95 years. EU governments and the European Parliament still need to > > give approval. > > > Under the current regime, the first rock 'n' roll recordings will go > > out of copyright in the coming years. > > > That means performers, producers and record labels would no longer get > > paid for sales or airplay, and the songs could be released cheaply by > > any record label. > > > Sir Cliff's first hits will go out of copyright on 1 January next > > year, while The Beatles' catalogue will start to enter the public > > domain in 2013. > > > Sir Paul McCartney and U2 have also spoken out in favour of extending > > the copyright. > > > But the EU plan is potentially more important for the thousands of > > lesser-known band members, session musicians and producers who may be > > in greater need of an income during their retirement. > > > The proposals were unveiled by European Commission Single Market > > Commissioner Charlie McCreevy. > > > "A 95-year term would bridge the income gap that performers face when > > they turn 70, just as their early performances recorded in their 20s > > would lose protection," his scheme said. > > ................................................... > > I would like to think that ownership of my house will extend at least as > long as I and those who inherit it live. A song is private property. Mao > wrote that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. Should > ownership rights also belong to those who can wrest them? > > Jerry > -- > Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. > =AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF==AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF= =AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF I beg to disagree. By a similar though extended argument we should be paying Mozarts relatives and Beethovens for their work used daily in TV ads and radio world-wide. When the rich get richer they want to change the rules in their favour. I am all for protecting copyright, but it should like everything else have a reasonable shelf-life. Twenty years is enough and should be the same as a patent. K.
Reply by ●July 17, 20082008-07-17
On Jul 18, 7:44 am, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote:> kronec...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: > > Greedy song-writers and performers are negotiating an extension of the > > 50 years (yes 50 years should be enough! - patents get 20 years after > > all). > > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7511224.stm > > > Ageing rock stars and session musicians will keep receiving royalties > > for their old recordings for the rest of their lives under a European > > Union plan. > > > Performers currently lose the rights to their recordings after 50 > > years. > > > Veteran artists like Sir Cliff Richard and Roger Daltrey are among > > those who have campaigned for it to be extended. > > > The EU has now announced a scheme for copyright on recordings to last > > for 95 years. EU governments and the European Parliament still need to > > give approval. > > > Under the current regime, the first rock 'n' roll recordings will go > > out of copyright in the coming years. > > > That means performers, producers and record labels would no longer get > > paid for sales or airplay, and the songs could be released cheaply by > > any record label. > > > Sir Cliff's first hits will go out of copyright on 1 January next > > year, while The Beatles' catalogue will start to enter the public > > domain in 2013. > > > Sir Paul McCartney and U2 have also spoken out in favour of extending > > the copyright. > > > But the EU plan is potentially more important for the thousands of > > lesser-known band members, session musicians and producers who may be > > in greater need of an income during their retirement. > > > The proposals were unveiled by European Commission Single Market > > Commissioner Charlie McCreevy. > > > "A 95-year term would bridge the income gap that performers face when > > they turn 70, just as their early performances recorded in their 20s > > would lose protection," his scheme said. > > ................................................... > > I would like to think that ownership of my house will extend at least as > long as I and those who inherit it live. A song is private property. Mao > wrote that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. Should > ownership rights also belong to those who can wrest them? > > Jerry > -- > Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. > =AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF==AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF= =AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF I beg to disagree. By a similar though extended argument we should be paying Mozarts relatives and Beethovens for their work used daily in TV ads and radio world-wide. When the rich get richer they want to change the rules in their favour. I am all for protecting copyright, but it should like everything else have a reasonable shelf-life. Twenty years is enough and should be the same as a patent. K.
Reply by ●July 17, 20082008-07-17
On Jul 18, 7:44 am, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote:> kronec...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: > > Greedy song-writers and performers are negotiating an extension of the > > 50 years (yes 50 years should be enough! - patents get 20 years after > > all). > > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7511224.stm > > > Ageing rock stars and session musicians will keep receiving royalties > > for their old recordings for the rest of their lives under a European > > Union plan. > > > Performers currently lose the rights to their recordings after 50 > > years. > > > Veteran artists like Sir Cliff Richard and Roger Daltrey are among > > those who have campaigned for it to be extended. > > > The EU has now announced a scheme for copyright on recordings to last > > for 95 years. EU governments and the European Parliament still need to > > give approval. > > > Under the current regime, the first rock 'n' roll recordings will go > > out of copyright in the coming years. > > > That means performers, producers and record labels would no longer get > > paid for sales or airplay, and the songs could be released cheaply by > > any record label. > > > Sir Cliff's first hits will go out of copyright on 1 January next > > year, while The Beatles' catalogue will start to enter the public > > domain in 2013. > > > Sir Paul McCartney and U2 have also spoken out in favour of extending > > the copyright. > > > But the EU plan is potentially more important for the thousands of > > lesser-known band members, session musicians and producers who may be > > in greater need of an income during their retirement. > > > The proposals were unveiled by European Commission Single Market > > Commissioner Charlie McCreevy. > > > "A 95-year term would bridge the income gap that performers face when > > they turn 70, just as their early performances recorded in their 20s > > would lose protection," his scheme said. > > ................................................... > > I would like to think that ownership of my house will extend at least as > long as I and those who inherit it live. A song is private property. Mao > wrote that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. Should > ownership rights also belong to those who can wrest them? > > Jerry > -- > Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. > �����������������������������������������������������������������������I beg to disagree. By a similar though extended argument we should be paying Mozarts relatives and Beethovens for their work used daily in TV ads and radio world-wide. When the rich get richer they want to change the rules in their favour. I am all for protecting copyright, but it should like everything else have a reasonable shelf-life. Twenty years is enough and should be the same as a patent. K.
Reply by ●July 17, 20082008-07-17
On Jul 18, 7:44 am, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote:> kronec...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: > > Greedy song-writers and performers are negotiating an extension of the > > 50 years (yes 50 years should be enough! - patents get 20 years after > > all). > > >http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7511224.stm > > > Ageing rock stars and session musicians will keep receiving royalties > > for their old recordings for the rest of their lives under a European > > Union plan. > > > Performers currently lose the rights to their recordings after 50 > > years. > > > Veteran artists like Sir Cliff Richard and Roger Daltrey are among > > those who have campaigned for it to be extended. > > > The EU has now announced a scheme for copyright on recordings to last > > for 95 years. EU governments and the European Parliament still need to > > give approval. > > > Under the current regime, the first rock 'n' roll recordings will go > > out of copyright in the coming years. > > > That means performers, producers and record labels would no longer get > > paid for sales or airplay, and the songs could be released cheaply by > > any record label. > > > Sir Cliff's first hits will go out of copyright on 1 January next > > year, while The Beatles' catalogue will start to enter the public > > domain in 2013. > > > Sir Paul McCartney and U2 have also spoken out in favour of extending > > the copyright. > > > But the EU plan is potentially more important for the thousands of > > lesser-known band members, session musicians and producers who may be > > in greater need of an income during their retirement. > > > The proposals were unveiled by European Commission Single Market > > Commissioner Charlie McCreevy. > > > "A 95-year term would bridge the income gap that performers face when > > they turn 70, just as their early performances recorded in their 20s > > would lose protection," his scheme said. > > ................................................... > > I would like to think that ownership of my house will extend at least as > long as I and those who inherit it live. A song is private property. Mao > wrote that political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. Should > ownership rights also belong to those who can wrest them? > > Jerry > -- > Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. > =AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF==AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF= =AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF=AF I beg to disagree. By a similar though extended argument we should be paying Mozarts relatives and Beethovens for their work used daily in TV ads and radio world-wide. When the rich get richer they want to change the rules in their favour. I am all for protecting copyright, but it should like everything else have a reasonable shelf-life. Twenty years is enough and should be the same as a patent. K.
