Aging rockers set to lose copyrights - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Lemonade Stand Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-01-2006, 11:55 AM   #1
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,323
Local Time: 07:48 PM
Aging rockers set to lose copyrights

LONDON, England (Reuters) -- When British finance minister Gordon Brown stands up to make his pre-budget speech next week, aging rockers Cliff Richard, The Beatles and The Rolling Stones might do well to tune in.

Not normally the stuff of rock'n'roll, Wednesday's address looks set to reject music industry calls for an extension of copyright on sound recordings to 95 years from 50, meaning veteran acts' early hits could soon be free for all to use.

The government commissioned Andrew Gowers to review all areas of intellectual property law, including challenges thrown up by the consumption of music and film over the Internet, and he is seen as unlikely to recommend a copyright extension.

His conclusions are expected to be published next week as part of the chancellor's annual pre-budget report.

Official sources say the Labour government appears more swayed by the right of consumers to access music cheaply, or, if it is 50 years old, essentially for free, than by old performers seeking protection.

Commentators also point out that the 50-year sound recording cover is standard in most European countries, and Britain would be unlikely to want to stand alone by extending it.

Richard has led the way in highlighting the issue, with his first hit "Move It!," from 1958, perilously close to the cut off point for copyright protection.

Protection for artists
More significantly for record labels who do a lucrative trade in remastering and repackaging old hits, The Beatles catalogue could be up for grabs from 2012 and 2013, including early hits like "Love Me Do" and "I Want To Hold Your Hand."

Then come The Shadows and The Rolling Stones, to name but a few.

In 2005, Elvis Presley's record label re-released his British No. 1 hits over consecutive weeks to cash in ahead of the deadline.

David Arnold, who composed the scores for four James Bond movies, argues that the 50-year copyright limit discriminates against performers and record companies.

"I don't think anyone involved in music's creation can understand how, after a certain amount of time, it stops being yours and starts being everyone else's," he told Reuters.

"We need to do the groundwork so there is an element of protection for artists and record companies who take a risk with an artist," he added. "That's if we value the entertainment industry and value music in our society."

Richard has said he would like to see copyright protection for singers and record labels extended, pointing out that songwriters enjoy protection for their lifetime plus 70 years.

In the United States, copyright protection is 95 years.

Industry bodies like the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) argue that the failure to extend protection on old hits will jeopardize investment in future talent.

Emma Pike, chief executive of the British Music Rights group, sides with the BPI, but says the Gowers Review raises broader issues for music and film in the 21st century.

"Sales of legitimate music downloads are growing exponentially ... but the overall picture globally is still one of decline," she said.

"There is a statistic that 80 percent (of Internet music download traffic) is illegal and 20 percent legal, so we have an enormous amount of work to do and the music industry simply can't do it on its own."

Copyright 2006 Reuters. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
__________________

__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
Old 12-01-2006, 04:47 PM   #2
Breakdancing Soul Pilgrim
 
UberBeaver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: the most serious...douch hammer ever
Posts: 20,318
Local Time: 07:48 PM
I kinda think it would be nice for the person that wrote the music to be able to "own" it and see it used properly thought their lives. However, I'm still kinda bitter about what the Rolling Stones did to the Verve, so I don't feel any pity for them.
__________________

__________________
UberBeaver is offline  
Old 12-02-2006, 01:04 AM   #3
War Child
 
Ormus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Frontios
Posts: 758
Local Time: 08:48 PM
Quote:
Not normally the stuff of rock'n'roll, Wednesday's address looks set to reject music industry calls for an extension of copyright on sound recordings to 95 years from 50, meaning veteran acts' early hits could soon be free for all to use.
It's about time that a government finally stands up to this abuse of the original intent of copyright law. If it were up to corporations, they would just continue to play this "copyright extension" game indefinitely. Do you really think that once the 95th year came up that they'd actually allow it to go public domain without kicking and screaming?
__________________
Ormus is offline  
Old 12-03-2006, 08:41 PM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BrownEyedBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: San Pedro Sula, Honduras
Posts: 3,510
Local Time: 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by UberBeaver
I kinda think it would be nice for the person that wrote the music to be able to "own" it and see it used properly thought their lives. However, I'm still kinda bitter about what the Rolling Stones did to the Verve, so I don't feel any pity for them.

So true. Greedy bastards.
__________________
BrownEyedBoy is offline  
Old 12-03-2006, 08:45 PM   #5
ONE
love, blood, life
 
MrBrau1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Verplexed in Vermont
Posts: 10,436
Local Time: 07:48 PM
As greedy as the Stones may have been, The Verve were equally stupid. Infact, moreso.

The Verve=Brilliant, but stupid band.
__________________
"If you needed my autograph, I'd give it to you." Bob Dylan
MrBrau1 is offline  
Old 12-04-2006, 09:19 AM   #6
Blue Crack Distributor
 
LarryMullen's POPAngel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: I'll be up with the sun, I'm not coming down...
Posts: 53,698
Local Time: 07:48 PM
Stupid bands.

This really sucks. If I was an artist I'd be fighting this like mad.
__________________
LarryMullen's POPAngel is offline  
Old 12-04-2006, 10:27 AM   #7
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BrownEyedBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: San Pedro Sula, Honduras
Posts: 3,510
Local Time: 06:48 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrBrau1
As greedy as the Stones may have been, The Verve were equally stupid. Infact, moreso.

The Verve=Brilliant, but stupid band.
I was actually going to point that out myself but in the end was too lazy to type it. I just think the Stones could´ve pretty easily let it go.
__________________

__________________
BrownEyedBoy is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com