EU Getting Ready To Vote On Unnecessary Copyright Extension
from the sad dept
Whenever we talk about things like retroactive copyright term extension, we frequently see comments from even the regular copyright system supporters among the readership here insisting that they, too, feel copyright is too long and extending it further makes little sense. In fact, it often seems difficult to find anyone willing to publicly support copyright term extension... and yet, it seems to keep happening. We were just discussing how Denmark had suddenly changed its position on copyright extension on the issue of neighboring rights, which are a particularly pernicious interpretation of copyright law.Either way, it looks like Denmark's sudden caving (after quite a bit of lobbying from the entertainment industry) is quickly snowballing into the EU Commission moving forward with copyright term extension across Europe. Multiple economic studies have shown that such extensions do not benefit society. In fact, they rarely benefit the content creators who are paraded out as the reason for such extensions. Instead, the majority of the money goes to a few gatekeeper companies who hold a bunch of old copyrights. It's pretty sad that the EU would so blatantly take content out of the public domain and give it to a few legacy companies.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, copyright extension, denmark, europe, welfare
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Well, your comment is certainly more insightful then the first 10 comments on a typical TorrentFreak article, all of which say "First!".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
abusive
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
(Last I heard, Maria Callas' opera recordings produced 10% of the revenue of EMI Classics. Callas' last recordings were from 1963, and she died in the 1970s.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Look on the bright side
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Look on the bright side
Let's see, at about US$80,000 per copy...
Hey guys! I just solved the budget problem!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Look on the bright side
that we claim we would have made...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Look on the bright side
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Look on the bright side
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Look on the bright side
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Been there, done that
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Been there, done that
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Been there, done that
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Been there, done that
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The sole archivist?
When old-time radio shows were originally broadcast there was rarely any thought of ever replaying them. Often the only reasons recordings were made at all was so the performance studio didn't have to be in the same building as the transmitter, or so the show could be broadcast live to the east coast and replayed later that same day for the west coast. During WWII many shows were recorded specifically so they could be replayed for servicemen through the Armed Forces Radio Network.
Transcription discs were often discarded or destroyed immediately after use, or stored in a closet and thrown out later when the closet got full. Engineers and other employees often saved transcription discs as a hobby. When tape came into the picture they made illegal copies to trade with other collectors. Later it was CDs and now it's the Internet.
There are shows produced by major networks like CBS, and a few other notables such as the Jack Benny Show, whose rights holders or their heirs have rigorously kept track of their copyrights and enforced them over the years, but in the vast majority of cases the identities of the rights holders have been obscured by time. In the 30s and 40s there was no uniform practice for assigning radio show copyrights. Sometimes the originating station held the rights, sometimes the writers, sometimes a producer, even a lead actor. Over the years stations and production companies have gone out of business, merged and been absorbed, making it impossible in practical terms to trace the current rights holders.
Without years of "pirating" by collectors and enthusiasts (myself included) who keep creating and distributing more copies out of love for the material, very little of that segment of entertainment history would still exist. So for their efforts to retroactively castrate the public domain, I say to our corporate representatives in Congress, GO FUCK YOURSELVES.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The sole archivist?
I appreciate your knowledge in this area, and I'm glad someone put me in check *here*. Maybe I can turn this stuff over to you?
I've seen the wall of tapes and it's at least 12 foot wide and 8 foot tall, and my cousin is about 70 years old. How should I let you know what I find out when I dig deeper?
P.S. One interesting tidbit: His son works for Universal :-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Look on the bright side
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We need a new system for old works
I propose a system that would let a copyright holder extend copyright by paying a fee each year. The fee could be used to renew the copyright indefinitely, but the fee would increase every year. Once the fee stopped being paid the work would go into the public domain immediately. This would let companies like Disney have a certain way to extend their copyright without the political uncertainty of extensions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We need a new system for old works
Unfortunately, as I was typing this reply, I realised how it would probably play out. Big content companies would simply pass the cost to the consumer who would not wish to pay the increase in copyright fees, so something like on old movie on DVD would cost the same as a new movie on DVD and the price of all of them would go up until nobody could afford to buy anything.
But I still think it'd be an idea worth researching if we could only get the politicians to actually listen to the PEOPLE for a change!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We need a new system for old works
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We need a new system for old works
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We need a new system for old works
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We need a new system for old works
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What is that public to do?
At some point, the public will lose their appetite for allowing Big Content to bribe politicians at the expense of our culture. Instead of trying to go the political route, the public will simply revolt. In the US, our politicians are for the most part entirely captured by Big Content; rare is the dissenting voice. The masses will rebel, Big Content will martial the power of the state to try to put down the rebellion.
As I type this, it is all sounding eerily familiar...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What is that public to do?
It would certainly involve burning stuff.
.
.
.
CD's and DVD's mostly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What is that public to do?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: What is that public to do?
Think:
Copyright revolt. Burning CD's.
Get it? :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: What is that public to do?
Get it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What is that public to do?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What is that public to do?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You can have it both ways?
Senate report on the US Copyright Extension Act of 1998: "The purpose of the bill is to ensure adequate copyright protection for American works in foreign nations and the continued economic benefits of a healthy surplus balance of trade in the exploitation of copyrighted works. The bill accomplishes these goals by extending the current U.S. copyright term for an additional 20 years. Such an extension will provide significant trade benefits by substantially harmonizing U.S. copyright law to that of the European Union while ensuring fair compensation for American creators who deserve to benefit fully from the exploitation of their works. Moreover, by stimulating the creation of new works and providing enhanced economic incentives to preserve existing works, such an extension will enhance the long-term volume, vitality and accessibility of the public domain." ~~ source http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/?&dbname=cp104&sid=cp104wMGKl&refer=&r_n=sr315 .104&item=&&&sel=TOC_8954&
Who do you agree with?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: You can have it both ways?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: You can have it both ways?
I passed maths at school with flying colours and even somebody with poor math skills can work out that it doesn't add up: Public Domain Material *minus* Public Domain Material *equals* Zero, yet according to that quote, Public Domain Material *minus* Public Domain Material *equals* More Public Domain Material. Sorry, but one minus one does not equal two.
Ha! I think I just provided the best way of explaining how the music industry is so bad at accounting!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: You can have it both ways?
Nice analogy. It's simple and it makes your point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
While you're on the EU...
For the past months, I've been morbidly fascinated by the copyright trolls in action in the USA. Legal downloads and legal weed allowed me to alternate between silent gloating and silent sympathy.
But all good things must come to an end: After Denmark, the Dutch government now proposes silly anti-piracy measures.
Not as draconian as COICA but the proposal appears as unhindered by technical or economic objectivity as lobbyists can make it.
To date, downloading copyrighted content is not illegal in the NL, but uploading it is. Loss of income through illicit downloads is compensated by a blanket tax on (re-)writable media (a whole new pit of snakes, that).
In a side note to this law, the minister also calls upon content providers to increase the availability of legal alternatives.
Here's how that will turn out: "Oh yay, I can now view -not download- House MD for €9,99 per episode, only 6 months after TV premiere in the USA!" (€9,99 = 14,43 USD, too bloody expensive)
For now, most of the tech-minded people I know agree that downloads are not the problem, but Big Content's business model is. We will happily keep downloading TV shows from the USA as long as there are no fairly-priced legal alternatives to watch recent episodes.
What is a fair price? Depends on the show; I'd say anywhere between 4 and 14 USD (download, with DRM).
The minister assures the public that this law is not aimed at and will not criminalise the average internet user.
Maybe it's just me, but if a minister feels he needs to stress that point in the first press release, my skin crawls with paranoia; the focus may be on facilitators now, but who's to say how the law will be used 10, 20 years from now?
Only "massive downloaders" will be investigated.
2 problems there:
- How do you define "massive downloading"?
- How do you detect "massive downloading"? deep packet inspection; Big Brother 0.3 Beta.
Maybe it's just me, but if a minister feels he needs to stress that point in the first press release, my skin crawls with paranoia; the focus may be on facilitators now, but who's to say how the law will be used 10, 20 years from now?
Regards from an avid reader in the land of wooden shoes and tulips; keep up the good work Mike.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why would the EU be exempt from the abuse?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Keep it up guys, I'm taking notes.
• Producers should have rights to achieve double their costs and have their rights cease to exist after that, it gives a fair payment for the work done and incentivize the continue creation of works to maintain revenues.
• Use it or loose it, if you don't use the copyrighted material for a certain amount of time you loose the rights to it.
• If copyright extensions are permitted, those terms should be subject to renew licenses every year with increasing fees for every year it is extended, those fees should be calculated as a percentage of the earnings of the copyright holder or if available the revenues for the work.
Thank you all for the ideas, I will make sure it get cataloged and pasted every time somebody says "You don't want artists to get paid", with the accompanying text "People just don't want to paid for things they never had to pay before".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Keep it up guys, I'm taking notes.
Some exceptional works that continue to generate revenues after that and since they are few and far between one extension may be appropriate, but only if this never becomes the rule but the exception, so we permit another 10 years where the copyright holder should pay a percentage of what he makes yearly from the sales of that work each year for the reminder of the years it will be covered.
How can we make copyright taxable?
How can we make copyright have sane limits?
How can we make copyright act like a variable, with thresholds to trigger certain actions? you know conditions change and static laws will never be ok for all periods and phases, how do we understand those cycles and create dynamic laws?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It soon won't be legal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]