Jamaica The Latest To Embrace Retroactive Copyright Term Extension And Screw The Public Domain

from the sad-news-for-jamaican-music dept

Fri, Oct 21st 2011 4:59am — Mike Masnick

Last month we wrote about Europe retroactively extending copyright, which, in effect, seized works that were supposed to go into the public domain. A study found that the cost to the public was 1 billion euros. To date, we have never seen a reasonable justification for retroactive copyright term extension. The purpose of copyright is to benefit the public by inspiring new works, by giving the creator a temporary monopoly. It makes no sense to retroactively change the deal, because obviously the deal was sufficient at the time the content was created. Nothing in retroactive extension increases the incentive for new works. If anything, it does the exact opposite -- it gives the record labels more incentive to keep squeezing money out of old songs, rather than to invest in new ones.

So it's disappointing to hear that Jamaica appears poised to follow suit and extend copyrights from 50 years to 70 years as well. In the video below, it starts off with an impassioned plea by a recording industry representative, who misrepresents some research. He notes a WIPO paper that says the copyright industries' return on investment is higher than other sectors. That may be true, but that is almost entirely unrelated to copyright term extension. There can be investment in the same sectors without copyright, and just because the copyright is extended, there is no reason to believe there is greater investment in those industries. The basic fallacy presented by Evon Mullings, is the idea that retroactive extension leads to greater investment. In fact, as noted, it gives the labels less incentive to invest in new works.

Unfortunately, the speaker after Mullings is the Minister of Culture, Olivia Grange, who flat out says: "You won't have to advocate. You won't have to fight for it. It is going to be done."

This is especially ridiculous when it comes to Jamaican culture and Jamaican music. For many, many years, we've spoken about how Jamaican music was a great example of the success of embracing a remix culture. In addition there's been plenty of recent research talking about the explosive creativity in Jamaican culture spurred on by technology, not by copyright law... It's a shame that rather than understanding this, it appears the industry and politicians there are simply repeating myths and passing legislation that will significantly harm the public.

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, jamaica

18 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Steve R. (profile), 21 Oct 2011 @ 5:13am

It's Never Enough
Those who assert that so-called "intellectual property" exists are never satisfied. It's always more more more.

Not only that, but as their property claims become more onerous, once legal activities become criminal. To stamp out this atrocious "criminal" active; they demand even stronger onerous laws to protect so-called "intellectual property". Sigh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DannyB (profile), 21 Oct 2011 @ 5:48am
  
  Re: It's Never Enough
  Call it what it really is: Imaginary Property.
  
  The best way to protect your imaginary property is to KEEP IT TO YOURSELF.
  
  That way you won't have to hear your music playing in the background on a video of someone's baby.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Steve R. (profile), 21 Oct 2011 @ 6:46am
    
    Re: Re: It's Never Enough
    Fully agree. What I neglected to add, is that the ever "stronger" laws concerning so-called "intellectual property" are "stealing" from the public domain and depriving people of due process.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Doe, 21 Oct 2011 @ 5:16am

Did they extend copyright to dead people?
My favorite thing about copyright is that it is life plus 70 years in the US. Without copyright, what incentive do dead people have to create?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- WysiWyg (profile), 21 Oct 2011 @ 7:55am
  
  Re: Did they extend copyright to dead people?
  Well, just like the factory worker wouldn't go to work if he didn't know that the company would keep paying his great-great-grandkids for 70 years after his death, no-one would ever create anything creative without this protection. Obviously.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Oct 2011 @ 5:28am

Is bob marley/lee scratch perry's music about to go into public domain?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Richard (profile), 21 Oct 2011 @ 5:29am

, it appears the industry and politicians there are simply repeating myths and passing legislation that will significantly harm the public.

Their disregard of reality reminds me of Gaddafi.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Oct 2011 @ 5:32am

In other developments, apparently Google wants in the music biz so bad that they've agreed to stop pointing at pirate sites in exchange for licensing agreements with the content holders.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Doe, 21 Oct 2011 @ 5:58am
  
  Re:
  I wonder who is going to tell them what sites are pirate sites? RIAA? MPAA? ICE?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
MrWilson, 21 Oct 2011 @ 6:04am

Once again, if those in power do not respect the original social agreement that was copyright law, then the public will not recognize copyright law as valid.

A citizen who continues to respect copyright law is like a battered wife who stays with her abusive husband, who also demands more and more of her earnings for himself, all because, "think of the artists (who are also getting screwed)."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
anonymous, 21 Oct 2011 @ 7:10am

this has only happened so as to maintain the continuing flow of drugs into the USA. Jamaica has little else to offer anyone except shit and grass! they have to earn money somehow and tourism alone wont cut it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 21 Oct 2011 @ 9:32am
  
  Re:
  Right. The sheer quantities of Jamaican pot imports is such that the Jamaican Weed Cartel would lose billions were it to stop. They're such a huge player in the weed market that they can exert unbelievable control over their own government.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Fenderson (profile), 21 Oct 2011 @ 9:32am
    
    Re: Re:
    (forgot the SarcMark)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Oct 2011 @ 7:14am

When humans start to interface with computers without the aid of machanical input devices, when data is piped straight into your cortex, will media companies sue you for remembering music and thinking about it? Will they ensure you forget such music and artwork, or have to buy memory licenses for it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 21 Oct 2011 @ 9:33am
  
  Re:
  Yes.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
WysiWyg (profile), 21 Oct 2011 @ 7:57am

Ow, my head!
I can't wrap my head around the logic they use; apparently the current system means that they are making more money than anyone else, so they need to change it!?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chosen Reject (profile), 21 Oct 2011 @ 12:30pm
  
  Re: Ow, my head!
  His logic is impeccable. Copyright industries having a higher return on investment can only mean that we need to add more industries under the copyright industries umbrella. This is good to know. I need to figure out a way to copyright my stock trades then I'll be rolling in money.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
The eejit (profile), 21 Oct 2011 @ 12:17pm

Yay! More cultural raping and pillaging for the sake of A Few Dollars More!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]