Free beer was one of those great campaigning platforms when I was a student. We loved it, but we also knew that it wasn’t real. There is no free beer because free beer is against the fundamental physics of both business and economics. Until now.
http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/07/22/copyright-extension-what-you-can-do/In a nutshell, music copyright which used to expire after 50 years is to be extended to 95 years by the European Parliament.
There are few issues that presently get my hackles up in the way that copyright extension does. Once again a special interest group seems to have lobbied its way into a ridiculous windfall at our expense. Don’t for a moment imagine that this is anything that benefits the artist. Most of them have long since sold their rights to that obscene body of companies that represent the recording industry. Here are my personal favourite counter arguments.
1. The period up to the end of the current 50 year limit has what in licensing terms is called a residual value. Note that word. Value. It therefore follows that there is a value in the 50-95 year period as well. And since the record companies didn’t pay for that period, the copyright, and its value as a property, should revert to the original creator.
2. As it stands the Value I talked about above is ours, the public. If the record companies want it they should pay for it. I don’t expect my elected representatives to give my rights away (though I’m rarely surprised when they do)
Here’s a simple question. If copyright was reduced from 50 years to 45 years would the stakeholders expect compensation for those 5 year? Of course they would. So why do they expect to get 45 years for free?
