J.A.W. Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 (edited) BBC: It seems EU music recordings copyright is to be extended to 70 years after all. This will be a blow to all those European public-domain labels Edited September 8, 2011 by J.A.W. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmce Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 Wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDK Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 Frankly, I'm much less concerned about who owns the rights to popular recordings than I am with so-called orphan works that fall between the cracks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ayers Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 These laws were framed in general to protect intellectual property (composition) but limit the rights of performers. Don't need to go into the history of that. But worth noting that what protects performers also protects the producers (music publishers of course are already protected). Frankly, I'm much less concerned about who owns the rights to popular recordings than I am with so-called orphan works that fall between the cracks. Why? Can't you just freely publish orphan works as long as reasonable efforts have been made to identify the owner? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmce Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 So what does this mean for releases by Fresh Sound and the like that fall between 1941 and 1961. Will they now be in violation and have to be withdrawn? These laws were framed in general to protect intellectual property (composition) but limit the rights of performers. Don't need to go into the history of that. But worth noting that what protects performers also protects the producers (music publishers of course are already protected). Frankly, I'm much less concerned about who owns the rights to popular recordings than I am with so-called orphan works that fall between the cracks. Why? Can't you just freely publish orphan works as long as reasonable efforts have been made to identify the owner? Not so easy. Read up on the Savory collection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Beat Steve Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 So what does this mean for releases by Fresh Sound and the like that fall between 1941 and 1961. Will they now be in violation and have to be withdrawn? "And the like" or not, those who seem to be complaining about "those Andorrans" all the time (and may now be silently approving that ther may get "what's due them") would do well to be much more concerned about the PROPER boxes and their ilk than about those Andorrans. The fact that the Proper reissues cut off the music on their boxes as soon as - oh wonder - the 50-year threshold is reached does not sound like they'd place an exceedingly huge priority on paying royalties in a big way. And the selection of a lot of the material on their boxes reeks quite a bit of previously reissued material that avoids the trouble of having to dig out NEVER previously reissued stuff from scratchy 78s etc. Rehashing, in short. Is that going to stay that way if the 70-year limit were enforced? Whereas Fresh Sound (and Blue Moon in the R&B field) do reissue their share of real "orphan works" that would otherwise go totally neglected and they therefore fill niches quite nicely. Or when did anybody last hear anyone crying out loud about the big corporations promoting music coming from labels such as Unique or Urania? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 Andorra's technically not an EU country, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.A.W. Posted September 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 (edited) Andorra's technically not an EU country, right? It isn't, but it has a "special arrangement" with the EU. Don't know what that entails, other than the use of the euro. So what does this mean for releases by Fresh Sound and the like that fall between 1941 and 1961. Will they now be in violation and have to be withdrawn? The EU directive will be retroactive, so all those releases will become illegal in the EU. Edited September 8, 2011 by J.A.W. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Beat Steve Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 Well, the UK (where Proper sits) definitely is part of the EU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.A.W. Posted September 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 (edited) Well, the UK (where Proper sits) definitely is part of the EU. Yep, Proper will have a problem, and so will JSP and other public-domain labels that are based in the UK and other EU countries, as far as they have released post-1941 recordings. Edited September 8, 2011 by J.A.W. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Lark Ascending Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 A spokesman at one body sounded pained when I referred to the "Cliff Richard law". "Think of the hard-up session musicians not Cliff Richard," he told me, claiming that thousands of struggling artists would now be guaranteed a pension. Good to see the music industry really caring about fairness. Can we expect an announcement in the next few days about how those companies will be compensating all the musicians they diddled out of money through unfair contracts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.A.W. Posted September 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 Good to see the music industry really caring about fairness. Can we expect an announcement in the next few days about how those companies will be compensating all the musicians they diddled out of money through unfair contracts? Don't forget the managers who did the same... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clunky Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 (edited) I presume that Hep will be in a similar position . Bizarre decision Edited September 8, 2011 by Clunky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.A.W. Posted September 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 I presume that Hep will be in a similar position . Bizarre decision Why is it a bizarre decision? Because it will affect Hep too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Wheel Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 Not a bizarre decision. Just a really, really stupid one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miles65 Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 Question: Who voted for the people who took that decision? Right answer: Nobody Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSngry Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 I say that everybody moves to Andorra (on paper, anyway) & business continues as usual. Either that, or Jordi Pujol goes on the buying spree to end all buying sprees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miles65 Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 I presume that Hep will be in a similar position . Bizarre decision Why is it a bizarre decision? Because it will affect Hep too? I would name it bizarre because it's retroactive. Products that have been on the market legaly for years now become illegal. If record companies would keep their entire catalogue in stock then I wouldn't object. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Lark Ascending Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 (edited) The internet will simply become even more people's friend. Edited September 8, 2011 by A Lark Ascending Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ayers Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 The internet will simply become even more people's friend. True. I sometimes wonder if that bloody Beatles mono box is still around because I was one of only a dozen or so people who actually paid for it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.A.W. Posted September 8, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 (edited) Question: Who voted for the people who took that decision? Right answer: Nobody The European Commission who issued the directive was not democratically elected, as no European government is in a parliamentary system, but the directive was approved by the European Parliament, which was democratically elected. Besides, the directive will have to be turned into (national) legislation by all national parliaments of the EU member states, which are all democratically elected. Edited September 8, 2011 by J.A.W. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miles65 Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 Question: Who voted for the people who took that decision? Right answer: Nobody The European Commission who issued the directive was not democratically elected, as no European government is in a parliamentary system, but the directive was approved by the European Parliament, wchich was democratically elected. Besides, the directive will have to be turned into legislation by all national parliaments of the EU member states, which are all democratically elected. Yes your right. It won't be easy to reverse this directive. I don't think it will play even a minor role in the next election for the European Parliament. But I'll stop here discussing Europian Union and democracy that would belong in the Politics section. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
king ubu Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 So they gave in, huh? Bad... now that the majors have almost completely stopped to reissue any historical recordings, to me, this seems to be really bad news. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clunky Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 I presume that Hep will be in a similar position . Bizarre decision Why is it a bizarre decision? Because it will affect Hep too? Bizarre because it's apparently retrospective which is unusual I would have thought. Nothing to with Hep but I named them as they have never been labelled one of the bad guys in the past but appear to have the full force of the EU heading their way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Beat Steve Posted September 8, 2011 Report Share Posted September 8, 2011 A spokesman at one body sounded pained when I referred to the "Cliff Richard law". "Think of the hard-up session musicians not Cliff Richard," he told me, claiming that thousands of struggling artists would now be guaranteed a pension. A question to the musically (passably) wise: Who do you think are the musicians who will receive the artists' royalties out of the sales of the reissue CDs by HERMAN'S HERMITS? (Admittedly not in the Beatles or Cliff R. league but not of minuscule stature in (British) 60s pop history either so there ought to be sales) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.