Aging rockers set to lose copyrights

[JEDI]

CNN

"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."

"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."

huh?

whats the diff between the aging rockers who have a 50yr copyright limit and songwriters that have lifetime + 70yrs?

 

[chrisms]

I'm not going to cry if Mick Jagger can't buy another yacht or Chubby Checker can't pay off his gambling debt.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: JEDI
CNN

"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."

"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."

huh?

whats the diff between the aging rockers who have a 50yr copyright limit and songwriters that have lifetime + 70yrs?

there is a copyright on the music itself, that's life+70, and 50 yrs on the musician's performance of that music.

 

[JEDI]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: JEDI
CNN

"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."

"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."

huh?

whats the diff between the aging rockers who have a 50yr copyright limit and songwriters that have lifetime + 70yrs?

there is a copyright on the music itself, that's life+70, and 50 yrs on the musician's performance of that music.

so how does the public win if there's still life+70 on the copyright?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: JEDI
so how does the public win if there's still life+70 on the copyright?

this would enable any publishing company to pay the songwriter, then sell the recording. possibly cheaper.

 

[FoBoT]

performance vs. writing

the songwriter wrote the song, so they get one rule

the performer recorded the performance of the music, they get another rule

that is what it sounds like to me

 

[imported_Devine]

I heard this on the radio yesterday, seems kinda stupid for them to lose the copyrights on music they created. How does old classical music like Beethoven, Bach and Mozart retain its copyrights?

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: Devine
I heard this on the radio yesterday, seems kinda stupid for them to lose the copyrights on music they created. How does old classical music like Beethoven, Bach and Mozart retain its copyrights?

Uh, it doesn't.

 

[waggy]

Originally posted by: Devine
I heard this on the radio yesterday, seems kinda stupid for them to lose the copyrights on music they created. How does old classical music like Beethoven, Bach and Mozart retain its copyrights?

hahahahhaha

oh man.

 

[CptObvious]

Originally posted by: Devine
I heard this on the radio yesterday, seems kinda stupid for them to lose the copyrights on music they created. How does old classical music like Beethoven, Bach and Mozart retain its copyrights?

The written music itself is in the public domain, but any recorded performance of the work is copyrighted as a derivative work.

 

[tk149]

Originally posted by: CptObvious

Originally posted by: Devine
I heard this on the radio yesterday, seems kinda stupid for them to lose the copyrights on music they created. How does old classical music like Beethoven, Bach and Mozart retain its copyrights?

The written music itself is in the public domain, but any recorded performance of the work is copyrighted as a derivative work.

Thank you, Captain Obvious! Oh...er...yeah,

 

[ThaGrandCow]

Originally posted by: Devine
I heard this on the radio yesterday, seems kinda stupid for them to lose the copyrights on music they created. How does old classical music like Beethoven, Bach and Mozart retain its copyrights?

Are... are you serious?
The only thing you're paying for in a store is their time to print up classical music and put it in a good binding. You can google any classical music and play it anywhere, or record anything you want using it for free.