Slashdot Mirror


EU Record Companies Push to Extend Copyright

TPIRman writes "European record companies, as represented by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, are pressuring the European Union to extend copyright terms for music producers. Critics like Creative Commons founder Lawrence Lessig are predictably opposed, but the IFPI argues that the move is needed in order to bring the E.U. in sync with U.S. copyright regulations. Ironically, one of the original rationales behind the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act was that U.S. copyrights needed to sync up with European standards."

23 of 292 comments (clear)

  1. shuffle up and deal. by Stumbles · · Score: 4, Funny

    Never let one hand know what the other is doing and if discovered, deny all knowledge and blame the foot.

    --
    My karma is not a Chameleon.
  2. Dupe'd agaIn! by TJ_Phazerhacki · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But seriously - why would ANYONE want the kinds of copyright nonsense we have over here? Talk to your senator, congressman, or the equivalent (don't know how your system works :p ) and shoot this down!

    --
    Physics is nothing like religion. If it was, we'd have an easier time trying to raise money!
    1. Re:Dupe'd agaIn! by I+confirm+I'm+not+a · · Score: 4, Insightful

      don't know how your system works :p

      Works? What is this "works" of which you speak? ;-)

      As far as I can tell our system works like this: the European Commission decide to do something. The European Parliament vote, and decide it's a stupid, stupid idea. The European Commission then ignore the democratic process altogether. I believe that the advantage to this system is that it's easier for lobbyists to get their lobbying done, without getting dirtied by contact with democracy.

      Someone with a less cynical view than me may wish to clarify, however...

      --
      This is where the serious fun begins.
  3. Abolishing copyright by Peaker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Glad to see we are on the right track to a civilian uprising that will abolish copyright.

    1. Re:Abolishing copyright by Uruk · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Let's take a look at the weaponry on either side of the Copyright debate:

      Copyright Holders

      • Billions of dollars
      • Coordinated world wide organizations of thousands of people working towards making money off of copyrighted material
      • Government lobbyists
      • Political Action committees
      • Campaign Contributions
      • 100 years of legal precedent
      Copyright Opponents
      • Righteous Indignation
      • Sense of Entitlement
      • Appeal to inferred intentions of people (founding fathers) who died 200 years ago
      • A few bright points, EFF and others
      • Blogs

      Umm, I think we have a problem. I'm on the side of restraining copyright, but I'm not sure this fight is fair!

      --
      -- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
    2. Re:Abolishing copyright by xtracto · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You surely forgot something in your list... Money to BUY the things... if the copyright oponents do not give money to the copyright owners (i.e. do not buy) then it will be difficult for the owners to win...

      Anyway, I just found this interesting page, and I think it is kind of on topic with this discussion:

      Some thoughs about piracy. It is better than I state here, have a look

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
  4. This is the last thing we need by specialbrad · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is the last thing we need. Syncing up european and american copyright laws is not a reason to change laws. Laws should be passed to serve the people, not to follow others. I hope this doesn't happen.

  5. Poor Mickey by Kaorimoch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why bother coming back every 50 years when Mickey Mouse is about to expire and slapping another 50 years onto copyright terms?

    Why not just make it 50 billion years and save Mickey Mouse from exploitation forever?

    1. Re:Poor Mickey by Uruk · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Yeah really. Check out this comment from the article:

      "From a cultural point of view, we find it strange that European artists are protected more in the U.S. than they are back home," she said.


      Let me summarize: "But Mom, he's doing it, so why can't I do it too!!!"

      They continue with this line of reasoning:

      "We feel there is real discrimination here," Cunningham said. "Record companies in the U.S., their assets are valued much more highly because they have a much longer term of (copyright) protection....


      This is like a 13-year old screaming "this is so unfair".

      Nobody is revisiting the underlying arguments for extending copyright protection past its usual lifetime. They see this as a business argument to be settled about competition and profitability.

      The EFF need to get in there and make sure that at least some relevant questions are being asked. Like what the purpose of copyright in the first place is, and how a proposed extension either supports or undermines that purpose.

      And here's your mom's comeback for the "but he's doing it too" teenager whine:

      Hey Europe, if all of your friends were jumping off of a bridge, would you do it too?
      --
      -- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
  6. We better not by m50d · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Unfortunately I can't argue for the unconstitutionality of these laws since we don't have a constitution here, but this copyright extension thing is stupid. Really stupid. We only just got Elvis in the public domain (is he even there yet?) from years and years ago. The UK even retroactively takes things out of the public domain, so if this passes we could lose that. (copy as much as you can, now, while you can).

    --
    I am trolling
  7. No irony....this is how it works by Rolan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not all that ironic that the justifications overlap. These are the excuses they use. They start in the US with: "We need to Sync up with Europe." then they change something just slightly so that it's longer than Europe. Then they goto Europe and say: "We need to Sync up with America." Rinse, repeat.

    --
    - AMW
  8. Why... by jwthompson2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Do all nation's laws need to be in sync? Is it possible that one nation has made a grave error and that others should avoid doing the same? Why does our whole world now have a bad case of "keeping up with the Jones'" in relation to legal matters. We all have our own governments, why can't they seem to think independently anymore and make better decisions....

    Damn globalization!

    --
    Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree. -Martin Luther
    1. Re:Why... by Uruk · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're discovering the power of "the precedent".

      The reason people don't want bad laws passed, even in small ways where it seems irrelevant is because it establishes a precedent. In many ways, a precedent is like the thin end of a wedge. Once you've worked in the smallest thing, you can just push from the back and eventually drive it all through.

      The laws don't necessarily have to be the same, but if you check the article you'll find that the debate is in terms of competition, not in terms of what copyright is all about. The EU has no desire to fall behind, they really do want to keep up with the US in a lot of different areas. So a precedent in copyright has been established: let's extend the lifetime in the US. Now comes the pressure behind the wedge: the europeans want it too!

      Hmm...I think I can see where this is going...

      --
      -- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
  9. If anything make the damn things.... by AlltheCoolNamesGone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ..... Shorter
    Like say, authors life time or 50 years wich ever is greater and thats it....

    --
    M$ it's whats for diner!!!!!
    1. Re:If anything make the damn things.... by phoenix.bam! · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I believe that's even too long. The reason copyright exists is to foster the arts and sciences by providing for a limited time a monopoly on the new work. Then the copyright expires, the public benefits the artist/inventor benefited. And after the expiration the artist/inventor is encouraged to invent/create MORE.

      The current system of profiting off one lucky creation for 3 generations is insane and does no foster creation, innovation or invention. Especially for the children who inherit valuable copyrights.

  10. Write to your MP now... by chiark · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Anyone in the UK really should take the time to write to their MP. Already this week we've seen a report in the Times saying that a labour MP is proposing to extend Copyright to be 100 years... ..."to protect the artist".

    How they can say that with a straight face is beyond me. I guess the record industry makes it easier for them?

    I wrote to my MP on Tuesday, and got a response the next day thanking me for my concerns, stating that he has read up on, and now understands the issue, and that they will discuss it with the Labour MP that is proposing the bill.

    It might be mere platitudes to keep me oppressed, but it might just work. We are supposed to be in a democracy, although with the EU constitution "no" votes from France and the Netherlands, one does wonder if the hierarchy will merely push it through no matter what the public says.

    No doubt someone will point out that this is EU policy which will need to be enacted in UK law, but all the same, make yourself heard. I did, and boy do I feel good about it :-)

  11. Write to them by jgritz · · Score: 5, Informative

    The guy in the UK pushing this is James Purnell. If you live in the UK you should write to him.

  12. It is understandable and wrong. by Crimson+Dragon · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Two words one never strings together.... understandable and wrong. This is, however, the perception of the EU's debate over the extension of length of copyrights. I will also preface my remarks by outright stating my anathema towards IP and its handling in the US.

    That having been said....

    Imagine for a moment that you are a patent holder in the US. You put out a product that does well in the US. Now imagine another patent holder from the EU. His product does well in the EU. Assuming both do well in their respective markets, the US patent holder garners revenue for use of the patent long after the EU patent holder does. What are EU innovators to do?

    Leave the EU, that's what.

    Aside from the right or wrong of IP, the EU seemingly wishes to address this long-term market value of a work and adjust to losing innovators overseas to the US. How to properly deal with that is another matter, but we must be careful to acknowledge all aspects of the issue.

    --
    The Crimson Dragon
  13. Darren SMASH! by Darren+Winsper · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For fuck's sake, is 50 years not long enough?! If you need that long to make enough profit on something to carry on doing business, then YOUR BUSINESS MODEL IS FUCKED!

  14. In other news... by erroneus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am pushing to have unemployment benefits extended until 50 years after I die. Not only do I want to get paid for doing nothing now, but for at least 50 years after I have died so that my beneficiaries can also get paid for doing nothing.

    Later I will be lobbying for an extension to that extension... in about 40 years from now.

  15. No surprise by Vainglorious+Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In the EU, performers get 50 years copyright. 2005 minus fifty years is 1955, the dawn of the modern era of rock and pop. The late Elvis is the first big goose scheduled to stop laying golden eggs, but other huge ones loom over the next decade - the Beatles in particular.

    No wonder the corps are pressing for extensions; why wouldn't they want indefinite copyrights? It's certainly in their interests, but it's most definitely not in the wider interestes of society at large. This proposal will do nothing to pomote the useful arts and sciences.

    --
    My next sig will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush
  16. Re:Inconsistent = Chaos by legirons · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "While I disagree with how long copryrights have been extended here, I don't see what's wrong with the concept of consistency in global copyright laws."

    What's special about copyright? By your argument, all the laws around the world should be the same, and we could just elect one government to write them.

    Of course, that ignores cultural differences and assumes everyone shares exactly the same view of what's right. And it's only a small step between believing that other people "should" follow your laws, and starting a war to enforce that view. Not exactly a democratic view to hold.

    "With inconsistent laws, the enforcement of copyrights from country to country would be chaotic at best."

    And that's bad how? Too confusing for policemen? Many people already deal with different laws, taxes, etc. in every state, and even laws that apply to particular places within a state.

    If courts can already deal with complex financial crimes across many locations (which they can) where the laws are different in virtually every state, country, and region, then what's so difficult about copyright that requires the imposition of a "world government"?

  17. Who are the Real Pirates? by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 4, Insightful
    As another Slashdot poster pointed out in another related article, this is nothing more than Theft of the Public Domain.

    Now who are the Real Pirates?

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."