Slashdot Mirror
100 Years of Copyright Hysteria
Nate Anderson pens a fine historical retrospective for Ars Technica: a look at 100 years of Big Content's fearmongering, in their own words. There was John Philip Sousa in 1906 warning that recording technology would destroy the US pastime of gathering around the piano to sing music ("What of the national throat? Will it not weaken? What of the national chest? Will it not shrink?"). There was the photocopier after World War II. There was the VCR in the 1970s, which a movie lobbyist predicted would result in tidal waves, avalanches, and bleeding and hemorrhaging by the music business. He compared the VCR to the Boston Strangler — in this scenario the US public was a woman home alone. Then home taping of music, digital audio tape, MP3 players, and Napster, each of which was predicted to lay waste to entire industries; and so on up to date with DVRs, HD radio, and HDTV. Anderson concludes with a quote from copyright expert William Patry in his book Moral Panics and the Copyright Wars: "I cannot think of a single significant innovation in either the creation or distribution of works of authorship that owes its origins to the copyright industries."
As Elizabeth Cady Stanton said, "To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt."
I think copyright, and IP law in general has a legitimate and defensible purpose. That said, IP policy is essentially made without any regard to facts (you could argue that about a lot of policy, but in IP it's particularly bad). The fact that one can violate copyright law so easily, without intending it, and the fact that so much stuff of so little value is copyrighted, as well as really old stuff, breeds contempt of copyright law altogether.
The legitimacy of copyright law might be salvaged by cutting down the length of terms drastically, or otherwise changing the policy so that it is actually sensible. Barring that, though, as long as some written works from 1924 are still copyrighted, can you really blame people for thinking the whole thing is ridiculous?
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
Good thing we have sheetmusictorrent.
Actually it looks like John Philip Sousa's prediction was correct. We Don't sit-around home pianos in our parlors listening to somebody music, but I don't cry about it anymore than I cry that the horsewhip or candlestick makers no longer exist. Some forms of technology are obsolete and have been replaced by better forms, like direct recordings from far-off places.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
There is still "80s" sounding music being created now. In fact, I am listening to my Modern 80s playlist on iTunes now. There are a lot of bands out there today that are doing a very good job of writing songs that would have been right at home in 1983. Music is constantly changing and reinventing itself (although you would never know it from listing to most of the RIAA pablum), so there is alway new and interesting music to discover, even if you are primarily interested in nostalgia, like the music of the 80s.
Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
Good point. The original "14 years" was derived by looking at actuarial tables, and determining how long the average artist lives after his creation. In 1790 the average was 13 years, 8 months..... today it would probably be longer..... still it was tied to the original creator's lifespan, not perpetual.
So that means Mickey Mouse, which was created in 1928, should now be public domain.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall