Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Power of Backroom Lobbying: How the Music Industry Got a Copyright Extension

Posted by Soulskill on from the you-wouldn't-download-a-lobbyist dept.

An anonymous reader writes: The Canadian government's unexpected budget decision to extend the term of copyright for sound recordings came as a surprise to most copyright watchers, but not the music industry lobby, which was ready with a press release within minutes. How did the industry seemingly know this was coming? Michael Geist reports that records show the extension is the result of backroom lobbying with monthly meetings between senior government officials and music industry lobbyists paving the way for copyright term extension without public consultation or debate.

12 of 109 comments (clear)

  1. No surprise by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why should anyone surprised, given the industry's deep pockets and demonstrated penchant for bribery?

    IMNSHO anyone "surprised" by this outcome is naïve.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    1. Re:No surprise by mwvdlee · · Score: 4, Insightful

      By this point, anybody who believes capitalist democracy isn't broken is just clinging on to false hope.
      Any system that depends on all players being honest and fair is doomed to fail.
      Sadly, this includes every possible system that I'm aware of.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:No surprise by NoKaOi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Interesting how in some places in the world, we call it bribery and corruption. In other places, it's just "how stuff gets done."

    3. Re:No surprise by itzly · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Secret talks between government and industry isn't really democracy.

    4. Re:No surprise by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 4, Insightful
      It is either failure to prosecute obvious bribery (lobyists bribe politicians to do illegal things) or corruption (politicans fail to make corruption illegal out of self interest).

      What ever the law, there is clear and obvious lack of morality here.

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    5. Re:No surprise by dj245 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Interesting how in some places in the world, we call it bribery and corruption. In other places, it's just "how stuff gets done."

      It's still graft either way. Think of all the problems caused by money buying influence in government. Now imagine how terrible it would be if businesses did it to each other too. The US government might be bought and paid for, but at least we have quite low levels of business-to-business bribery and corruption. My company can bid on projects and stand a very good chance of being evaluated on the quality of our bid and our reputation. That isn't true in a lot of places.

      I can't imagine how ridiculous things must be in China, where bribery is rampant and government and business are hard to distinguish from each other.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    6. Re:No surprise by cheesybagel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Capitalism tends to degenerate into cartels which harm the general public. Even Adam Smith knew that. To prevent this anti-trust legislation needs to be actively enforced. With the current global economy the power of the corporations has increased a lot to the point where it becomes hard for national governments to resist them. Even if that government is the US government. The unfortunate end result of this will either be chaos or a world government.

  2. They write both press releases by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm not saying corporate lobbyists aren't burrowed like ticks into every major government, because they are. But let's be real. They were "ready with a press release within minutes" because they wrote both press releases, and read the one that fit the situation. That's how it works.

    1. Re:They write both press releases by stealth_finger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They were "ready with a press release within minutes" because they wrote both press releases, and read the one that fit the situation. That's how it works.

      You mean the government's and their own?

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  3. How? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bribes.

    Calling it lobbying is just sugar coating it.

  4. Freudian slip by tao · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For some reason I read that as "paying the way for copyright term extension". After realising that I'd misread it I corrected myself. Then corrected myself again when I realised that the misread version makes more sense.

  5. Nonliteral similarity is the problem by tepples · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Bad patents prevent you from innovating on your own ideas - that, yes, have some basis in what came before (what doesn't?). Copyrights just prevent you from 'free as in beer' access to something that we all agree isn't ours.

    "We all agree"? Not everyone agreed about the ruling in Gaye v. Thicke to apply exclusive rights to the overall feel of a musical composition. Not everyone agreed about the ruling in Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music to penalize someone for having copied a melody completely by accident. What steps should a songwriter take to keep from infringing (and remain a songwriter) in this sort of legal landscape? At least expiry keeps, say, the Shakespeare estate from claiming that the entire world is guilty or liable of "nonliteral similarity". It acts as one of the checks on "stupid cases".