Lawrence Lessig Criticizes Proposed 140-Year Copyright Protections (techcrunch.com)

EqualCitizens.US reports on growing opposition to the CLASSICS Act proposed by the U.S. Congress, which grants blanket copyright protection to all audio works created before 1972, leaving some of them copyrighted until 2067. Importantly, the Act doesn't require artists or the rights holder to register for the copyright. Rather, any and all pre-1972 sound recordings would be copyrighted, greatly limiting the public's access to these works. Various organizations and scholars have responded. Equal Citizens along with a coalition of internet freedom and democracy reform organizations, is sending this letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee to urge its members to reject this Act in its entirety, or at a minimum, at least require registration of pre-1972 works. Otherwise, if the Act passes as is, famous artists and wealthy corporations will benefit greatly while the public will get absolutely nothing in return, as Professor Lawrence Lessig notes in Wired....

This act will limit access to past works and stifle creativity for new works. It would effectively remove many existing works, including some popular documentaries, podcasts, etc., from the public arena. The Coalition recommends adding a registration requirement to secure the extended copyright term, such that works that nobody claimed could be allowed to enter the public domain. As this TechCrunch report on the coalition letter explains:

By having artists and rights owners register, it solves the problem for everyone. Anyone who wants to have their pre-1972 works brought into the new scheme can easily achieve that, but orphan works will enter the public domain as they ought to.
"Either way," Lessig writes, "it is finally clear that the Supreme Court's prediction that the copyright owners would be satisfied with the copyright protection provided by the Sonny Bono Act turns out not to be true."

Comments

That's a common mistake

[rsilvergun]

they're not Progressives. Being a Progressive doesn't just mean you're tolerant of gays and abortion. Those are social issues. The folks you're referring to are Hollywood, and to a man they're economically right wing.

The Democratic party is being run by economically right wing and socially moderate (the Hillary wing didn't support Gay Marriage until forced to by the base) conservatives. Being Progressive means being _economically_ progressive too. That means these things:

1. Medicare for all.
2. Living Wage.
3. College for all.
4. New New Deal (google it).
5. End the Wars.

Disney, the most Hollywood of Hollywood definitely opposes #1-#4 and I'm guessing if forced to answer would oppose #5 (their board of directors owns stock in the defense industry along with everybody else at the top).