Mick Hucknall on copywrite

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

Here's a link to a Guardian article by Mick Hucknall, lead singer of Simply Red.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/st...1954727,00.html

MG

[Claude]

Sorry, but that article is entirely predictable.

There is a lot of lobbying going on as the EU Commission is preparing a study on copyright term extension. It would not benefit Nick Hucknall. Nobody will listen to Simply Red records in 30 years. It's for the Beatles and the Rolling Stones.

[Neal Pomea]

I would rephrase his premise.

The public domain concept is more radical, in a sense. Something belonging to no one and to all? Could that be socialist?

To me, copyright is conservative. Those strange, powdered-wigged founding fathers, some of whom owned slaves, wanted works to become public domain in 9 years. They were more radical and socialist than the punk rocker who wrote that piece. He wants his piece of property. Can't blame him.

In the United States, it was understood that from the time the work is made public, the work is public domain, but the government gave a grant to the creators to have property-like monopoly rights for a limited time. This grant of monopoly property-like rights is not socialist, it is conservative, modeling itself after real property rights.

Over the course of time, the copyright law for music has come to cover the published music and lyrics, and the medium or sound recording. Property-like monopoly rights were assigned.

Isn't that conservative? (How is that for me being predictable?)

Are you in favor of EU's c term extension proposal?

Edited November 24, 2006 by It Should be You

[jmjk]

Nobody will listen to Simply Red records in 30 years. It's for the Beatles and the Rolling Stones.

Hmmm...Maybe YOU will not be, but it's been over twenty years so far, and some people are still listening.

[Claude]

My post wasn't directed against Hucknall, whose music I like. But in 30 years the Beatles will still be big sellers, but Simply Red won't.

So it's very dishonest when the music industry sends second rate artists (only in terms of economic success, not in erms of artistic merit) to defend the coyright extension, because it's mainly the Elvis Presley and John Lennon estate that will benefit from it. And of course the record companies who sell these recordings.

The industry is not lobbying for copyright extension to help the poor old guy who had a single hit in the 60's to continue to receive royalties so he can pay his medical bills.