![]() I saw the following on the Reuters.co.uk website.
I don’t quite know why it appals me so much that I feel the need to write about it but it does. It is pure greed on the part of the artists and the record companies. They already have fifty years to make money on what was a few days work in their youth and they still want more. In the real world you do a job, get paid for it and go off to do another job. End of story. In this fantasy world of popular music they make a record and want to keep getting paid for it time and time and time again. Fifty years isn’t long enough to rake in the cash for their three minute ditties. Oh no, they want the cash to continue rolling in long after they're dead. So much so that these rebels of yesteryear are going to the courts and the legislature and bleating about wanting the law changed to protect their bank accounts. Elvis is dead (yes he is) and is well past caring but people like Sonny Bono and Bruce Welch need to realise that they are perfectly welcome to make money off their music by performing it or re-recording it but changing the law for their own enrichment is immoral. Over the coming years we will be seeing a lot more of these issues. America seems pretty much wrapped up and sorted since the big corporations have gained the decisions they want from the politicians they bought and paid for when high office was just an ambition with a large price tag. But the EU is a harder nut for them to crack. Yes, EU politicians are just as corrupt as American ones but they will still be harder to sell (and buy) on protecting the interests of trillionaire American companies. Companies who knew the law perfectly well when they made these films and records but now want it changing because they overestimated their ability to continue making things of the same longevity and quality. The answer to the situation is simple – if you remaster, re-edit or in some way improve a recording, film or TV programme then the copyright clock is already reset to zero. All Disney should have to do is produce a new version of, for example, Snow White. One that is better than other companies’ cash in editions. But they don’t want to be put in a position where they have to work for their money. They want to be protected by new laws because the old ones no longer fit their mission statement. And if fifty years was upped to one hundred. What then? The same companies with different chairmen will be back wanting the law changed in the future to further extend their copyright. And this time they’ll have another precedent on their side. As well as another President. Though whether it will be Ashley or Mary-Kate I wouldn’t want to speculate. If fifty years isn’t long enough to squeeze money out of something then what makes a hundred years any different? I am so sick of the music industry trying to paint itself as hard done by. Trying to claim they are always the victim. I agree that the current issue of downloading music damaging the record industry has merit. The issue of the rights and wrongs of downloading is a column for a different time but the scale of the problem is such that the industry is broadly speaking in the right. But the message they try to get across is delivered by multi millionaires crying about losing money appealing to teenagers who can barely afford the over priced CDs. Now the industry is preparing for another round of we’re-the-victims spin. Only this time it is different. This time they are opposing something that isn’t illegal. Will they win? Probably. If not now then in a few years time when the Beatles’ recordings come into the frame. If musicians and the studios weren’t so greedy we would be standing on the verge of a historic time. When the public domain begins to add the works of twentieth century musical greats to the eighteenth and nineteenth century masters. When Elvis becomes as much public property as Shakespeare and Dickens. But Elvis has better lawyers than Bill or Chaz.
Postscript - Dave emailed me to say that Sonny Bono is in fact as dead as Elvis (yes he IS) and therefore his potential for new releases is rather limited. Short of someone "discovering" a batch of lost tapes, he won't be producing anything new. But since he started this whole sodding business in the first place he is still a git. And I absolutely refute claims that I thought he was the lead singer of U2... |
|
|