Excellent video. I like the fairy tale theme!

The wording of the legislation (I've read it all!) reads like a press release from the record companies. It's disappointing that those involved seem unable to think critically about what they're hearing from the industry lobbyists - they bizarrely believe that "lots of lobbyists" = "a popular cause", rather than "lots of lobbyists" = "an unpopular cause that will make the lobbyists paymaster's lots of money"!

Sadly, the video doesn't touch on the positive reasons for the public domain - i.e. why we _don't_ have perpetual copyright. Copyright exists to help artists - but it also must expire to help artists. Creative minds re-use ideas from the past. From Shakespeare to Disney, Mozart to The Beatles, the past acts as inspiration and in some cases is directly re-used. Throttling the public domain by extending copyright throttles creativity.

Also these industries that seek to extend their control of the past have a terrible record of caring for it. They have routinely destroyed the master copies of older recordings.

It's a sad fact that record companies do not bother to re-release most of the music in which they _currently_ hold the copyright. Bizarrely, they also refuse to license smaller record companies to re-package and re-release these recordings, preferring to let them sit unheard and uncared for, rotting away in a vault.

This is another reason we need the public domain - to give the public access to recordings that the record companies themselves have lost interest in. The legislation appears to recognise this issue by letting unissued recordings return to the public domain eventually - but read carefully - to keep the copyright, all the record company needs to do is dash off the worst quality CD ever (find a scratched record, copy it onto a CD, sell it - job done!) and offer it for sale - if you want to hear it properly, under this legislation you'll be waiting 95 years!

The final irony is that even when a recording goes out of copyright, the original owner, performer, etc can continue to make money from it. They are free to re-release it, just like everyone else at that point - the advantage they have is that they should have the master tapes to do a great job, and they can add their own personal insight in linear notes, private photos, commentary etc to add to the appeal of the new re-issue. To plead poverty when they have this unique money making opportunity is going too far.

Cheers,
David.

Nice speech. Just wish you didn't have to make it in the first place.

I asked my MEPs if they were going to attend the conference but none of them indicated they were. The thing that worries (well, shocks) me most about all this is how politicians seem just ignore any counter arguments to what industry lobbies tell them. I mean it - they just ignore the other side. I know this because I've written to them and received replies from all parties (with the notable exception of the Greens) that frankly would insult the analytical powers of a 12 year old. Extending copyright forever is a stupid thing to do. The argument for this is NOT difficult or particularly complicated. WHY DO THEY IGNORE IT?

I'm only following the situation on sound copyright, but if this is anything like how similar issues are handled in the EU then god help us. We may as well put corporate CEOs in charge of policy and cut out the middle man. Sure would be cheaper, and wouldn't make a blind bit of difference to the legislation that gets passed, as far as I can tell.

I dunno. I'm depressed and angry about this whole sorry mess.

Great stuff.