----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Brylawski" <[log in to unmask]>
>I have a lot to say about Mike's post, and then I promise I'll take a
> First, the FBI does enforce copyright, or at least blatant piracy for
> profit. I think that there are many "federal offensives" in the
> various copyright laws.
> Second, it was LC's National Recording Preservation Board (NRPB), not
> ARSC, which commissioned the study of out-of-print recordings. As I
> wrote earlier, it's free for the taking at
> http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub133/pub133.pdf. (Yet I point out,
> in all fairness, the study was carried out by two ARSC members, Tim
> and Steve Smolian.)
> ARSC does not have a lobbyist now officially. We don't have the
> financial resources.
> Regarding Mike's comment: "I turned to Tim Brooks who happened to be
> standing right
>> behind me, and whispered a question "This is to buy us off and stop our
>> complaints, isn't it?" and he gave a knowing nod." Tim is entitled to his
>> opinion and he and I have discussed this a lot, but I think that it's too
>> cynical to think that this limited license to stream-only pre-1925
>> materials will convince Congress to maintain no public-domain laws, and
>> also dismissive of the influence of ARSC's efforts thus far (led by Tim!)
>> to inform Congress of the sound recording anomaly. The license is only to
>> stream materials which, if in any other format, would already be public
>> domain. It is my expectation that the streaming site will build a demand
>> for FULL access to the recordings and could actually promote changes in
>> the law. The NRPB study of the state of audio preservation, written by
>> Rob Bamberger, will be published this summer. It includes a full chapter
>> (25% of the study) on how copyright laws impedes preservation and access.
>> This study was commissioned by Congress.
> That said, this is an uphill battle. I encourage all readers to see if
> their congressional representatives are on the Judiciary Committee,
> and to write to them to tell them how you feel about these issues.
> Finally, it is a new website, one only partially managed by ARSC,
> which spells out these issues in full. It was created by the new
> Historical Recording Coalition for Access and Preservation:
You might to work something out with the NLC...which could take
advantage of our 50-yeat copyright term for sound recordings...?!
Steven C. Barr