 |
 |
On Tue, 18 Apr 2006, steven c wrote: > Forwarded for comment...a very well-reasoned and well-written opposition > to the British attempt to import the US "eternal copyright" on sound > recordings... > > Steven C. Barr > > > > > > THE PROPOSED EXTENSION OF MECHANICAL COPYRIGHT TO 95 YEARS Thank you for sharing this. For me, such an extension of the copyrights proffers the notion that a music recording is nothing more than a consumer product like a soft drink. In this country we are beginning to address notions like "victim's rights." I believe that it is time for the rights of those who value recordings to get their "rights" addressed. I have no problem if the copyrights are extended in perpetuity, provided my right to access to information can be addressed. For me, that is at the heart of the matter and from a practical consideration, based upon US copyrights and the proposed extension of the British Copyrights...rights to access are not valued in the slightest. Reflecting on what I just typed...I wonder...I think we all remember when Coca Cola "threatened" to stop making the classic coke...what would happen if they did stop making the classic coke...should the recipe become public domain? Then I think out archives preserving the recorded history of performing organizations. Much of this preservation is being done, when the law allows, with tax payer money. Yet, as a tax payer, I am denied reasonable access to those recordings. Maybe it is just my odd way of looking at things, but the current situation seems absurd to me, and the law as proposed for the UK sounds like something out of a Monty Python sketch. Karl