Interesting observation, Mike.  If the links were broken after January and
the posts quit generating income for somebody, the posts may be taken down.
Then who wins?  Lots of non-PD stuff linked at DAHR, too, and a number that
say "video unavailable."  Yet, it all reminds me of another law that
Americans routinely ignored and finally took it off the books after some 14
years of civil non-compliance.  I'm sure there are others and will be more. 

I remember conversations here or 78-L predicting some of this when Mickey
Mouse and Rhapsody In Blue were about to become public domain and the
Disneys and Gershwins started making a fuss.  Wonder if they'll be back next
year for a repeat performance.  Recognizing I'm mixing media laws here, but
I think the concept may still be viable.

Rodger Holtin

For Best Results Use Victor Needles

-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Biel
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2021 2:56 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] the latest Copyright issue

Scroll down on the YouTube information postings. They might not have been
POSTED by the copyright owner, but almost all of them are being moneterized
by them or a representative. Someone makes money on every click. My question
is whether these links can be broken in January when pre 1923 enters the
Public Domain. Orchard makes millions every day from music that is PD
everywhere in the world except the US.
Michael Biel.

Get Outlook for iOS<> ________________________________
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
<[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Bob Kosovsky
<[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2021 2:20:33 PM
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] the latest Copyright issue

Indeed, the United States Congress has overwhelmingly favored copyright
holders (in the form of large businesses) with little evidence of balancing
the needs/rights of the population.

Recently I was thinking of Napster.  The original Napster is dead;  but
YouTube is alive and doing exceptionally well. According to,
"As of February 2020, more than 500 hours of video were uploaded to YouTube
*every minute*. This equates to approximately 30,000 hours of newly uploaded
content per hour."  That puts Napster to shame.  I can find much (but not
all) of my favorite recordings on YouTube.  I smirk and smile when I see
commercial recordings - clearly uploaded not by a copyright holder -
remaining on YouTube for years with no evidence of being taken down.

I'm not the only one who believes that the oppressive U.S. copyright laws
have led to more and more people accessing recordings of questionable
legality, in large part because most people are unable to determine whether
something is a bootleg or a legal issue, and most don't care.  For better or
worse, YouTube enables this.  (Even if YouTube were taken down, the Internet
world has already accepted that a majority of music will be freely

Bob Kosovsky, Ph.D. -- Librarian, Rare Books and Manuscripts, Music &
Recorded Sound Division The New York Public Library for the Performing Arts
- Dorothy and Lewis B.
Cullman Center

40 Lincoln Center Plaza, New York, NY 10023<>

On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 1:53 PM John Haley <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I have a law degree and 40+ years of commercial law practice in my 
> background, so I think I do, but do I really want to bother?  If you 
> look at this and think, this is truly insane, you are not wrong.
> They "fixed" what was already a horrible mess by creating a bunch of 
> new layers of complexity.  Thanks a lot.
> The rest of our planet does not do anything like this.  Most major 
> jurisdictions other than the U.S. approach Public Domain in a rational 
> way, and their statutes are pretty clear on their face.
> The whole original idea of copyright and other forms of protection of 
> intellectual property, back when kings ruled, was to be certain that 
> artistic creations, scientific inventions, etc., would finally get to 
> the public, to benefit humankind, after a reasonable period of protection
> the author, inventor, etc.   And the monarch could not claim perpetual
> ownership.   The idea was not to tie things up for multiple lifetimes, and
> the original purpose was to be sure that the public would ultimately 
> benefit.  In the U.S., that original concept has been eroded almost 
> out of existence.  Fortunately, that is not true around the world.
> Best,
> John Haley
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 1:16 PM CBAUDIO <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > One has to be somewhat of a 'Legal Beagle' to understand it all. 
> > Having studied the commercial code in college, I usually reserve 
> > legal documents for sleepless nights. That includes everything 
> > generated by the US Government. However, there are those who 
> > routinely read these docs & actually understand them.
> >
> > :)
> > CB
> > Corey Bailey Audio Engineering
> ><>
> >
> > ------ Original Message ------
> > From: "Brewster Kahle" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Sent: 11/12/2021 8:05:51 AM
> > Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] The American Zonophone Discography and 
> > others
> >
> > >
> > >Someone just pointed out this page
> > >
> > >
> > >.php
> > >
> > >is the table there what others understand?   gosh this is confusing.
> > >
> > >-brewster
> > >
> > >
> >

This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.