Tories on copyright; Changes to wine labelling

Tories will expand sound recording term - but at a price

It’s a bumper IP day for The Times. First off, it reports on an interesting trade-off proposed by David Cameron, leader of the Conservative Party. Wading in to the debate over sound recordings, he has come out in favour of extending the term from 50 to 70 years at the BPI’s AGM. This would give an ‘incentive to the music industry to digitise both older and niche repertoire which more people can enjoy at no extra cost’. In so doing, he has rejected the findings of the Gowers Review. However, in return for this concession, Cameron is calling on the music industry to show greater social responsibility by ‘not promoting a culture of low academic aspiration or violence but instead to inspire young kids with a positive vision of how to lead their life’.

The IPKat says there’s no point getting too excited over this one. As Cameron himself acknowledges, any term change would need to be approved by Europe. As for the social responsibility trade-off, this is very much a double-edged sword. It is regrettable to deify violence and the like in music, but to try and remove it in return for a specific legislative concession would involve papering over a sentiment that it deeply held in some sections of society (if violent lyrics weren’t striking a cord, they wouldn’t be included), rather than tackling it head on.

The full text of David Cameron’s speech is available here.

The grapes of wrath

The Times also reports on controversial reform of the European wine sector, following a year long consultation. Of particular interest to IP lawyers is a change to the labelling of geographical origin. Under the proposal, it will be possible to label wines with the grape variety and vintage, even where the wine has no GI. Previously, such labelling has been limited to GI-protected wine. The aim is said to be to respond to consumer demand for single variety wines. However, the proposal has met with a frosty response from European wine-makers.

The IPKat reckons that one of the key aims of GI protection is to enhance the availability of information to consumers, and hence to facilitate wider consumer choice. While in principle, the more information that is available the better, the telling point here will be, will the proposed new tier of labelling enable purchasers to make better decisions, or just confuse consumers?

A summary of the proposal is available here.