European Parliament backs 95 year copyright
The Legal Affairs Committee of the European Parliament has today approved legislation extending (in the words of the press release) 'the copyright protection for mu
sic compositions on physical devices (i.e. digital forms are excluded) to 95 years.' [The IPKat assumes this means sound recordings].
An amendment has been made to 'to prevent the use of previous contractual agreements to deduct money from the additional royalties'.
Session musicians will benefit from a fund to which producers will have to contribute at least 20% of royalties they gain from the term extension.
The legislation will be reviewed after 3 years, and then every 4 years. The Commission has also been asked to look at whether a similar extension is justified in the audiovisual sector.
A plenary vote will take place in March.
The IPKat can't claim to be thrilled by the decision, but he suspects that the writing was on the wall. He notes that 95 years is almost double the current 50 years, but at the same time, he can't help but think that all the terms are rather arbitrary. He's puzzled by the exception for digital recording - doesn't this emasculate the extension (or is there something about the way that recordings are usually made that the Kat doesn't know?)
STOP PRESS: The IPKat thanks Chris Ellins from the University of Westminster for this link to the Legal Affairs Committee's documents.
sic compositions on physical devices (i.e. digital forms are excluded) to 95 years.' [The IPKat assumes this means sound recordings].An amendment has been made to 'to prevent the use of previous contractual agreements to deduct money from the additional royalties'.
Session musicians will benefit from a fund to which producers will have to contribute at least 20% of royalties they gain from the term extension.
The legislation will be reviewed after 3 years, and then every 4 years. The Commission has also been asked to look at whether a similar extension is justified in the audiovisual sector.
A plenary vote will take place in March.
The IPKat can't claim to be thrilled by the decision, but he suspects that the writing was on the wall. He notes that 95 years is almost double the current 50 years, but at the same time, he can't help but think that all the terms are rather arbitrary. He's puzzled by the exception for digital recording - doesn't this emasculate the extension (or is there something about the way that recordings are usually made that the Kat doesn't know?)
STOP PRESS: The IPKat thanks Chris Ellins from the University of Westminster for this link to the Legal Affairs Committee's documents.
