Begin forwarded message:
> From: "JISCMAIL LISTSERV Server (15.0)" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: 7 October 2008 21:49:40 BST
> To: "J. P. E. Harper-Scott" <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: MUSICOLOGY-ALL: approval required (49329E1B)
>
> This message was originally submitted by
> [log in to unmask] to the
> MUSICOLOGY-ALL list at JISCMAIL.AC.UK. You can approve it using
> the "OK"
> mechanism (click on the link below), ignore it, or repost an edited
> copy. The
> message will expire automatically; you do not need to do anything if
> you just
> want to discard it. Please refer to the list owner's guide if
> you are not
> familiar with the "OK" mechanism; these instructions are
> being kept
> purposefully short for your convenience in processing large
> numbers of
> messages.
****Forwarded message from Nicholas Cook <[log in to unmask]>****
Most of you will probably know that the European Commission, prompted
by the
major record companies, plans to extend copyright on sound recordings
from
50 to 95 years, in line with the US. The result in the US has been to
make
access to the vast majority of the recorded legacy impossible (for
details
see http://www.clir.org/pubs/execsum/sum133.html). Unlike the US
legislation, the Commission's proposals include a 'use it or lose it'
provision, by which if after 50 years sound recordings are not
reissued by
the rights owner copyright reverts to the performer(s), and if they
are not
then reissued by the performer(s) copyright lapses--but in its current
form
the provision appears quite unworkable, and in any case it would not
apply
to recordings produced from now on.
There is a great deal of coordinated opposition from copyright lawyers
and
other experts, including some musicological groups, but there is no
substitute for people making their views known to their MEPs. If you
care
about access to the heritage of recorded music, either now or in the
future,
then please read the following circular from the Open Rights Group.
---------------------------
Nicholas Cook, FBA
Professorial Research Fellow, Royal Holloway, University of London
Director, AHRC Research Centre for the History and Analysis of Recorded
Music [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
The European Parliament has begun preparing its opinion on the European
Commission's flawed proposal to extend the term of copyright
protection for
sound recordings. MEPs have been appointed to act as rapporteurs, who
will
guide the committees that will recommend how Parliament should vote.
Your
MEPs need to know that their voters are concerned and paying attention
- get
in touch with them to let them know your concerns. To help you do this
we've
prepared a guide to lobbying your MEPs (1) and a briefing pack (2).
(1) http://www.soundcopyright.eu/system/files/MEP+lobbying+tips.pdf
(2) http://www.soundcopyright.eu/system/files/Briefing.pdf
Lobbyists for term extension are making the case to MEPs inside the
European
Parliament right now. But your voice is stronger than any lobbyist. We
can't
overstate it: the most important thing you can do to stop term
extension is
to let your MEPs know your concerns so they an see and hear your side.
Be
aware also that MEPs can be deluged with information on many topics and
appreciate being treated as individuals.If you want to travel to
Brusselsto
meet your MEPs and need help - hit reply. If you have a story or an
interest
that we should know about - hit reply. Now is the time to speak, so
use your
voice wisely!
We'll keep you updated of major developments, but you can track the
proposal
on the Parliament website (3) and the details of relevant committees
and MEP
members are also available (4). Currently Legal Affairs (JURI) are
leading.
Three other committees - Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO);
Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE); and Culture and Education
(CULT), will
also help.
(3)
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/FindByProcnum.do?lang=3D2&procnum=3DCOD/2008/0157
(4)
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/activities/committees/committeesList.do?language=3DEN
In the meantime the Directive is also being discussed by
representatives of
Member States in the Council of Ministers. And criticism of the
Commission's
proposal is emerging all over Europe.
The world leading Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property Law
(5) in
Munich, has released a statement concluding that prolonging the term of
protection "cannot be justified from any point of view." (6)
(5) www.ip.mpg.de
(6) http://www.ip.mpg.de/en/data/pdf/stellungnahme-bmj-2008-09-10-def_eng.pdf
Professor Bernt Hugenholtz, Director of the Institute for Information
Law
(IViR) in Amsterdam, and one of the Commission's own advisers, has
accused
Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso of intentionally misleading
policy-makers with the proposal (7).
(7) http://www.ivir.nl//news/Open_Letter_EC.pdf
Pekka Gronow, sound archivist, author of "An International History of
the
Recording Industry", and adjunct professor of ethnomusicology at the
University of Helsinki, has written and concluded that performers
benefit
very little from the proposed extension ("in most cases the resulting
sums
will not even cover bank charges"). (8)
(8) http://blogit.yle.fi/node/2234
And of course, ORG have written to the authorities in the UK, explaining
exactly why the proposal makes no sense (9).
(9) http://www.openrightsgroup.org/uploads/080829_ukipo_ectermextension.pdf
The Sound Copyright Campaign=20
Run by the Open Rights Group and EFF
----------------------------------
One other link (added by Nicholas Cook): statement from the Centre for
Intellectual Property Policy & Management, University of Bournemouth:
(10) http://www.cippm.org.uk/publications/index.html
****End of forwarded message****
______________________________________
Dr J. P. E. Harper-Scott
Lecturer in Music
Department of Music
Royal Holloway, University of London
Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX, Great Britain
http://www.rhul.ac.uk/Music/jpeh-s.html
______________________________________
|
