> Music Modernization Act I don't know if/how it could legally be done, but I'd love to see "cute" names for laws barred from use in Congress. Refer to them all by number not brand names dreamed up by marketing professionals to make the proposed law seem unassailable ( "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act" aka USA PATRIOT Act).
Congress wants to extend the copyright on some sound recordings to 144 years
31–40 of 132 posts
Re: Congress wants to extend the copyright on some sound recordings to 144 years
#32> Music Modernization Act I don't know if/how it could legally be done, but I'd love to see "cute" names for laws barred from use in Congress. Refer to them all by number not brand names dreamed up by marketing professionals to make the proposed law seem unassailable ( "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act" aka USA PATRIOT Act).
You need a Cut Undemocratic Naming Titles bill
Re: Congress wants to extend the copyright on some sound recordings to 144 years
#33Which recording was this bill written for?
Re: Congress wants to extend the copyright on some sound recordings to 144 years
#34Extending copyright long after the life of an artist is bad economics. Because of the value of future money any revenue from future sales 30+ is essentially worthless now. So it doesn’t induce people to create more works of art and entertainment.
Promoting artists to create art has long been sidelined as a goal of copyright. Now, copyright is there to make sure already copy written works are profitable forever. I mean think about it. All they have to do is take old music and movies and repackage it as new media. Disney movies from the 30s can be remade today with CGI. Pop music from the 80s can be remixed in 2040, and a whole new generation of people will buy it up, without any artists involved. Copyright has lost its purpose.
Re: Congress wants to extend the copyright on some sound recordings to 144 years
#35> Music Modernization Act I don't know if/how it could legally be done, but I'd love to see "cute" names for laws barred from use in Congress. Refer to them all by number not brand names dreamed up by marketing professionals to make the proposed law seem unassailable ( "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act" aka USA PATRIOT Act).
It can't even in principal be done in a binding way in mere statute, since newer law wins in case of a conflict, and even were it done by Constitutional Amendment, it would be hard to give it teeth.
Plus, it's plenty useful to have memorable named for laws, rather having to remember bill/session numbers (or, worse, the weird practice in California and some other places where laws, even when they actually have friendly names, are frequently referred to by bill numbers without session numbers, even long after adoption, when such identifiers are decidedly non-unique.)
Re: Congress wants to extend the copyright on some sound recordings to 144 years
#36> Music Modernization Act I don't know if/how it could legally be done, but I'd love to see "cute" names for laws barred from use in Congress. Refer to them all by number not brand names dreamed up by marketing professionals to make the proposed law seem unassailable ( "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act" aka USA PATRIOT Act).
For more on framing, see George Lakoff’s lecture on moral politics — reveals the way political language uses metaphors and How framing a debate ensures its outcome.
Repeating the frame reinforces the intended meaning. Merely Using the name of the bill defines its outcome.
“Tax Relief” - no one wants to fight a “relief” effort. Tax cuts for the rich would be the correct name.
“Clear sky initiative” is the name of a clear cutting bill.
Re: Congress wants to extend the copyright on some sound recordings to 144 years
#37Re: Congress wants to extend the copyright on some sound recordings to 144 years
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
The focus of the act is actually on modernizing licensing for streaming: https://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/congress-is-giving-m... .
The important thing here is that primarily good MMA has been bundled with the CLASSICS Act. From the EFF commentary: "The CLASSICS Act gives nothing back to the public. It doesn’t increase access to pre-1972 recordings, which are already played regularly on Internet radio. And it doesn’t let the public use these recordings without permission any sooner. While some recording artists and their heirs will receive money…
A big part of the deterioration of current state of political discourse in the US could be attributed to this one issue. I have no conception of how such a limit on the content of bills could be defined and enforced while maintaining the balance of power, but the current system is insanity.
Re: Congress wants to extend the copyright on some sound recordings to 144 years
#39> Music Modernization Act I don't know if/how it could legally be done, but I'd love to see "cute" names for laws barred from use in Congress. Refer to them all by number not brand names dreamed up by marketing professionals to make the proposed law seem unassailable ( "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act" aka USA PATRIOT Act).
Re: Congress wants to extend the copyright on some sound recordings to 144 years
#40At some point, people need to realize it's not the copyright system that's rotten, it's the incentivization of congressmen...