Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

wikimediafoundation.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 321 posts

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#71

Post by arh68 »

Devil's advocate here: why give welfare to artists (really, the labels they sign their rights over to) when so many great pieces of art actually exist that were made by artists who died penniless? Van Gogh, Gauguin,

I just don't buy the notion that extending copyrights way, way past death help the artist in any way. Why fight for labels' rights, when they largely amount to copyright trolls? Their artificial fears have made their way into YouTube, which just has to take those legal recordings down (they don't), because they're just so scared (they should not be) that this might be something that belongs to a troll.

When the real musicians get their content taken down after Big Label overtly steals it, we're getting trolled.

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#72

Post by onetimemanytime »

plopilop wrote: post #53
clon wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lazy rich child A's dad built a house, which he and his children can benefit from for marginal costs (maintenance, taxes). Lazy rich child B's dad wrote some music, which he and his children can benefit from for marginal costs (publishing, taxes). I know - in one case it is a physical object, and in the other - immaterial. But both houses and music can offer enjoyment and can be benefited from financially, and thus h…

In my country, inheritance of more than 2 million € is taxed ~50% (20% tax for 500 000 - 1M€). Copyright inheritance is not taxed in any way.

>>Copyright inheritance is not taxed in any way.

Michael Jackson's estate begs to differ: IRS argues that the pop star’s name and likeness should have been valued at $161 million; that would be down from 2013, when it valued those rights at $434 million. https://www.wsj.com/articles/michaels-jacksons-estate-faces-...

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#73

Post by phkahler »

One solution would be to host videos on your own site. It's another argument for decentralization.

Of course it's not simple. We need a decentralized platform for this and social media, but the questions on how to achieve that are many.

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#74

Post by [deleted] »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #7
giancarlostoro wrote: post #4

Given how quickly music becomes "old" I don't understand why copyright needs to chain up music any longer than two decades (I'm being kinda generous, some songs are old after a few months / one to five years). I hate the state of copyrighted works. Movies can stay copyrighted for a good 40 to 50 years, anything else is crazy. Books maybe 50 years too, but again, it's just crazy and clear that the extended years of co…

> Given how quickly music becomes "old" I don't understand why copyright needs to chain up music any longer than two decades You say that but the Beatles, Elvis, Beethoven, Pink Floyd, Michael Jackson are all artists that had their heyday 30-60 years ago and are still the top selling artists. A lot of them are dead now because of varying reasons, but some are still alive and kicking and giving new performances of the…

[deleted]

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#75

Post by xamuel »

clon wrote: post #58
dmitriid wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Immaterial rights are not material rights 2. Private property is a false analogy 3. Copyright was established for two reasons: a) to let the author (and only the author ) to profit from their immaterial work. b) to facilitate the free exchange of ideas

That is kind of the point - why is the dad who wields a pencil going to have to leave his children in a worse position than a dad who wielded a hammer.

The dad who wields a pencil is paid for his art, and he can use that money to buy a house.

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#76

Post by jaxtellerSoA »

yeloboy wrote: post #31

Copyright should only have a term of life (with a minimum duration of 50 years in case the artist dies at 20-30) and that's all. Tell me one reason this shouldn't be the case. By then, the studios will have taken a profit (or been a commercial failure but that's not on us) and so will have the artist. After the artist dies, there's no reason to "support the artist" anymore and while there is the effect of post-mortem…

> Copyright should only have a term of life (with a minimum duration of 50 years in case the artist dies at 20-30) and that's all.

Boy you are generous, if it was up to me copyrights would have a life of 10 years, no extensions/renewals. Ten years ought to be enough to squeeze a healthy chuck of profits out of your material. If after 10 years you can't/haven't come up with anything new, then you better find a new job.

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#77

Post by zaphar »

richrichardsson wrote: post #56
brann0 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide some proof that "pirating" (I hate that word) had severely diminished sold copies? And I don't mean all those "studies" based on the false premise that downloaded records are lost sales.

No I cannot, but conversely can you prove that is has not? All I can proffer is anecdote that as bandwidth and the ubiquity of Internet increased over the years, the sales of music via the label I'm involved with diminished. All the while our artists and the label itself became more and more popular, so it seems entirely counter inuitive that sales should have been dropping.

I would bet the drop in album sales is more likely due to the rise of Spotify and other streaming services than piracy.

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#78

Post by clon »

clon wrote: post #58
dmitriid wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Immaterial rights are not material rights 2. Private property is a false analogy 3. Copyright was established for two reasons: a) to let the author (and only the author ) to profit from their immaterial work. b) to facilitate the free exchange of ideas

That is kind of the point - why is the dad who wields a pencil going to have to leave his children in a worse position than a dad who wielded a hammer.

Nothing stopping from renting out the house in your lifetime, only to leave it for your children once you cease to be.

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#79

Post by graeme »

indigochill wrote: post #42
yeloboy wrote: post #31

Copyright should only have a term of life (with a minimum duration of 50 years in case the artist dies at 20-30) and that's all. Tell me one reason this shouldn't be the case. By then, the studios will have taken a profit (or been a commercial failure but that's not on us) and so will have the artist. After the artist dies, there's no reason to "support the artist" anymore and while there is the effect of post-mortem…

I agree with the gist of this, but I'm actually leaning towards a shorter copyright lifespan. Maybe 20? The reason being that I feel this better balances the need to benefit from your work (20 years is quite a while to be exclusively entitled to something) with the need for society to build on your work without threat of litigation. I feel 50 years benefits the former a bit too much at the expense of the latter. Just…

What about business. Any business writing is copyright protected too. I've been on business for eight years, and it would be very weird it the stuff I wrote and still use on my site expires in 12 years. It potentially will still be just as valid in that time.

I know the tech world changes fast but there are some niches where something written or recorded in 1998 is still valid today.

Re: Can Beethoven send takedown requests?

#80

Post by lozenge »

dotancohen wrote: post #52
Jerry2 wrote: post #37

I used to have a Youtube channel where I posted videos of me playing the piano. I played mostly Mozart, Beethoven and Rachmaninoff compositions. I had around 40 videos in total. Sometime around 2014, I started getting DMCA takedown notices from various companies claiming copyright. I was getting one or two per week and I contested them and things were ruled into my favor. But then it started getting harder and harder…

Who was sending these notices? Sounds like perjury to me.

It isn't perjury. In the DMCA, It is illegal for me to send copyright notices about you infringing a work I don't own, but it is not illegal for me to send a copyright notice about a work I do own - say a film - even if the page doesn't actually contain any of that film.

Apart from classical music, bird noises and ambient noises are common cases of inaccurate YouTube takedowns.

Post reply on HN