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

Music industry hails passage of the Music Modernization Act

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 48 posts

Re: Music industry hails passage of the Music Modernization Act

#11

Post by realusername »

shshhdhs wrote: post #8
syshum wrote: post #7

> is that it guarantees that writers of pre-1972 songs receive federal copyright protection it is a sad day for the constution, and for the Public.... Nothing pre-1972 should have any copyright at all at this point, Copyright should be for 14 years + a single 14 year extension if the Human Creator is still alive to file for the extension. 28 years is the MAXIMUM anything should be copyrighted for, 14 years if the cop…

> The erosion of a vibrant Public Domain catalog is on of the greatest travesties of modern human civilization Ok, well I was with you until that last point. This is not one of the “greatest” travesties compared to wars, genocides, concentration camps, torture, mass murders, pillage, etc. Some cultures were literally wiped from history, and it puts things in perspective. We can hopefully fix copyright with future leg…

> We can hopefully fix copyright with future legislation, but it’s not like all the material was destroyed forever.

You can thank piracy for that, most of the content was saved by individuals not following copyright laws and would be lost otherwise.

Re: Music industry hails passage of the Music Modernization Act

#12

Post by syshum »

shshhdhs wrote: post #8
syshum wrote: post #7

> is that it guarantees that writers of pre-1972 songs receive federal copyright protection it is a sad day for the constution, and for the Public.... Nothing pre-1972 should have any copyright at all at this point, Copyright should be for 14 years + a single 14 year extension if the Human Creator is still alive to file for the extension. 28 years is the MAXIMUM anything should be copyrighted for, 14 years if the cop…

> The erosion of a vibrant Public Domain catalog is on of the greatest travesties of modern human civilization Ok, well I was with you until that last point. This is not one of the “greatest” travesties compared to wars, genocides, concentration camps, torture, mass murders, pillage, etc. Some cultures were literally wiped from history, and it puts things in perspective. We can hopefully fix copyright with future leg…

>> it’s not like all the material was destroyed forever.

Yes some things are, many things in fact have been lost forever.

Popular things where people simply ignore the law are often preserved, but that is not the case with obscure / less popular works or works where the create aggressively fights any archiving or preservation efforts.

>This is not one of the “greatest” travesties compared to

That depends on how you define Modern Civilization, and where you want to cut off the list of "one of". I do however think you down play the significance losing these works can have on our understanding of history, what actually took place, and to be able to study why some of those events occurred. If you do not believe that is a great travesty then I guess we will just have to disagree

Re: Music industry hails passage of the Music Modernization Act

#14

Post by asah »

syshum wrote: post #7

> is that it guarantees that writers of pre-1972 songs receive federal copyright protection it is a sad day for the constution, and for the Public.... Nothing pre-1972 should have any copyright at all at this point, Copyright should be for 14 years + a single 14 year extension if the Human Creator is still alive to file for the extension. 28 years is the MAXIMUM anything should be copyrighted for, 14 years if the cop…

greatest travesties? It's just money.

Re: Music industry hails passage of the Music Modernization Act

#15

Post by Angostura »

pjc50 wrote: post #10
shshhdhs wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The erosion of a vibrant Public Domain catalog is on of the greatest travesties of modern human civilization Ok, well I was with you until that last point. This is not one of the “greatest” travesties compared to wars, genocides, concentration camps, torture, mass murders, pillage, etc. Some cultures were literally wiped from history, and it puts things in perspective. We can hopefully fix copyright with future leg…

Some of the more obscure stuff does end up lost entirely. This is more of a problem with digital formats, especially games, where copying is intrinsic to preservation. The arcade machines with self-wiping "DRM" systems are a particularly strong example. Most of the old Doctor Who episodes that have been recovered have been from copies that were not supposed to have existed.

Actually those old Doctor Who episode were recorded perfectly legally. UK Copyright legislation has an exemption for recording off-air broadcasts for personal use for the purpose of timeshifting. It doesn't say how long you are allowed to shift the time.

Re: Music industry hails passage of the Music Modernization Act

#17

Post by charlesdm »

syshum wrote: post #7

> is that it guarantees that writers of pre-1972 songs receive federal copyright protection it is a sad day for the constution, and for the Public.... Nothing pre-1972 should have any copyright at all at this point, Copyright should be for 14 years + a single 14 year extension if the Human Creator is still alive to file for the extension. 28 years is the MAXIMUM anything should be copyrighted for, 14 years if the cop…

One could argue if you made something, you're entitled to the rights.

If a painter makes a painting, he'll be able to pass those down to his children. But if a musician makes a song, it'll end up in the public domain after X years.

Re: Music industry hails passage of the Music Modernization Act

#18

Post by drngdds »

charlesdm wrote: post #17
syshum wrote: post #7

> is that it guarantees that writers of pre-1972 songs receive federal copyright protection it is a sad day for the constution, and for the Public.... Nothing pre-1972 should have any copyright at all at this point, Copyright should be for 14 years + a single 14 year extension if the Human Creator is still alive to file for the extension. 28 years is the MAXIMUM anything should be copyrighted for, 14 years if the cop…

One could argue if you made something, you're entitled to the rights. If a painter makes a painting, he'll be able to pass those down to his children. But if a musician makes a song, it'll end up in the public domain after X years.

Apples and oranges. You're comparing a physical thing to 'intellectual property'.

Re: Music industry hails passage of the Music Modernization Act

#19

Post by markvdb »

charlesdm wrote: post #17
syshum wrote: post #7

> is that it guarantees that writers of pre-1972 songs receive federal copyright protection it is a sad day for the constution, and for the Public.... Nothing pre-1972 should have any copyright at all at this point, Copyright should be for 14 years + a single 14 year extension if the Human Creator is still alive to file for the extension. 28 years is the MAXIMUM anything should be copyrighted for, 14 years if the cop…

One could argue if you made something, you're entitled to the rights. If a painter makes a painting, he'll be able to pass those down to his children. But if a musician makes a song, it'll end up in the public domain after X years.

Why should I have to pay for the state enforcing an artificial monopoly on a recording your (great grand)father made?

The natural state is no such enforcement. Copying the original is essentially zero marginal cost.

P.S. Pro musician here.

Re: Music industry hails passage of the Music Modernization Act

#20

Post by petercooper »

charlesdm wrote: post #17
syshum wrote: post #7

> is that it guarantees that writers of pre-1972 songs receive federal copyright protection it is a sad day for the constution, and for the Public.... Nothing pre-1972 should have any copyright at all at this point, Copyright should be for 14 years + a single 14 year extension if the Human Creator is still alive to file for the extension. 28 years is the MAXIMUM anything should be copyrighted for, 14 years if the cop…

One could argue if you made something, you're entitled to the rights. If a painter makes a painting, he'll be able to pass those down to his children. But if a musician makes a song, it'll end up in the public domain after X years.

The physical vs non-physical aspect makes it more complex, but I think the situation is ultimately the same..(?) A painter like a musician can keep and pass down a physical representation of the original image (a canvas vs a gold disc/master) but the rights to the image/song itself can enter public domain and be reproduced (a print vs an MP3).

It's kinda interesting to me that in art the physical object is revered above the image itself, whereas I can't imagine there are many people who spend millions on gold discs or masters of culturally significant songs.

Post reply on HN