Rights Holders Rush To Gain More Cash

[GhostShip]

Most of us work a few hours and get paid for those hours but for some artistic folks it seems they need to get paid for nearly a hundred years for those few hours, perhaps we are all missing a trick here 

http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/7565576/us-industry-bodies-govt-support-eu-digital-copyright

A cadre of U.S. music industry organizations have signed an open letter calling on the government to support copyright reforms in Europe which address the so-called “value gap,” the disparity in royalty payments from a range of music distribution services.

The letter, which namechecks Spotify and YouTube, continues, “Protecting this growing digital-access model is imperative. Unfortunately, this advancement is threatened by a growing divide between the online consumption of our content and the revenue it generates -- a Value Gap. This gap is largely due to a narrow group of businesses that exploit analog-era laws intended for passive online conduits in order to obtain below-market licenses never intended for active music distributors like them.”

The letter is signed by the usual gang of scroungers whom act as unofficial taxation agents on both the artist and the consumer.

 I believe folks are happy to reward any artist directly for creating great and innovative works of public entertainment but that like any other deal that has to be balanced against the requirements of greater society, is it really valid to lock music up for more than a human life span under laws crafted by guile and special interest groups written mainly in private after meetings with such "rightsholders" ?

My view is pretty simple on this, the time period of copyright protection should be about no more than 50 years thus allowing the artist some measure of protection without allowing them to sit idle for decades, creativity is to be rewarded but lets be clear here we are all creative in some sphere or other and we only get paid the once so in return for suspending our normal arrangement we want a fair deal also, you guys make the music and we buy it for about 50 years after that it should be free to all forever, failing to recognise the publics side of a deal means the public is more than likely to treat you guys the same way.

[White Stripes]

but for some artistic folks it seems they need to get paid for nearly a hundred years for those few hours,

the real problem is when the copy-written performance in question goes out of print this 100 years pushes many artists into complete obscurity

[GhostShip]

Indeed that's an overlooked issue with overbroad copyright time periods, by lowering the time span to something approximating an average life time there is some overlap for those whom might not be able to own a copy of a work to get to enjoy it in their later years, this makes sense if you think about it as those whom made the music will die just prior to their audience of fans most of whom where youthful when the work was first created and will thus enjoy it the most, in many cases such "enjoyment " can be infectious to a further generation of folks not around at the time of the original work but clearly able to see the effect it has on the older folks.

We have all seen the copyright wolves searching out fresh blood each time an artist dies to drain the last "middleman" cent out of the deceased's work but you don't see this same kind of vigour when it comes to tracking down artists, musicians and authors to deliver up some royalties, they may well find thousands of ways to gather those revenues but parting with them is strictly another matter, ask any ex band member and the same story becomes all too familiar.

The average age globally is 71 however locally its a crap shoot, see here for further info 

http://www.infoplease.com/world/statistics/life-expectancy-country.html