New initiative lengthens copyright protections so that artists receive royalties further into retirement, but also lengthens it for record producers so that they have additional time to "adapt to the rapidly changing business environment."Today the the European Commission formally adopted several initiatives that drastically alter the copyright protection landscape and sadly bring it into line with the US. The Commission proposed to equalize the copyright protection term for performers with that of composers in a bid to bridge the "income gap that performers face toward(s) the end of their lives." This means that the term of protection for recorded performances and the record itself will be lengthened from 50 to 95 years. "In this way, the proposal would benefit both the performer and the record producer," says a press release from the Commission. "It also signals that Europe values their creative contribution." An extended term would mean that performers could continue earning money well into retirement. A 95-year term would bridge the income gap that performers face when they turn 70, just as their early performances recorded in their 20s would lose protection. They will continue to be eligible for broadcast royalties, royalties for performances in public places, such as bars and discotheques, and compensation payments for private copying of their performances. Sadly, however, an extended copyright protection term would also benefit record producers. "I am committed to concentrate all necessary efforts to ensure that performers have a decent income and that there will be a European-based music industry in the years to come," said Internal Market and Services Commissioner Charlie McCreevy. Is there really any credible fears that there won't be? There may not be a record industry as we know it, the kind with offices and overpaid executives who try to make as much money off the backs of musicians as is legally - or even illegally - possible, but there will ALWAYS be artists seeking nothing more than to express themselves through song. The extended term would also benefit record labels who would get an extra 45 years to monopolize the albums of society's most gifted musicians. The Commission apparently decided to include them so that they would be able to generate additional revenue from an increased music catalogue to sell tracks and albums from. "It would generate additional revenue from the sale of records in shops and on the Internet," continued the press release. "This should allow producers to adapt to the rapidly changing business environment which is characterised by a fast decline in physical sales (- 30% over the past five yeas) and the comparatively slow Propping up record labels certainly can't be important for the health and well-being of music and society, and surely illustrates just how beholden to the music industry many politicians are. For its part, the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry(IFPI) was quick to praise the decision. John Kennedy, Chairman & CEO of IFPI, said: “Commissioner McCreevy has shown great vision and determination in taking this important initiative which is vital to the competitiveness of the European music sector. Equalising term of protection with the U.S. will achieve fairness for European artists and promote industry investment in new talent, with a positive impact on consumer choice. We look forward to working with the EU institutions on the remaining issues in this proposal to ensure that the final legislation will bring real benefits to the music sector and everyone who enjoys the incredible diversity of European music. ” The IFPI at least acknowledges the apparent revenue payday by noting that it will now be able to capitalize on the sale of albums that otherwise would've gone to the public domain. "The recording industry is gratified that the Commission has moved to close this copyright gap, especially at a time when early recordings can win new audiences and enjoy a second lease of life on the Internet," says the IFPI. Probably the single most disturbing thing of the whole affair is that the Commission seems to be using the pretext of helping aging musicians earn money in order to give additional revenue streams to the recording industry. If it was really sincere about helping artists then it would separate the two plans and have a meaningful debate about each on their own merits and not as some part of some odd plan to ensure there's a European-based music industry. Where do they think it'll go? (jared@zeropaid.com) |
|
members that voted for this story
|
