[Table of Contents]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ARSCLIST] Britain reverses position on copyright extension


In all due respect, you will not find many takers here. I am an artist
who has been recording music for nearly 30 years and never made a dime from
it - it has cost me money actually. But at least I am working on
conserving my own work, and still have control of most of it.

There is a big difference between Artists and Businesspeople, and when they interact, it is usually the businesspeople who get the long end of the stick.
As far as I know, the copyright term in the US is life of the author +75 years. This would seem to be a vehicle to provide for the heirs of the copyright-holder, but in the vast amount of cases, the copyright-holder is a corporation, so the heirs of the author are out in the cold (as was the author, in many cases). In effect, what we have in the US is a vehicle which protects corporations like Disney from losing copyrights on valuable properties (i.e. Mickey Mouse) and provides no avenue for the plethora of media which is locked up in basements and archives to be shared with future generations. If I read the curve from Richard Hess' article (which I would like to award kudos to) in the last ARSC journal, there is much less time left, given the current amount of material residing on analog tape, to preserve what we have. Much of what is there will be lost, due mainly to the lack of resources to preserve it. As a preservation engineer in the current day and age, I feel incredibly priviledged to be able to rescue the material I have worked on, and I feel sad when I find that the work I have done is still locked away from the people who are seeking it. An asset is worth nothing if noone ever knows about it.

-Matt Sohn

[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]