[pp.int.general] Protest certain musicians?

[Bernhard Schillo]

Richard Stallman schrieb:
>     Because of these reasons my suggestion for a duration of copyright is 
>     the lifetime of the crator PLUS 15 years after creation of the work. For 
>     example when the artist dies at an age of 80 years and wrote a song at 
>     the age of 75 years, the song would be copyrightet 10 years after his 
>     death.
>
> And if he writes a song at the age of 20 and lives to be 80,
> that song will be copyrighted for 90 years.  That is too long.
> It means society loses the benefit of
> possible modified versions that might be interesting,
> and other artists who want to make them are stifled.
>
> It is a mistake to judge copyright issues primarily in terms of what
> might be good for the copyright holder.  The issue is what's good for
> the public.

But how can copyright be good for the public at all? It is never good 
for the public. When we accept a "little bit" of copyright, then the 
reason for this can only be, that it's good for the artist - to get him 
to create something (which is good for the public...). But i as an 
composer and writer of music and lyrics would never again produce 
anything if i had to cope with the situation, that i got to have to make 
money with my creations in a short period and if i don't make it, then 
somebody else (probably a big company), can use it the way he wants.

In this context we also have to talk about the right to contradict the 
defacement of the creation, which in germany is regulated by the 
"Urheberpersönlichkeitsrecht", in english the "moral rights", like the 
dictionary told me. Should these rights last longer than the 
exploitation laws? Can i contradict a special usage of my creation with 
them?

For that reasons i have suggested a short term aim and a long term aim. 
The long term aim should be the abolishing of copyrights and the short 
term aim should be the reducing them to the time i suggested and the 
full legalizing of the private copy.

I fully agree with you, that e.g. 90 Years of copyright is too long, if 
a creation got really famous. Then the creator got paid and the creation 
has become a folktune (for example). So the "folk" should be able to use 
it. I think that's your point. But to be fair to the creators (and i 
think that's nessecary if we don't want to abolish copyright 
completely), there are just two possibilitys: Either copyright is 
orientated on the lifespan of the creator or it's orientated on the 
success (when a creation is successfull and the creator got paid, then 
release it in the public domain). I can't imagine a way to measure the 
success like nessecary for possibility two, so in my opinion there only 
remains possibility one.

Regards
Bernhard Schillo