[pp.int.general] Protest certain musicians?

[Félix Robles]

I can only disagree. Copyright laws are a good idea, they are needed to
protect creators. But not all copyright laws are a good idea. We want to
protect creators not because we just happen to like them, but because they
create cultural products that are a benefit to society. Copyright laws pay
the artists by giving them a temporary monopoly on their works, but we
should pay them what is fair, and not more. That's why that monopoly given
to the artist must have a deadline.

It is true that a given cultural product (for example a song or a book) can
be forgotten until 30 years later it's rescued. In PIRATA (Spanish PP) we
have discussed to give the absolute monopoly on their works to the artists
for a limited time, for example 20 years, and after that until they die
they'll only receive a small percentage of revenues when it's used for
profit.

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Bernhard Schillo <b.schillo at gmx.net> wrote:

> 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
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Pirate Parties International - General Talk
> pp.international.general at lists.pirateweb.net
> http://lists.pirateweb.net/mailman/listinfo/pp.international.general
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pirateweb.net/pipermail/pp.international.general/attachments/20091021/090776dd/attachment.htm>