[pp.int.general] Protest certain musicians?

[Félix Robles]

I must add that when I say:
" we have discussed to give the absolute monopoly on their works to the
artists for a limited time"
I mean the absolute monopoly on the for-profit use. Non-profit use should be
legal from the start, always.

2009/10/21 Félix Robles <redeadlink at gmail.com>

> 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/20091021/97a6a681/attachment-0001.htm>