After reflecting on the concept of copyright the past several months, wading through legal documents and laws, and the process that brought it to where it is today, I have begun to ask myself very serious questions about the direction the concept of copyright has traveled in the past 40 years or so.

Initially, when copyright was first introduced to this country, the means to distribute copyrighted works was really quite simple. It was by horse or by foot. If it was sent, by mail or messenger, it arrived by horse or foot. This meant that it literally could take months or years to distribute to the "maximum market". The copyright term of 14 years plus 14-year extension must have been determined in part by the physical constraints created by the ability to distribute the work in a timely fashion. For the creator of the work to see rewards for his work would take years, simply because of the inability to get the work to the potential buyers any more quickly. It could take 14 years or 28 years to realize a return.

Now fast forward to 2002 and here we are with copyright extension after extension, to the point where individual copyright is now life plus 70 years, and corporate copyright is 95 years. Yet, here we are with the internet, satellite TV, cell phones, Ipaqs, wireless networks, cable TV, newspapers are distributed to the regional printing plant electronically, Ricochet, Aircard, that literally provide instant access to distribution. Airplanes, UPS, Fedex, 18 Wheelers, fax machines, distribute products in mere days (if not minutes) rather than months or years. Rather than extending copyright, shouldn't we be shortening copyright? Say to 7 and 7? Same thing with corporate copyright, shouldn't they be shortened as well?

As they say in academic circles "Publish or die" Talk about an incentive to create! If you can't sit back on your laurels, then you must continue to create. This would benefit the culture greatly. One has to ask what would Disney have come up with if Mickey and his pals where going into the public domain as scheduled? What would Mike Stoller and his partner Jerry Leiber produced in the years since "Stuck in the Middle with You" (1972), had there been an incentive to keep creating? At the very least in 1979 they would have started working again to produce more of those wonderful tunes they were so adept at producing in the 50's and 60's. (and everyone recognizes)

It's my hope at least one court in this land of ours has some common sense, and interpets the intent of the law.

haha got ya

first post

"Stuck in the Middle with You" isn't that done by, Steelers Wheel?

But written By Leibler and Stoller

Thse are the same writters that wrote Jailhouse Rock, Along Came Jones, Charlie Brown, Come a little Bit Closer, Only In America, Yakety Yak, and tons of others.

ahhhh ok.

Are there ever any demonstrations about this sort of thing in D.C.? I'm tired of hearing all this stuff about copyright, and yet not much really gets done about it. I realize the eldred case could shave 20 years off copyright terms, but as the last two articles have stated, is that really enough? I go to school right next to D.C., and I want to go to a copyright reduction demonstration dammit... but they just don't seem to happen.

Yet, Jerry and Mike sued Napster, Aimster, KaZaa, Grokster, MusicCity, and others for copyright infringement.


I think corporate copyright should be shorted to 10 years, individuals to 25.

SCOTTJW ::

You have hit the nail on the head COPYRIGHT REFORM NOW. We have to get this revolution going.

Actually, Stealers Wheel's "Stuck in the Middle With You" was PRODUCED by Leiber / Stoller. The song had actually been written by its two main members, Gerry Rafferty (later of "Baker Street" and "Right Down the Line" fame) and Joe Egan.

As for post-1972: One of L&S's only contributions thereafterwards was producing Peggy Lee's 1976 album "Mirrors."

But it does saddens me for certain, to see a virtual apathy among much of the general public on this issue. Because it is certainly true that anything hard won is easily lost and almost never regained.

Git yer Copyright Reform Now Shirts Here http://www.cafeshops.com/cp/store.aspx?s=boycott_riaa,repeal_dmca,moca,corrupt_cd,reform_copyrite,riaa_ss

Hmm interesting considerations

W-B APATHY is the word. At the current rate, about another 40 years or so, and the Brits will have a case for copyright infringment for the US National Anthem. Francis Scott Key was a pirate

my @ss is ®
and that is sweet in any light!

I believe in copyright as an artist but 75 to 95 years years?!? Come on, you would be dead in 95 years! That is insane. It sould be roughly ten years for a song. They sure do love to milk it don't they?

and yes I hate typing and typos but Im too lazy to correct em

THE RIAA is BULLSHIT.

Lets suggest the following - 50 years for an individual, 25 years for a corporation, with another 25 years only upon condition that the corporation disbursed at least 25 percent of the gross revenues to the artist.

50 years for an individual is way too long (let alone up to 50 years for a corporation), that still defeats the point of copyright, as 50 years is a significant fraction of a person's life... it's hard to create when you are dead or too old to move your fingers or your lung capacity is near zero. I agree with Fenderbenders on terms of copyright.

wasn't copyright intended for like, 10 to 20 years? 50 years is still far to long in my humble opinion.

who gets the copyright after that person is dead? The family or the label?

If the person dies within the term of copyright protection, it should go to immediate family, then be released into public domain when the term expires, with no chance of renewal. This would only be fair because neither the family or the label created the work.

Crazy part is that under current law, individual is life plus 70, so that makes it age discriminatory toward older creators. life plua 70 is a heck of a lot longer for a 20 year old, than it is for a 60 year old. My personal feeling are that it should be a fixed limited term.

what was wrong with two terms, - 28 + 28 ( a renewal term), which congress put in to protect authors from thievery by distributors. Maybe sponser a "restore renewal rights for authors - pass the anti-Rosen Copyright amendment.