1953 Jazz public domain in Europe?

[Dick Onstenk]

This is what Ben Crowell wrote on rmmj. Is it true? And what about tunes
older than 1953? Sorry if I missed this earlier here ...

Dick

"Thought people might be interested in this new story:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/01/02/international/02CND_COPY.html

(If you're not a New York Times subscriber, you have to undergo their
free registration process. I happen to subscribe, but if I didn't, I'd
be be happy to register, and explain to them how I'm a retired 117-year-
old homemaker residing an Antarctica).

The upshot is that Europe isn't afflicted with the Sonny Bono Infinite
Copyright Extension Act, so stuff from 50 years ago keeps going
public-domain. In the US, congress keeps extending the copyright terms --
the last year to go PD in the US was 1922, and it's unlikely that 1923
will ever be allowed to, since Disney doesn't want to loose their
Pooh and Mickey Mouse copyrights.

This could have some really positive implications for jazz -- 1953
is really getting into modern times! European jazz musicians can now
perform a lot of cool tunes without paying royalties. They can, for
instance, broadcast their recordings on internet radio, whereas in the
US that's becoming financially impossible. In the US
they'd have to pay money to the record companies that hold the copyrights
from the dead dead composers. It'll be cool to see if Europe experiences
a real jazz renaissance."

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 10-1-03

[Lazzerini]

> This is what Ben Crowell wrote on rmmj. Is it true?

True?
Not really.
It's very misleading.

I've seen a few stories like this and can't quite figure out what they're on
about other than being professional journalists who have to file a story
even if they don't understand what they are writing about.

Generally speaking, in Europe, copyright lasts for the life of the creator,
plus seventy years after their death. (I seem to recall some harmonisation
of EEC intellectual property law that makes this seventy-five years instead
of the UK's seventy years - but I'm not dead yet, so haven't got around to
it.)

So this bit...

"This could have some really positive implications for jazz -- 1953 is
really getting into modern times! European jazz musicians can now perform a
lot of cool tunes without paying royalties."

is complete balderdash, nonsense, totally disconnected from facts.
As we english say - it's bollocks.

The Sonny Bono sponsored extension applies to the ownership of recordings
and not to the actual copyright of tunes or their qualification for entering
the public domain.

That's where the 50 year rule lives, has relevance, and becomes contentious.
Companies wish to continue exercising their rights in recordings of say,
Maria Callas, made over 50 years ago, and prevent anyone else releasing the
music.

Lazz

[icarusi]

Lazzerini <la...@telus.net> wrote in message
news:li_W9.34452$Ui4.1...@news1.telusplanet.net...

> That's where the 50 year rule lives, has relevance, and becomes
contentious.
> Companies wish to continue exercising their rights in
recordings of say,
> Maria Callas, made over 50 years ago, and prevent anyone else
releasing the
> music.

AFAIK if they do a remix of a track and release that then the
copyright of that mix would date from the new release date.
They'd have to be able to prove that any infringing copies were
of that mix, and not copies of the original recording.

Icarusi
--
remove the 00 to reply