[Free-sklyarov-uk] BBC broadcasts EMI propaganda

[Tim Ivorson]

This is really run of the mill actually, but I have made an .ogg of a
report that I heard on radio four this morning.

EMI is having a tantrum about an opera recording's copyright
restriction/protection expiring.

The Radio Four news describes copyrighted music as 'protected' (this
encourages us to see the debate from the publishers point of view.
'Restricted' would be a no less biased term). EMI describes it as an
'injustice' that the copyright of this recording will expire. A US
copyright lawyer insists that the possibility of internet distribution
gives Europe a duty (to US copyright holders) to extend copyright.
European Industry lobbiers argue that we need longer copyright in Europe
to justify cultural snobery. EMI thought that is would be 'damaging' for
the beatles' recordings to be allowed to enter the public domain. No
argument for this was given. A direct quote from a Radio Four newsreader:
"Why should companies invest big money now to record the classics of
tomorrow if they can't keep the profits they make".

Hasn't the Sono Bono retroactive copyright act already harmonised US
copyright with EU copyright? So why does the industry feel that it has the
right to use EU copyright durations as a justification for extending those
of the US, while insisting that EU copyright durations are no good? And
why haven't the relevent parts of US copyright law been harmonised with
European law? So it seems that elements in the US are upset that Europe
won't bully them into further extending copyright duration. Is that a
Cruise missile that I see on the horizon?

The BBC seem rather concerned about people violating their copyright, but
we all pay for it, and not for the BBC to prosecute us for distributing
material for them, while they neglect to to it themselves. Mail me
off-list if you want the .ogg.

Tim Ivorson