09-12-2016, 04:26 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-12-2016, 04:26 PM by Warren Dew.)
(09-01-2016, 07:35 PM)pbrower2a Wrote: The objective of copyright extension was to protect the interests of corporations that own extant, aging copyrights -- like movie studios, recording companies,. and publishing houses. Even with the extension to 95 years, some works from after 1922 (practically anything in completed form from before January 1, 1923 is in the public domain) will start entering the public domain on January 1, 2019.
Does anyone know of any composer, author, artist, or performer can get any benefit from having a copyright on his own creative activity extended? Will William Faulkner write another novel or will Paul Hindemith compose another musical work due to copyright extension? Absolutely not!
Movies are not the work of individuals the way songs are. Personally I have no problem with extending the copyright on movies indefinitely, or as long as the corporation does not go bankrupt. Disney's income stream from movies as far back as the 1920s allows them to continue producing wonderful movies today.
Such a copyright wouldn't need to apply to scripts or sheet music or possibly even the recordings, just to the overall multimedia result.