Theater of the absurd, or Once again about the fiction "public domain"

    A man comes to the master and says:
    - Master, I have something very tight with the money. Borrow me a ruble, and I'll return two to you in the spring, and I’ll leave the ax as a deposit.
    The gentleman scratched his head and said:
    “Well then, so be it, here's a ruble for you.” Only in spring it will be hard for you to give two rubles, give one right now, and in spring another one?
    The man thought and said:
    “And really, it will be hard to give two rubles,” and he gave the ruble back.
    He goes home and thinks: there is no ruble, there is no ax, the ruble should remain - and everything is right!

    Why this epigraph. Recently, I wrote a topic about how record companies steal phonograms from the public domain . In the wake of the topic aboutTo extend the period of protection of related rights in the European Union, I decided to find out how long executive law in the United States lasts. And I found out.

    Until 1972, the United States did not have federal law relating to copyright on phonograms, but there were many local laws. Adopted in 1971, The Sound Recording Amendment transferred all phonograms to the wing of copyright and recorded that all phonograms released before 1972 were protected by copyright until 2047, and the subsequent Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act (aka Mickey Mouse Law) extended this period to 2067 (see )

    And from this it follows: at the moment in the States there is NO PHONOMA IN PUBLIC DOMAIN AND WILL NOT APPEAR IN THE COMING 56 YEARS. None at all.

    And, like, everything is correct. Well, what if I suddenly put on the American server records, say, “Boris Godunov” performed by Fyodor Chaliapin, then I will thereby deprive the HMV company of legitimate profits, which has the following relation to these records: none. I emphasize that the rights of the publishers of phonograms belong only to the owner of the label - neither to the composer, nor to the performer, whose rights copywriters so love to hide behind, these rights are NOT SUBJECT to US law.

    However, from the experience of previous discussions on Habré, I’m sure there will surely be people who will say here that, they say, “everything is right”; that there is no normal alternative to such a right; that I just don’t want to pay for other people's labor and other. However, I simply could not come up with any argument in defense of the existence of this theater of the absurd. Whom did I rob this time?

    UPD Yes, I am aware that a record company can themselves transfer a phonogram to the public domain. Only here I do not know examples of such a transfer.

    Also popular now: