Upcoming Conf: Sound Property? Investigating the Legal Status of Sound Recordings (Salford)

SOUND PROPERTY? INVESTIGATING THE LEGAL STATUS OF SOUND RECORDINGS
AN INTERDISCIPLINARY CONFERENCE ON MUSIC & COPYRIGHT
UNIVERSITY OF SALFORD
28 - 29 MAY 2009

This conference proposes to investigate the current U.S. and U.K. statutes that regulate the protection of sound recordings. It will inquire to what degree those laws secure the rights of both the owners and creators of the music contained on these products as well as determine their impact upon those who consume and comment upon this material. The pending efforts to universalize an extended term of copyright underscore the potential for even more draconian controls upon recorded music. Will the public, creators, and commentators continue to be able to acquire, appreciate and appropriate musical materials? Can some balance be found between the need for profit and the pursuit of pleasure? Is it possible in a civil society for music effectively to be silenced through constraints over its recorded legacy?

Keynote Speakers Include:

Nicholas Cook, University of Cambridge. Music: A Very Short Introduction & Music, Imagination & Culture

Simon Frith, University of Edinburgh Taking Popular Music Seriously; Sound Effects; Editor, Music & Copyright

Kembrew McLeod, University of Iowa Freedom of Expression: Resistance & Repression in the Age of Intellectual Property; Owning Culture: Ownership, Authorship & Intellectual Property

Further details at:
http://www.adelphi.salford.ac.uk/adelphi/p/?s=23&pid=90

Extension to Copyright in the EU

EXTENSION TO COPYRIGHT ACROSS THE EU

[From the Open Rights Group:]
The European Parliament is set to vote on whether to double the term of copyright in sound recordings. Please register your concern at an event on the proposed Term Extension Directive, on Tuesday 27 January 2009 in the European Parliament in Brussels:

http://soundcopyright.eventbrite.com/

This flawed Directive has been unanimously condemned by Europe's leading intellectual property research centres. The European Parliament must address the mounting concerns of consumer groups and copyright users if they want a modern, workable copyright policy. Please, if you can, come to Brussels and register your concern.

If you can't make it, please forward this mail to your MEP (you can get their contact details here:
http://www.laquadrature.net/wiki/Political_Memory) and ask them to:

*Strongly oppose this legislation

*Attend the 27 January event on your behalf

*Sign the Sound Copyright petition (http://www.soundcopyright.eu/petition)

*Watch the Open Rights Groups' cartoon "How copyright term extension in Sound Recordings actually works" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kijON_XODUk)




SPREAD THE WORD: HOW COPYRIGHT TERM EXTENSION IN SOUND RECORDINGS ACTUALLY WORKS:

The Open Rights Group and animators Eclectech, whose work has included pieces for Friends of the Earth and No2ID in the UK, have produced a short animation explaining "How copyright term extension in Sound Recordings actually works". Check it out at the link below and show your friends and your MEPs why term extension is a really bad idea.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kijON_XODUk

ANDREW GOWERS HITS OUT AT "OUT OF TUNE" TERM EXTENSION:

The former editor of the Financial Times, Andrew Gowers, hit out at the UK Government's suggestion that they should consider a copyright extension as "out of tune with reality". Gowers original evidence-based review for the UK Government concluded against extending copyright.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/ba280756-ca07-11dd-93e5-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1


The ORG privacy policy is online at http://www.openrightsgroup.org/privacy-policy/

Sound Copyright Campain (European Union)

From The Sound Copyright Campaign:

The flawed proposal to extend the term of copyright protection afforded to sound recordings, robbing consumers in the name of perfomers but for the benefit of the world’s four major record labels, is being fast-tracked through the democratic process. Earlier this month MEPs from the relevant European Parliament committees presented their draft reports (1) at a meeting of the legal affairs committee (JURI), the Committee which will make recommendations to the European Parliament on how to vote on the Directive early next year. They proposed a host of worrying new amendments which threaten to:

* Weaken further already inadequate measures intended to allow orphan works, and commercially worthless but culturally significant recordings to pass into the public domain (Culture (CULT), Internal Market (IMCO) and the Industry, Technology and Research (ITRE) committees draft reports).

* Allow record labels to deduct “costs” from a fund intended to benefit session musicians, further shrinking the pot of money made available to performers in favour of labels (IMCO committee draft report).

* Dramatically widen the scope of the Directive to include audio-visual recording, even though no relevant impact assessment has been conducted into what effect this might have on consumers and follow-on innovators. (JURI and ITRE committee draft reports).

(1) http://www.openrightsgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/term-extension-committee-draft-reports.zip

At the JURI meeting, Dr Lionel Bently of the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL) Cambridge, dismissed the proposal stating that “record producers will gain the lion’s share of revenues on sales in the extended term”. He warned that the Directive would accrue serious social and economic costs, and concluded that MEPs should “oppose this measure in its totality.” (2)

(2)http://www.openrightsgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/prof-bently-juri-speech.pdf

Bently is not the only expert to oppose the Directive. In an open letter to MEPs, Europe’s leading intellectual property research centres unanimously condemned the proposal (3). The European Broadcast Union has also stated publicly that the proposal will make consumers foot the bill while stifling innovation (4).

(3) http://www.openrightsgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/term-open-letter-and-statement.zip
(4) http://www.openrightsgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/ebu-position-paper-extending-the-term-of-copyright-protection.doc

Earlier this month ORG met with MEPs in the European Parliament to express our serious concerns about the proposal. We warned that the European Commission’s own figures demonstrate that performers will benefit little from the extended term (5), while the world’s four major record labels will gain millions of Euros direct from consumer’s pockets. We argued that this damaged the respect necessary for a functioning IP system.

(5) http://www.openrightsgroup.org/wp-content/uploads/openrights-scotsman-oct-08.pdf

But our voice is not as powerful as yours. It’s vital that you contact your MEPs now (6) and tell them why term extension is bad news (7).

(6) http://www.soundcopyright.eu/system/files/MEP+lobbying+tips.pdf
(7) http://www.soundcopyright.eu/system/files/Briefing.pdf

With all the evidence pointing against this measure, you can call on your MEPs to put a stop to bad IP law and reject this proposal. You can also also tell the appropriate government department in your own EU country (8) (in the UK it is DCMS), as they will be meeting in the Council of Ministers to discuss term extension.

(8) http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/urls.jsp

With the European elections next year, Parliament is set to move quickly on this issue. It’s up to you to remind your representatives that their job is to look out for your interests, not to rush through bad law.

The Sound Copyright Campaign
Run by the Open Rights Group and EFF

CFP: Sound Property? Investigating the Legal Status of Sound Recordings (Salford)

SOUND PROPERTY? INVESTIGATING THE LEGAL STATUS OF SOUND RECORDINGS
AN INTERDISCIPLINARY CONFERENCE ON MUSIC & COPYRIGHT
UNIVERSITY OF SALFORD, UK
18 - 19 FEBRUARY 2009
CALL FOR PAPERS

This conference proposes to investigate the current U.S. and U.K. statutes that regulate the protection of sound recordings. It will inquire to what degree those laws secure the rights of both the owners and creators of the music contained on these products as well as determine their impact upon those who consume and comment upon this material. The pending efforts to universalize an extended term of copyright underscore the potential for even more draconian controls upon recorded music. Will the public, creators, and commentators continue to be able to acquire, appreciate and appropriate musical materials? Can some balance be found between the need for profit and the pursuit of pleasure? Is it possible in a civil society for music effectively to be silenced through constraints over its recorded legacy?

Proposals are solicited that address the current U.S. and U.K. statutes; the impact of these laws upon writing and teaching about music; the impact of these laws upon musical creators and consumers; and the relationship between legal controls over recorded sound and issues of public policy and the needs of a civil society.

Conference papers will be organized into panel sessions of 2 hours, each comprising three 25-minute presentations with time for discussion. Proposals may be submitted either for individual papers or for organized panel sessions of three papers and a chair.

Proposals are welcome and encouraged from a variety of disciplinary perspectives, (including but certainly not limited to law, economics, sociology, music, popular music studies, history, cultural studies, film and television studies etc.) and from those with professional perspectives related to the subject (performers, producers, composers, lawyers, executives etc.).

Efforts are being made to incorporate responses from the corporate sector in addition to that of commentators, both from the academy and the public arena. Also, final plans may well include both a concert by musicians whose work depends upon the manipulation of pre-existent recordings as well as showings of films about these issues and those that employ a cinematic re-mixing of visual and acoustic sources.

Proposals of at least 250 and no more than 500 words should be sent to David Sanjek before December 17th. Acceptance of papers and a final programme will be announced in late December.

David Sanjek
Professor of Music
Director, Popular Music Research Centre
University of Salford
Adelphi Building
Peru Street Greater Manchester
M3 6EQ U.K.
d.sanjek at salford.ac.uk

Flickr, Creative Commons and Copyright 2.0

Flickr is a fabulous resource. Not only can you share your photos with others, it serves as a large repository for stock photos which can be used for academic presentations, etc. In terms of licensed academic resources there is ArtStor, but having digested the license for ease of re-use, 2 words come to mind: not friendly. There are other sites which have stock photos (Phil Bradley has a summary of these.) I've experimented with a bunch of these sites testing keywords and usability and range of stock and bookmarked my favourites under the 'stock_photos' tag in my Delicious feed.

In particular, Flickr epitomises the spirit of Web 2.0 and how copyright (and inherent intellectual property) has evolved for the web. In addition to social networking by sharing your creative ideas, endeavours, Flickr also allows you to share your content with as many or as few restrictions as possible via a Creative Commons license. (Another aspect of Web 2.0 is that you can follow the addition of new content and developments uploaded (by individual) via RSS feeds at the bottom of that individual's page.)

From the main page (above) click on search, then click through to the Advanced search button.

Scroll on down until you see the following filters:

From this point, you can restrict your search to photos whose owners will allow re-use or adaptability of content (most just asking for a citation back to the original on Flickr), some allowing adaptability but for non-commercial purposes. It is this variance which allows a Creative Commons license to sit in the middle of a continuum ranging from copyright (where permission must be sought for any modifications) to public domain (do with it what you will).

From www.creativecommons.org

At a time when MEPs are debating extension to existing copyright laws, creativity in this new medium will be stifled as the editors of the Guardian eloquently put yesterday in their tribute to Creative Commons co-founder Lawrence Lessig.

"[Lessig] regards extension of copyright as anathema to the YouTube generation and a brake on economic growth. He also thinks it is against the US constitution, which states that copyright should be "limited". The original limit has been extended from 14 to 70 years after the death of the creator, and Prof Lessig points out that one of the main corporations that lobbied for this, Disney, cut its creative teeth by raiding the public domain for works from Snow White to the Hunchback of Notre Dame. If the current term for copyright had existed then, it might have suffocated Mickey Mouse at birth." http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/22/intellectualproperty-copyright

Speaking of Disney, it is only apropos that I highlight the following Youtube clip which covers issues of copyright, in particular, the fair use (US) / fair dealing (UK) doctrine using snippets of Disney's own cartoon characters.

Whilst this clip is very entertaining and outlines the general principle of fair use, there are some differences with fair dealing (UK) albeit both operate from a common ideology which balances the market value (i.e. what an author could potentially lose) against a reasonable amount of time for the author to enjoy those royalties. (To this end, I think it's about time Steamboat Willie passed into public domain! I'm not including the famous Mickey Mouse clip which first synchronised sound with animation in this posting but here is the link to the 1928 clip.) To learn a bit more about Creative Commons licensing and how you can use it and adapt materials for your research, this clip is a nice introduction. (Because it is hosted on Revver, small annoying text ads appear like super-titles, once they appear they can be immediately minimised which I HIGHLY recommend!)

With all of the discussion on copyright I would be remiss if I did not mention Eduserv's new Copyright Tutorial which was brought to my attention in a recent posting by Sheila Webber. Although I am not a (big) fan of Eduserv, I give credit where credit is due and they've done a good job here. The Copyright Toolkit (http://www.copyrighttoolkit.com/) is a good resource with a UK focus for those wishing to ensure compliance. It has exercises to work through different scenarios and will serve as a nice reference as it contains relevant bits of case law to illustrate their points.