[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ARSCLIST] Britain reverses position on copyright extension
I don't know who you are, but this does not seem to be your field.
Paul D wrote:
Copyright laws are designed to allow the Creator to financially benefit
from their work.
FOR A LIMITED PERIOD OF TIME.
I'm not sure how you can ethically separate a songwriter
from his royalties for any length of time.
IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA YOU DO IT BY READING THE CONSTITUTION OF
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.*
"SECTION EIGHT - Powers of Congress*
"The Congress shall have Power . . .
"To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for
to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective
Writings and Discoveries;"
A REAL understanding of this clause of The Constitution shows that it
was understood by our founding fathers -- many of whom were writers and
inventors -- that unless "the exclusive Right" was "for limited Times",
society and the country will not truly progress and benefit. It was a
long established principle in law that the time period of Public Domain
was MORE IMPORTANT than the time period of copyright or patent. The
works are created FOR the PUBLIC DOMAIN, but prior to giving it to the
public, the creator will benefit. That time period is the BAIT to get
things to be created. But the eventual path of ALL creations were meant
for the Public Domain. Industry money and lobbys have been able to
trick our recent congress to misunderstanding these longstanding legal
and social concepts.
Its like finding a gold mine
and only benefitting for 7 years; after which you turn it over for "public
use". You found the gold. You keep it. Period.
BALONEY. Haven't you ever heard of Eminent Domain??? It is in the
Fifth Amendment *
"Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified
" . . . nor shall private property be taken for public use, without
This means that if there IS "just compensation", private property CAN
be taken for public use. It happens all the time.
"The power of the federal or state government to take private property
for a public purpose, even if the property owner objects. The Fifth
Amendment to the United States Constitution allows the government to
take private property if the taking is for a public use and the owner is
"justly compensated" (usually, paid fair market value) for his or her
loss. A public use is virtually anything that is sanctioned by a federal
or state legislative body, but such uses may include roads, parks,
reservoirs, schools, hospitals or other public buildings. Sometimes
called condemnation, taking or expropriation."
Royalty fees are trivial. Like 10 cents per sale on a song.It is not the cost that is at issue, it is the restriction of use.
SONGS cannot be restricted from use by any other person or company --
there is compulsary use written into the law. If I want to record your
song, you MUST let me. But recordings are not included. If a company
wishes to restrict any use of a recording EVEN BY THE CREATOR, they can
restrict the use. Except by special contract, PERFORMERS DO NOT OWN
Mike Biel mbiel@xxxxxxxxx