Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by EvanAnderson 1738 days ago
It's also galling that this recording was made under a copyright regime that granted substantially shorter federal copyright terms and required renewal to achieve the maximum term. Creators, at that time, knew "the deal" and accepted it.

The intellectual commons has been (and is), literally, subject to "I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further." scenarios. That shouldn't have ever been acceptable. Since no "normie" has ever given a damn about copyright terms only those who were financially incented to care (read: holders of copyrights) got a say. They used their lobby to make the change happen.
2 comments
contravariant 1738 days ago
Presumably we should look at all the good (?) Disney is doing with the money they've earned to truly appreciate why long dead artists should keep their copyright.
link
puppet-master 1738 days ago
Pulling their ads briefly from YouTube a few years back certainly achieved some good
link
alliao 1738 days ago
haven't you checked out their cruisers? they obviously need to do more to welcome the resurrection of walt disney the man himself in 2100. Preferably with world domination by then.
link
razwall 1738 days ago
What you say is mostly true, but in the case of sound recordings from before 1972, it's actually the opposite. At the time such recordings were made, they were subject to an infinite copyright term! The Music Modernization Act [1] passed in 2018 to put a finite life on those copyrights. As a result, all sound recordings from before 1923 become public domain this January.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_Modernization_Act

link
chuckee 1738 days ago
> they were subject to an infinite copyright term!

If so, that law was unconstitutional:

"[the United States Congress shall have power] To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_Clause

link
razwall 1738 days ago
It was common law copyright, not derived from the copyright clause of the Constitution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law_copyright

link
EvanAnderson 1738 days ago
That's why I qualified re: "federal copyright". Copyright of old sound recordings was a terrible mess for a long time.
link