The insidious effect of copyright

[harimau]

Copyright has been touted as the way to ensure that creative artists get compensated for their work.

However, copyright does negatively impact the overall cultural scene:

Read and comment:

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201203 ... eems.shtml

[Nick H]

I wonder if this is not being a little over-imaginative in interpreting statistics. A publisher will keep a book in their list as long as it sells, and copyright is just a small part of the cost of doing so.

[harimau]

I was hoping that there would be a discussion about how music would be affected because nowadays several artists and Sabah owners are asserting copyright.

On the other hand, this may have a beneficial effect on music if the only tapes we can access are those of Madurai Mani Iyer, MDR, Semmangudi, GNB, etc. )

[varsha]

I can see your point .
I can see the judge , hearing both sides of the argument , ask for the relevant music to be played for him . and frown at the prosecutor
You want to defend the copyright for that ? :-BD

[VijayR]

I was hoping that there would be a discussion about how music would be affected because nowadays several artists and Sabah owners are asserting copyright.

Ok, I'll bite. I'll start with a minor crib - the article makes an attempt to sound overly analytical. However, the only real takeaway that I seem to get is that the true shelf-life of copyright is likely 28 years or less, far lower than the term that copyright law grants. I do agree with that assessment.

The connection to CM is what I am not clear about. I feel that the article's analysis is specific to organized publishing. Publishing houses are, after all, middle-men (or women); all they really care about is sales revenue (as Nick pointed out a couple of posts up). The context of copyright in CM is very different. Artists are not (at least, I don't think are) trying to assert copyright for works that are more than 28 years old. It is the more recent period that is the issue. There is nothing in the article that indicates that asserting copyright for recent works has any "insidious" effect, so the title of this thread is perhaps generalizing a bit too much. In fact, my guess is (I may be way off base here) that most artists will not have a problem if the copyright term is reduced to 20 or 25 years. So, basically, provide aggressive protection for the recent stuff, but at the same time also aggressively public-domain the older stuff.

PS: I deliberately left out sabhas in the above because I believe that sabhas should not have any say in copyright at all. The authors/composers and performers are the only stakeholders in this game (if it is a recording session in a studio, then the record label also comes into play).

[askn]

There are 3 parts to the copyright story
!. The effect of a overly long copyright period and using that to restrict access to the works and charging high prices to make that access available ( a model favoured by traditional media industry ). This attempts to maximise income for the rights holders at the cost of the consumer.
2. All content should be free of copyright , and be available to all to share , use and consume as they please . This leaves the creator / performer very few avenues to by able to benefit from the work.
3. A fair trade between the creator / performer , where works are made available to the public at a reasonable price , with copyright for a reasonable period , so that the artist can benefit from the work

The original purpose of copyright law was promote the progress of science an arts by giving the authors and inventors an exclusive right to exploit their work for a limited time

Both copyright abuse , and non-recognition of the rights of creators are harmful

[Nick H]

I was hoping that there would be a discussion about how music would be affected

I think that you picked the wrong bait.

Copyright and performing rights in music is different to that in the written word.

[askn]

not really ?
the principles are the same across the arts
Copyright law applies equally as between and author and a musician
The musiican has a set of rights based on the nature of the work , as a performer , composer etc

[Nick H]

I wonder when was the last time that a living carnatic classical composer received a payment for the performance of one of their pieces? I don't think we are talking about composer's rights here at all, only, perhaps, those of performers, and the copyright in the performance itself.

I don't think that there is any relationship to publisher's book stocks/lists.

[askn]

True. They haven't. The relevant rights here are those of the performers and performance rights.
The equivalent of the a book publisher's is the music label ?

[Nick H]

OK, well, to try to fulfil Harimau's wish, and to respond to some things that have been said about sabbhas and copyright...

What about when the Sabha is also a publisher and issues some or all of their concerts as commercially available recordings? I imagine that they must, as they are aware of their business, tie up rights and options when booking the performers.

What about the treasure archive recordings that a number of sabhas must have? Should they be made available? Commercially? Would artist relationships make this possible?

[VijayR]

OK, well, to try to fulfil Harimau's wish, and to respond to some things that have been said about sabbhas and copyright...

What about when the Sabha is also a publisher and issues some or all of their concerts as commercially available recordings? I imagine that they must, as they are aware of their business, tie up rights and options when booking the performers.

What about the treasure archive recordings that a number of sabhas must have? Should they be made available? Commercially? Would artist relationships make this possible?

1. I can't think of a single sabha that "regularly" releases its concerts as commercial recordings (Charsur is not a sabha in the conventional sense). In the few cases where sabha kutcheris are released, it is always through an intermediary recording label. To the best of my knowledge, I have not seen sabhas grab recording rights and options from artists. In fact, in most sabhas, I don't think there is even a written contract between the sabha and artists...

2. Even if a sabha wants to release archival recordings (commercially or otherwise), it has to be subject to artist approval (what happens in practice might be a different story altogether, going by the attitude of typical sabha secretaries). With a proper revenue sharing model, I'm guessing many (if not most) artists will not object. However, this is easier said than done because it will involve manpower in terms of keeping track of sales, disbursement of revenue, etc.

[arasi]

Wonder how it works abroad--with the US sabhas and the ones in other countries.

[harimau]

Music publishing in Carnatic music is not the same as book publishing, in terms of scale of production.

A book, unless it is one of those published by the so-called vanity presses -- where the author essentially pays for the cost of production because it is a book hyping him or his patron -- has a press run of a few thousand. There are costs to typesetting several hundred pages, printing, binding, distributing, etc. One can say the pop music world has some similarities to this because a recording may have a pressing of several thousand copies.

Carnatic music is produced by any number of independent labels. A production run can be as few as 50 CDs. The CD labels and the cover stock can be printed for cheap at the local Students Xerox in Chennai or its equivalent since most software such as CorelDraw have templates for them. I know of "commercial houses" in Chennai that have production runs of 200 CDs. They will produce more CDs as the demand requires it.

But I was talking about how this business of copyright and the policy of "no recording as this is my sabha or my music" . In this case, we the audience are being shut out of a large amount of good, bad and indifferent music.

We have recordings of the great masters of the 1950s thru the 1980s because of their lax attitude towards recording and copyright. The prime beneficiaries of this are not just the listeners but also the current-day musicians who now are raising the bogeyman of copyright.

I am suggesting a policy of clandestine recordings and posting them on various websites. If anyone sends a notice to take it down, let them try and enforce that. Post them on websites hosted in China or Russia and let us watch them try and enforce their claimed copyright. :-BD

[Nick H]

But I was talking about how this business of copyright and the policy of "no recording as this is my sabha or my music" . In this case, we the audience are being shut out of a large amount of good, bad and indifferent music.

Compare with the Western music performance thing, where the slightest sniff or recording results in the attention of burly security staff

I am suggesting a policy of clandestine recordings and posting them on various websites. If anyone sends a notice to take it down, let them try and enforce that.

Open revolution! Well, it is interesting to see it openly suggested!

[askn]

I am suggesting a policy of clandestine recordings and posting them on various websites. If anyone sends a notice to take it down, let them try and enforce that. Post them on websites hosted in China or Russia and let us watch them try and enforce their claimed copyright. :-BD

Won't it be better if the artist is encouraged to record the concert and make it available to listen / download for a reasonable price either directly or through a 3rd party.
Win - win for all ?

[SrinathK]

The old days where the days of scarcity and few commercial releases and rasikas with their private collections did invaluable help to preserving the music of those times. Many such collections have in fact become commercial releases now.

However the present day is the age of information explosion and anyone with a mobile phone can easily record a concert and share it worldwide with the click of a button. Even the artistes themselves would find it easy to record each and every performance of theirs so I see no issue about losing good music in the information age.

Hence its not so straightforward to compare those times with the present day. As music rasikas have supported music back in those time, so now again rasikas should adapt to the demands of today and support music and musicians.

Unless there is a win win scenario and both musicians and rasikas cooperate for each others benefit this problem will not be solved.

However I don't see any cause for worries about losing great music in the present day with all our mobiles and terabyte drives. I can only hope that whatever rasikas do will be done in the interests of music and musicians since we are both dependent on each other and should not think only from a one sided perspective. One day even the copyrights will expire.

The future of music is in the internet mobiles and direct downloads. Take itunes store or amazon, just pay a dollar and download a track. The cost is generally directly proportional to the playing time. Or pay more and get the whole album. Saves much money and space too. If the cost is optimal then well and good. Imagine 100000 views on Youtube. If the musician gets even 10-30 rs for one view it's still substantial. Over a long period of time there will be plenty of satisfied musicians and music lovers. Speaking of amazon, haven't they just set up base in India now?

Someone tell me if youtube has pay and watch services...it would be a fantastic business idea. Just upload and earn ....

[srkris]

While we are at it, will all carnatic artists agree to pay a fair share of the royalty that comes from singing even dead composers' kritis to their descendants/memorial institutions (if descendants dont exist or are unknown)?

Those who won't, do not understand the *spirit* of intellectual-property rights, and that being the case, how can they expect to claim rights over their own intellectual property?

I am not in the least disrespectful of intellectual property rights of performers, but if they are really arguing for a moral case in favour of copyright and royalty, they should fairly share the proceeds with the composers, dead or alive.

Composers should ideally receive a share of proceeds for every live performance, published music being relatively a minor revenue stream in the carnatic music revenue generation model.

Thyagaraja may have never asked for it, but neither is he going to object if his memorial at Thiruvaiyar receives royalty for its upkeep! If not, let there be no more crocodile-tears.

[vasanthakokilam]

Someone tell me if youtube has pay and watch services...it would be a fantastic business idea. Just upload and earn ....

Yup, there is. Relatively recent ( may 2013 ) http://www.youtube.com/channels/paid_channels

Google has picked those 60+ channels now, but soon they are planning to open it up.

Sign up for paid channels here: https://docs.google.com/a/google.com/fo ... I/viewform

[SrinathK]

Dear srikris

How does such a thing work in the west? To what extent can the descendants of a composer claim royalties. What about works of composers who are long gone?

I really don't think copyrights are enforced that much a couple of decades or so after an artiste's passing -- I mean just look at the sheer number of classical recordings on Youtube, some videos have reached millions of views and I have a feeling that actually has created a new generation of classical lovers today. The information age has its benefits

Personally I feel that releasing a small amount of one's music for free over time actually promotes music. Considering how many concerts are done a year, there will always be at least a couple of choice ones that can be freely released and which were non commercial. I am aware that there are plenty of such non commercial concerts in Sangeethapriya. We don't need Hd video quality, even decent mp3 @ 160- 192k is more than enough. All said and done there is no dearth of free music out there.

Also if artistes are concerned they also should privately record all their concerts for long posterity.

Personally I love the business model of itunes store and amazon - If done right it saves big money on packaging and also by sitting in one's comp or mobile doesn't eat up space in the house

Also speaking of descendants of composers there is a lot that rasikas can also do for them. It's not just musicians who owe something to the composers...we once had Shyama sastri celebrations at our campus and the money raised was all done for the benefit of their descendants. Copyrights can't work beyond a certain period after the composer has passed on so such initiatives are necessary if one is concerned about the plight of composer's kin.

[Nick H]

How does such a thing work in the west? To what extent can the descendants of a composer claim royalties. What about works of composers who are long gone?

Copyright expires, so there is no question of making any such payment when performing or recording eg Mozart. My professional copyright experience was all to do with pictures, and the rule was until fifty years after the artist's death."

I really don't think copyrights are enforced that much a couple of decades or so after an artiste's passing -- I mean just look at the sheer number of classical recordings on Youtube, some videos have reached millions of views and I have a feeling that actually has created a new generation of classical lovers today. The information age has its benefits

Did you know that Happy Birthday to You is still in copyright? See this Wikkipedia page

Whether copyright is enforced or not probably largely depends on the resources of the copyright holder, and on whether or not they estimate the enforcement to be worth the effort. Whole industries have grown up around copyright enforcement, and some of those waters are pretty murky.

Also if artistes are concerned they also should privately record all their concerts for long posterity.

I wonder how much of that music posterity will ever see?

Personally I love the business model of itunes store and amazon - If done right it saves big money on packaging and also by sitting in one's comp or mobile doesn't eat up space in the house

I don't think that everyone loves it. It may suit the consumer, but it may not suit music. Whilst the music publishing industry are often seen to be baddies, they did do what Amazon and Apple do not: they supported and encouraged music and musicians, they invested in artists. Amazon, Apple, etc, just take a huge cut on sales, and do not plough back anything at all into music. This is what I gathered from reading a couple of articles and I'm afraid I don't have any links.