4 ms·

I like this idea, but often economics isn't the only thing at play. Imagine for example, after 28 years, Halliburton wanted to make use of a John Lennon song in

by mvc 14y ago

I like this idea, but often economics isn't the only thing at play. Imagine for example, after 28 years, Halliburton wanted to make use of a John Lennon song in their advertising (pun not intended). Seems unfair that John (or his heirs) would have to pay to keep it from being used in this way.

jkn 14y ago
This is definitely an issue, however at some point the right of the people to appropriate their culture outweighs the right of the artists to control their creations. I think when your work has been in the wild for 28 years, it's time to let go.
- devcpp 14y ago
  Agreed. We're not used to see modern works reused freely because it has never happened. But with an open mind, I can easily see it. 28 years after your death, the world well deserves to finally use your work.
dredmorbius 14y ago
Existing music copyright already has this property. Mechanical licensing means that, simply by paying a standarized fee, a performance or recording of a piece of music may be lawfully created. This issue occurs regularly during political campaigns in which a candidate or party may use a song (Palin's use of "Barracuda" and Silversun Pickup' "Panic Switch" by Romney) against the wishes of the musician in question. Generally the negative publicity of the musician's protest outweighs benefits to the campaign. But legally there's not much musicians can do. http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/16/politics/music-in-campaigns/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/16/politics/music-in-campaigns/in... More broadly, the question becomes: at what point is a work fair pickings -- should we be able to prohibit Mozart or Vivaldi or Shakespeare works from being appropriated by various commercial or political concerns? Regardless, "use against my wishes or viewpoints" isn't one of the concerns of copyright as formed in the US Constitution. My view is that absent a brief period of commercial control, works should be released to public domain reasonably speedily.
dredmorbius 14y ago
And for a similar issue, there's the case of Neda Soltani. You may recall the woman whose death by a sniper during a rally in Iran was shared on video with the world in 2009. This is not her story. Rather, Neda Soltani's Facebook photo was mistakenly attributed to Neda Agha-Soltan by media worldwide. In a cosmic dark comedy, both protesters and Iranian government agents attacked Soltani on account of an error she had no part in. Eventually she left the country, though much of her family and many friends remain behind. http://www.onthemedia.org/2012/nov/30/my-stolen-face/ http://www.onthemedia.org/2012/nov/30/my-stolen-face/ http://www.amazon.com/My-Stolen-Face-ebook/dp/B009JVQ8QQ http://www.amazon.com/My-Stolen-Face-ebook/dp/B009JVQ8QQ

by mvc 14y ago

jkn 14y ago

This is definitely an issue, however at some point the right of the people to appropriate their culture outweighs the right of the artists to control their creations. I think when your work has been in the wild for 28 years, it's time to let go.

devcpp 14y ago
Agreed. We're not used to see modern works reused freely because it has never happened. But with an open mind, I can easily see it. 28 years after your death, the world well deserves to finally use your work.

dredmorbius 14y ago

Existing music copyright already has this property. Mechanical licensing means that, simply by paying a standarized fee, a performance or recording of a piece of music may be lawfully created. This issue occurs regularly during political campaigns in which a candidate or party may use a song (Palin's use of "Barracuda" and Silversun Pickup' "Panic Switch" by Romney) against the wishes of the musician in question. Generally the negative publicity of the musician's protest outweighs benefits to the campaign. But legally there's not much musicians can do. http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/16/politics/music-in-campaigns/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/16/politics/music-in-campaigns/in... More broadly, the question becomes: at what point is a work fair pickings -- should we be able to prohibit Mozart or Vivaldi or Shakespeare works from being appropriated by various commercial or political concerns? Regardless, "use against my wishes or viewpoints" isn't one of the concerns of copyright as formed in the US Constitution. My view is that absent a brief period of commercial control, works should be released to public domain reasonably speedily.

dredmorbius 14y ago

And for a similar issue, there's the case of Neda Soltani. You may recall the woman whose death by a sniper during a rally in Iran was shared on video with the world in 2009. This is not her story. Rather, Neda Soltani's Facebook photo was mistakenly attributed to Neda Agha-Soltan by media worldwide. In a cosmic dark comedy, both protesters and Iranian government agents attacked Soltani on account of an error she had no part in. Eventually she left the country, though much of her family and many friends remain behind. http://www.onthemedia.org/2012/nov/30/my-stolen-face/ http://www.onthemedia.org/2012/nov/30/my-stolen-face/ http://www.amazon.com/My-Stolen-Face-ebook/dp/B009JVQ8QQ http://www.amazon.com/My-Stolen-Face-ebook/dp/B009JVQ8QQ