英语论文网

How could locking up recorded music for another 45 years possibly benefit a creative and innovative society? European academics issue a joint statement on the proposed extension of copyright for sound recordings. In February of this year, EU internal market commissioner Charlie McCreevy declared his intention to propose a directive extending the European copyright term for sound recordings by 45 years, from 50 to 95 years.2 The announcement overturned the recommendations of two recent independent reviews on the issue. One was conducted by the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law at Cambridge University for the UK Gowers Review of Intellectual Property (2006),3 the other was commissioned by the Commission itself as part of a larger study by the Amsterdam Institute for Information Law (2006).4 The 2004 Commission Staff Working Paper on the European copyright framework had summarised the policy consensus quite accurately: “It is feared that an extended term of protection would only tend to diminish the choice of music on the market by enforcing the flow of revenues from few best-selling recordings, while at the same time not providing any real new incentives for creation of new recordings or motivating new 1 This statement was sent to the European Commission on Monday, 16 June 2008. It is also forthcoming in the European Intellectual Property Review (EIPR/9/2008). 2 DG Internal Market press release, IP/08/240, 14 February 2008 [available at https://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/08/240] 3 Review of the Economic Evidence Relating to an Extension of the Term of Copyright in Sound Recordings (2006), Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law, University of Cambridge for Gowers Review of Intellectual Property [available at https://www.hmtreasury. gov.uk/independent_reviews/gowers_review_intellectual_property/gowersreview_index.cfm] 4 The Recasting of Copyright & Related Rights for the Knowledge Economy (2006), Institute for Information Law (IViR), University of Amsterdam for DG Internal Market [available at https://papers.ssrn.com] 2 investment. It has also been pointed out that practically all developed countries, with the exception of the USA, apply the term of protection of 50 years. From the point of view of the Internal Market, the term of protection for phonogram producers does not cause particular concern since the term has been harmonised in the Community and also been incorporated by the 10 new Member States. (…) Moreover, it seems that public opinion and political realities in the EU are such as not to support an extension in the term of protection. Some would even argue that the term should be reduced. At this stage, therefore, time does not appear to be ripe for a change, and developments in the market should be further monitored and studied.”5 It is indeed hard to see how extending exclusive rights to the catalogue of recorded music for another 45 years would benefit society. Following years of fierce and sustained lobbying by the trade bodies of the record industry, however, the copyright unit of the Internal Market Directorate is currently drafting the text of the extension directive which the European Commission aims to adopt as a formal proposal to the European Council and the European Parliament “before the summer break of 2008”. It is still possible for the Commission to see sense, in particular the commissioners who speak on competition (Neelie Kroes), consumer