One-way ratchet and music copyright

As MediaGuardian reported, the music industry has reacted with outrage to the government's rejection of pleas to extend the period musicians get royalties from their tracks beyond the current 50 years.

The copyright extension has been one of the most controversial issues in copyright. So far, the copyright protection for performers in the United States is 95 years from release and in Australia it is 70 years. So the British music industry has felt wronged by the protection period of no more than 50 years, claiming that musicians are "second-class citizens" in Britain.

I, however, have less sympathy for them. Many people actually have failed to precisely interpret the copyright law, whose purpose is "not to reward the labor of musicians, but to promote the progress of science and culture". The appropriate reward to the musicians will help promote the progress of science and culture, but over-rewarding, like the overlong protection period, would only hamper its progress.

It is not hard to imagine what would happen if the music copyright is protected for a very long time, say, the whole life of musicians. This "eternal protection" would only disincentivise musicians from creating music and living on the lifetime reward. More importanly, the failure for music works to enter the pulic realm could also restrict the recreation of music works and limit the development of music industry. So the copyright has to be under check and balance.

Another worrying trend is that the copyright for musicians has turned into the copyright for media corporates, who sign up the musicians to secure the right to their works. The protection of artists' works is actually protecting the commercial interests of the conglomeratese like Sony and Disney, among others. As former editor of the Financial Times Andrew Gowers said, "For quite a number of years, probably for decades, intellectual property protection has been regarded as, in a way, a one-way ratchet. The people demanding more intellectual property protection have tended to be larger, better financed, more articulate than the fragmented number of consumers who pay the price for it,"

People who are criticising the British government's stand on the musical right claimed that the British creative industry will be hurt by their rejection of the copyright extension, and Britain's status as the center of world creative industry will be under threat. However, I think, thanks to the check and balance given to the copyright protection, Britain could retain its status as the cretive industry center.