That copyright issue isn't going away

For topics that don't quite fit anywhere else...
Post Reply
User avatar
Mr Bump
Posts: 463
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2022 1:01 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 73 times

That copyright issue isn't going away

Post by Mr Bump »

Been musing on the Beatles Bootleg Recordings 1963. They were released because a recording which is not published becomes public domain after 50 years. A recording which IS released has 70 years' protection from the point of release.

Hence 1963 outtakes were issued in 2012, because they were about to fall out of protection and become public property.

What strikes me - unless the law has changed - is that in 2033, all the original Beatles tracks will start to become public domain. Good/bad news, depending how you look at it.

But when that happens, the outtakes will still be protected into the future because they were issued later - for example the White Album outtakes first issued 2018 will be protected until 2088 - while the White Album album iteslf will be public domain at the start of 2039.

Odd situation. Anyway, just over a decade to go for the originals. Is it then free-for-all for non-sanctioned re-issues, compilations, remixes and so on, drawing on the original EMI catalogue? Is this good or bad?
User avatar
Mr Bump
Posts: 463
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2022 1:01 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 73 times

Re: That copyright issue isn't going away

Post by Mr Bump »

Hmm.. and if the above is correct, the unreleased Revolver outtakes which just came out, like that John Lennon guitar sketch of Yellow Submarine, fell out of protection as an unreleased recording in 2016 ... so it's now public property? Ditto the Love You To demo? I could issue them legally as a single, no?
User avatar
Lord Reith
Posts: 4608
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2021 8:22 am
Location: BBC House
Has thanked: 140 times
Been thanked: 3973 times

Re: That copyright issue isn't going away

Post by Lord Reith »

I am not certain but I think the complete remixing of the albums may qualify them for a new copyright. It's even possible that this is the chief reason the remixes are taking place. I can remember some talk prior to 2013 where people were theorising what would happen in 2033, and some people suggested that if the albums were remixed then that would qualify them for a new copyright.

That would be amusing, because like we only got the BBC sets in 2013 because they were due to go public domain, we may also have only got these SDE sets because they don't want to lose the catalogue in 2033.
Women there don't treat you mean, in Abilene
User avatar
Mr Bump
Posts: 463
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2022 1:01 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 73 times

Re: That copyright issue isn't going away

Post by Mr Bump »

That's an interesting thought. I guess that would need to be tested in court, but in any case, it wouldn't apply to the 1960s versions of the albums, nor indeed to any of the outtakes not released before the end of their 50th year. (Carnival of Light, for example, should it ever leak.)
Doug
Posts: 239
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2021 1:44 am
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 33 times
Contact:

Re: That copyright issue isn't going away

Post by Doug »

"They were released because a recording which is not published becomes public domain after 50 years."

I seem to remember they changed that, which is why we never got a 1964 (or after) copyright release.
User avatar
Mr Bump
Posts: 463
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2022 1:01 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 73 times

Re: That copyright issue isn't going away

Post by Mr Bump »

I think the change extended the copyright term for released recordings from 50 to 70 years, so, for example, Rubber Soul would have fallen out of protection on 1 January 2016 - now it's 1 January 2036.

As I understand it does not apply to unreleased recordings, which stay at 50. So I THINK any Rubber Soul outtakes not officially issued by 2016 are now public property? Everything I've seen online indicates this - I'd like to know if anyone who understands better can set me straight! Is this right or wrong?
User avatar
Lord Reith
Posts: 4608
Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2021 8:22 am
Location: BBC House
Has thanked: 140 times
Been thanked: 3973 times

Re: That copyright issue isn't going away

Post by Lord Reith »

Mr Bump wrote: Wed Nov 30, 2022 8:47 am I think the change extended the copyright term for released recordings from 50 to 70 years, so, for example, Rubber Soul would have fallen out of protection on 1 January 2016 - now it's 1 January 2036.

As I understand it does not apply to unreleased recordings, which stay at 50. So I THINK any Rubber Soul outtakes not officially issued by 2016 are now public property? Everything I've seen online indicates this - I'd like to know if anyone who understands better can set me straight! Is this right or wrong?
I am not a lawyer (thank God for that) but I think it more or less goes like this:

- In the UK, all radio programmes prior to 1963 are no longer in copyright. However, if a programme contains, say, a record that is still in copyright then that affects it. So all the Here We Go programmes from 1962 are now public domain. And so are the Goon Shows and all that sort of thing. Very few BBC programmes contained records, so that is pretty much everything they broadcast.

- Radio programmes up till the end of 1963 that were not issued on record prior to that date are also expired. So if some old guy looked in his loft and found a really good tape of Steppin' Out or the missing Side By Side he could legally put that out in Europe.

- Sound recordings made before the end of 1963 that were never released or communicated to the public in any way are also expired. The Beatles session with Pete Best from 1962 could be legally released by the owners in Europe but I guess if UMG says the tape was stolen that is a different matter.

- Sound recordings issued after 1963 have 70 years protection. After that, the copyright is expired in Europe so in a decade we may see PD releases of all the material from Please Please Me and With The Beatles, and then the following year AHAD/BFS etc but they won't be able to use the album covers.

Truth be told though, by 2033 there's going to be so few people buying cds that it'll hardly be worth anyone's trouble. Who's going to buy a PD release of Please Please Me with the wrong cover? And the streaming platforms would probably fob them off same as they do now. So most likely it'll just be a slightly confusing scenario where you see some weird cds being sold legally on Amazon, but it's just business a usual otherwise. It reminds me of when bootlegs became quasi-legal in Europe and Australia 30 years ago. Many jumped in thinking they'd make fortunes, but the only ones who made any money were Swinging Pig and those people who had really rare tapes. I can rememeber seeing hundreds of awful cds of Munich 66 and whatever toppling out of cutout bins, five for a buck or something. Nobody was interested, Beatles or not.
Women there don't treat you mean, in Abilene
User avatar
billylentz
Posts: 459
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2021 2:25 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 124 times

Re: That copyright issue isn't going away

Post by billylentz »

I think it depends on each country.

But in any case, aren´t we talking about two different matters? One thing is the copyrights; another thing is the recording rights. Or not?
User avatar
Mr Bump
Posts: 463
Joined: Sun Feb 06, 2022 1:01 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 73 times

Re: That copyright issue isn't going away

Post by Mr Bump »

"Copyright" may not be the correct term, but what we're discussing is the right to copy and sell recordings. So right now, I can't compile a "best of the White Album" made up of the regular Beatles recordings, and releaase it, without getting sued. But from 1 January 2039, I believe I could.

I am talking primarily about UK, because that's where I live. As LR points out, Europe law (which still applies in the UK, for now) is potentially different to US and other countries.
User avatar
Kwai Chang
Posts: 1558
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 3:46 am
Has thanked: 329 times
Been thanked: 177 times

Re: That copyright issue isn't going away

Post by Kwai Chang »

Lord Reith wrote: Tue Nov 29, 2022 9:18 pm ...we may also have only got these SDE sets because they don't want to lose the catalogue in 2033.
The scramble for another twenty years is just a Band-Aid on a bullet wound. When is ASCAP and BMI going to run all of the 'property' through an analyzer to determine who is in violation of whom? And, now The Beatles are to become public domain??? Even if it were possible, it will never happen. The money in Beatles publishing is massive. If analyzers are used...it will be the end of publishing/copyright/royalties, anyway. Let me restate, the amount of money is too large and so, anything is possible. Regardless of the lack of correctness, look for the Public Domain to become PRIVATIZED!(Owned).
The copyright extension activity will definitely be worth watching for the next twenty years.
The bonus would be that fan issued albums/singles/videos...would be a fertile breeding ground.
The classical rigid music structure that we know guarantees the copyright system is on borrowed time.
Everything has already been composed many times by multiple composers.
Publishing can't become worthless...too much damage. So, The Beatles going Public Domain will force new forms of creative theft.
Public Domain will become private property and thus even more valuable!
KC
Post Reply