I agree that it would be unusual for fans to miss them, but the 1969 one was missed by everybody except one guy who only discovered it because I think he got a tip off.
I can't really think of any reason they would do a copyright dump for 1969 but not any other year. European law states that any recording not made publicly available loses its protection after 50 years. A few people did say at the time that a loophole had been found, but when pressed they would never explain what it was, which makes me thinks it was just a ruse to make people look away.
2022 Pink Floyd Copyright Extension Dump
- Lord Reith
- Posts: 4691
- Joined: Thu Feb 18, 2021 8:22 am
- Location: BBC House
- Has thanked: 147 times
- Been thanked: 4080 times
Re: 2022 Pink Floyd Copyright Extension Dump
I've done a bit of Googling - not much yet, but it sounds like they might have found a legal technicality by making the tracks available but in such a way that no-one could find or access them. Maybe that's the loophole.
I'm going to try and get to the bottom of it.
I'm going to try and get to the bottom of it.
Re: 2022 Pink Floyd Copyright Extension Dump
I'm no lawyer and reading legal documents makes my head hurt - but I think I have found it.
DIRECTIVE 2011/77/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 27 September 2011
"if a fixation of the performance in a phonogram is lawfully published or lawfully communicated to the public within this period, the rights shall expire 70 years from the date of the first such publication or the first such communication to the public, whichever is the earlier.’"
In context this seems to mean sound recordings.
This establishes that the clock starts ticking at the point the recording is released.
I am also coming around to the idea of secret copyright dumps over the last 10 years. Would they really let Carnival Of Light fall out of protection, for example? I don't think they would.
DIRECTIVE 2011/77/EU OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 27 September 2011
"if a fixation of the performance in a phonogram is lawfully published or lawfully communicated to the public within this period, the rights shall expire 70 years from the date of the first such publication or the first such communication to the public, whichever is the earlier.’"
In context this seems to mean sound recordings.
This establishes that the clock starts ticking at the point the recording is released.
I am also coming around to the idea of secret copyright dumps over the last 10 years. Would they really let Carnival Of Light fall out of protection, for example? I don't think they would.
- Ziggy C
- Posts: 559
- Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2021 12:10 am
- Location: Woodland Hills, CA
- Has thanked: 97 times
- Been thanked: 127 times
Re: 2022 Pink Floyd Copyright Extension Dump
Thanks, Mr. Bump,
I read that to mean that the initial publication or communication of, say Please Please Me, would be in 1963. The 50yr clock started then. Re-release, post 2011, increases that time to 70yrs from 1963; either to 2013 or 2033. But the BBC recordings and outtakes have officially been released much later. And depending on their initial publication or communication, the copyright would be in force for either 50 or 70 years after that; The material released in the first official Beatles BBC CD's which came out in 2006(?), would have a copyright in force until 2056.
If the material continues to see re-mastering and re-release, does that reset the clock? I'm not seeing that in the language.
BTW, thanks for indulging this discussion. It's gone somewhere which I find extremely pertinent and interesting. Obviously, the search for this in-between copyright dumps continues with vigor. I still maintain that we would have been aware. The Beatle community is all over this stuff. The 1963 "dump" slipped by no one. The possible 1969 "dump", which I agree is not optimal Beatle stuff, most of it is neither exciting nor inspiring,....I tend to dwell in the pre-1968 realm....would have left more than just a whisper. Given how avidly many received the Peter Jackson Get Back trilogy, and revisited those recordings, I would presume someone in this group would have already posted.
I read that to mean that the initial publication or communication of, say Please Please Me, would be in 1963. The 50yr clock started then. Re-release, post 2011, increases that time to 70yrs from 1963; either to 2013 or 2033. But the BBC recordings and outtakes have officially been released much later. And depending on their initial publication or communication, the copyright would be in force for either 50 or 70 years after that; The material released in the first official Beatles BBC CD's which came out in 2006(?), would have a copyright in force until 2056.
If the material continues to see re-mastering and re-release, does that reset the clock? I'm not seeing that in the language.
BTW, thanks for indulging this discussion. It's gone somewhere which I find extremely pertinent and interesting. Obviously, the search for this in-between copyright dumps continues with vigor. I still maintain that we would have been aware. The Beatle community is all over this stuff. The 1963 "dump" slipped by no one. The possible 1969 "dump", which I agree is not optimal Beatle stuff, most of it is neither exciting nor inspiring,....I tend to dwell in the pre-1968 realm....would have left more than just a whisper. Given how avidly many received the Peter Jackson Get Back trilogy, and revisited those recordings, I would presume someone in this group would have already posted.
Re: 2022 Pink Floyd Copyright Extension Dump
I was under the impression that the 1969 dump was specifically indended to prevent unofficial releases of anything potentially pertaining to the forthcoming "Get Back" project in the period leading up to its' release, given that the Peter Jackson production would be released just outside the 50-year copyright protection period. Any thoughts?Lord Reith wrote: ↑Wed Dec 21, 2022 9:45 am I agree that it would be unusual for fans to miss them, but the 1969 one was missed by everybody except one guy who only discovered it because I think he got a tip off.
I can't really think of any reason they would do a copyright dump for 1969 but not any other year. European law states that any recording not made publicly available loses its protection after 50 years. A few people did say at the time that a loophole had been found, but when pressed they would never explain what it was, which makes me thinks it was just a ruse to make people look away.
- jpgrcat007
- Posts: 443
- Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2022 2:12 am
- Has thanked: 88 times
- Been thanked: 64 times
Re: 2022 Pink Floyd Copyright Extension Dump
One of the studio volumes, too. The other (the Dark Side EP) is still M.I.A....
- Ziggy C
- Posts: 559
- Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2021 12:10 am
- Location: Woodland Hills, CA
- Has thanked: 97 times
- Been thanked: 127 times
Re: 2022 Pink Floyd Copyright Extension Dump
Are Yoot Rakker is your friend on this. Yeah, I live in the gray zone and may have just earned a hand smack.