Christian Engström, Pirat

5 september 2011

Copyright Term Extension in the EU Council on Wednesday

Filed under: Copyright Term Extension,English,informationspolitik — Christian Engström @ 12:31

The big record companies want to keep their exclusive rights to recordings from the '50s and '60s

Four months have now passed since I and 40 fellow members of the European Parliament submitted a request for renewed referral of the Parliament’s decision to extent the protection time for music recordings from 50 to 70 years. Our aim was to give the Parliament a chance to reconsider the decision before the Council of Ministers adopted it as well, and made it into law.

Last Friday, at long last, we received a letter by snail mail from the EU bureaucracy apologizing for the long delay, and saying that our request was against the Rules of Procedure for the Parliament, and would not be accepted.

Considering the summary way that the request was dismissed, it is not obvious to me why it had to take them four months to reach that conclusion.

Coincidentally, it appears that the copyright term extension is on the agenda for the Council meeting that starts on Wednesday, September 7. I have not managed to find the agenda on the Council’s web site, but the information comes from one of the permanent representations here in Brussels.

This is bad news.

There used to be a blocking minority in the Council, which is what prevented the copyright term extension from becoming a reality in 2009, when the (old) Parliament took the decision. But now that blocking minority has disappeared, since Denmark has changed its position.

The Member States that currently oppose the proposal are: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Luxembourg, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Sweden, and The Netherlands. That is five votes short of a blocking minority.

Unless something very unexpected happens, odds are that the copyright term extension will become reality this week. This is despite the fact that the extension has met massive criticism from the academic world, including the Hargreaves Review that was presented to the British government earlier this year.

Despite the damning criticism the Hargreaves Review levies at the copyright term extension, the British government is still pushing for the extension.

Are you surprised that politicians first order a scientific review of a policy area, and then completely ignore its findings and do the exact opposite? You shouldn’t be. Fact based policy making has never been applied in the intellectual property field before, and the people who are pulling the strings are not going to start now.

The purpose of the European Union is to keep the various lobbyists for big business happy, in this case the big record companies that own the rights to 80% of all music that has been recorded in history. If the copyright term extension goes through this week, they will be very happy with their politicians who delivered.

…………

Andra om ämnet (in Swedish): Henrik Alexandersson, Europaportalen, Piratpartiet

In English: PC World

Tags: , , ,

33 kommentarer

  1. ”Considering the summary way that the request was dismissed, it is not obvious to me why it had to take them four months to reach that conclusion.”

    ”Coincidentally, it appears that the copyright term extension is on the agenda for the Council meeting that starts on Wednesday, September 7….”

    That’s exactly why it took so long. It leaves you just two working days to mount some lobbying and opposition. Very typical for the EU ways I’m afraid.

    Kommentar av Jarda — 5 september 2011 @ 14:36

  2. Surprisingly, I don’t agree with the interpretation of Paul Dunstan that paragraph 4 would only apply to all other procedures. The text of paragraph 4 states ”in the circumstances defined in this Rule”. One should bend very hard to construe this as applicable only for everything except the ordinary legislative procedure.

    It turns out Rule 59 is one of a very few rules with subheadings. (Actually I couldn’t find any other one.) The importance of subheadings are therefore unclear.

    Now, I think you should turn to the Conference of Presidents and ask them to intervene due to the late answer of the director for the Plenary, to convince the council to hold off until the matter is finally resolved by Parliament, because you should immediately appeal this decision with a request for interpretation of the rules by the committee responsible according to Rule 211.

    Kommentar av Johan Tjäder — 5 september 2011 @ 15:24

  3. [...] | Blog de C. Engström Foto | European Parliament me gusta 0 Para votar identifícate o regístrate aquí. [...]

    Pingback av El día en que se votará la extensión del copyright — 5 september 2011 @ 16:23

  4. Unfortunately, the position of the Czech Republic was changed a couple of months ago, supported by the House of Commons and refused by the Senate. The Pirate Party has issued a critical statement, since the Czech Republic used to claim that this proposal is of the making of the recording industry lobbyists. Yet with the coming of a new minister of culture (a dentist from the corporation oriented party TOP09) the government has suddenly changed its position

    http://www.piratskastrana.cz/tiskove-zpravy/tiskova-konference-piratske-strany-k-prodlouzeni-kopirovaciho-monopolu-na-zvukove-nah

    Kommentar av Jakub Michalek — 5 september 2011 @ 16:35

  5. [...] att förändringen snart kommer röstas igenom. Flera länder protesterar, däribland Sverige. Christian Engström har försökt väcka frågan på nytt i EU-parlamentet, men fått beskedet att det inte går av procedurtekniska [...]

    Pingback av Med sådana vänner behöver upphovsrätten inga fiender… | Sagor från livbåten — 5 september 2011 @ 21:45

  6. [...] | Blog de C. Engström Foto | European Parliament Fuente Nación [...]

    Pingback av 20 años que nos pueden robar a todos #culturas2011 -El Parlamento Europeo debatirá la ampliación a 70 años de los derechos sobre los fonogramas. | Partido Pirata — 6 september 2011 @ 2:54

  7. Although I agree on that a protection time of 50 years is enough, I can’t understand why the Swedish Pirate Party considers that it’s so important not to extend the protection time from 50 to 70 years, when they don’t respect the current protection time and the connected laws.

    The Swedish Pirate Party accepts and contributes to protection times of single days before copyrighted works are shared illegally in millions on the Internet, e.g. using The Pirate Bay that The Swedish Pirate party delivers Internet bandwidth to.

    I would have more understanding regarding the effort to not extend the protection time if respect is shown for the current protection time, and that is obviously not done.

    Kommentar av nejtillpirater — 6 september 2011 @ 6:10

  8. [...] | Blog de C. Engström Advertisement LD_AddCustomAttr("AdOpt", "1"); LD_AddCustomAttr("Origin", "other"); [...]

    Pingback av El día en que se votará la extensión del copyright « Maestroviejo's Blog — 6 september 2011 @ 6:17

  9. [...] No existe ningún argumento académicamente válido o rigurosamente demostrado a favor de la extensión del copyright a setenta años, veinte más que los cincuenta que cubre actualmente y que ya tienden a considerarse excesivos. Sí existen, en cambio, infinidad de argumentos en contra de la medida, incluyendo el demoledor informe Hargreaves, publicado el pasado mayo y que afirma, como muchos otros, que la extensión del copyright no beneficia a los autores, sino únicamente a las grandes multinacionales que gestionan extensos catálogos de obras. Christian Engström, junto con cuarenta europarlamentarios más, pidió la revisión y reconsideración de este tema, para encontrarse con una oscura denegación por defecto de procedimiento  enviada cuatro meses después, dejándolo sin plaz…. [...]

    Pingback av El Parlamento oscuro » El Blog de Enrique Dans — 6 september 2011 @ 9:43

  10. ”Coincidentally, it appears that the copyright term extension is on the agenda for the Council meeting that starts on Wednesday, September 7. I have not managed to find the agenda on the Council’s web site, but the information comes from one of the permanent representations here in Brussels.”

    http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/11/st13/st13792.en11.pdf

    Kommentar av Anonym — 6 september 2011 @ 11:32

  11. @ nejtillpirater

    Although I agree on that a protection time of 50 years is enough, I can’t understand why the Swedish Pirate Party considers that it’s so important not to extend the protection time from 50 to 70 years, when they don’t respect the current protection time and the connected laws.

    Your logic is flawed yet again.

    1. The Swedish Pirate Party isn’t breaking any laws as far as I know. A willingness to change a law doesn’t imply a disrespect for laws in particular or in general. Was this just an ill-formed attempt to continue your un-objective smear campaigns against the Pirate Party?

    2. Even if your fantasy were true and the party would break all sort of laws, it would still not change their reasons for wanting to change the outdated laws. Was this just an ill-formed attempt to continue your un-objective smear campaigns against the Pirate Party?

    The Swedish Pirate Party accepts and contributes to protection times of single days before copyrighted works are shared illegally in millions on the Internet, e.g. using The Pirate Bay that The Swedish Pirate party delivers Internet bandwidth to.

    As stated numerous times to you already, and neglected from your side because the facts doesn’t fit your own personal smear campaign. The Pirate Party delivers bandwidth to a search engine. There is absolutely nothing illegal in delivering bandwidth to a search engine.

    I would have more understanding regarding the effort to not extend the protection time if respect is shown for the current protection time, and that is obviously not done.

    It depends on what kind of respect you refer to. In terms of following the laws I have already explained to you that the Pirate Party isn’t breaking any laws.

    Kommentar av Professor — 6 september 2011 @ 13:14

  12. [...] | Blog de C. Engström Foto | European Parliament Arnau FuentesWebsite – More Posts Posted on September 6, 2011 by [...]

    Pingback av Government In The Lab | Blog | El día en que se votará la extensión del copyright — 6 september 2011 @ 17:02

  13. [...] a newly elected Parliament to reconsider items voted by the previously dissolved Parliament, but he reported yesterday in his blog that his attempt had been turned down, leaving the way open for Council to adopt the [...]

    Pingback av back on the agenda | MegaSoul — 6 september 2011 @ 19:38

  14. [...] No existe ningún argumento académicamente válido o rigurosamente demostrado a favor de la extensión del copyright a setenta años, veinte más que los cincuenta que cubre actualmente y que ya tienden a considerarse excesivos. Sí existen, en cambio, infinidad de argumentos en contra de la medida, incluyendo el demoledor informe Hargreaves, publicado el pasado mayo y que afirma, como muchos otros, que la extensión del copyright no beneficia a los autores, sino únicamente a las grandes multinacionales que gestionan extensos catálogos de obras. Christian Engström, junto con cuarenta europarlamentarios más, pidió la revisión y reconsideración de este tema, para encontrarse con una oscura denegación por defecto de procedimiento  enviada cuatro meses después, dejándolo sin plaz…. [...]

    Pingback av El Parlamento oscuro — 7 september 2011 @ 8:21

  15. Should not the extra 20 years belong to the original copyright holders instead of the curents holders. This is of course not what was lobbied for and would be difficult to administrate but right is right. Right?

    Kommentar av per — 7 september 2011 @ 9:00

  16. [...] Engström, Pirate MEP Copyright Term Extension in the EU Council on Wednesday via christianengstrom.wordpress.com Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:GillaBli först att gilla denna [...]

    Pingback av Copyright Term Extension in the EU Council on Wednesday « Christian Engström, Pirate MEP | Världen kan vänta — 7 september 2011 @ 9:20

  17. @nejtillpirater (#8)

    Besides you being wrong, there is an important legislative aspect that you’ve missed. The current rules can not be changed ex officio by parliament. Only when the European commission opens the subject, parliament has an opportunity to change it.

    But a decision must not be limited to a yes or no to the commission’s proposal. It can be AMENDED, which actually opens up the opportunity, however remotely, for parliament to remove this secondary right all together simply by lowering the protection to 0 years or at least significantly reducing of this time limit.

    Recordings should not create an independent copyright, but any right should be derived from the author’s original rights

    Kommentar av Johan Tjäder — 7 september 2011 @ 9:51

  18. [...] No existe ningún argumento académicamente válido o rigurosamente demostrado a favor de la extensión del copyright a setenta años, veinte más que los cincuenta que cubre actualmente y que ya tienden a considerarse excesivos. Sí existen, en cambio, infinidad de argumentos en contra de la medida, incluyendo el demoledor informe Hargreaves, publicado el pasado mayo y que afirma, como muchos otros, que la extensión del copyright no beneficia a los autores, sino únicamente a las grandes multinacionales que gestionan extensos catálogos de obras. Christian Engström, junto con cuarenta europarlamentarios más, pidió la revisión y reconsideración de este tema, para encontrarse con una oscura denegación por defecto de procedimiento  enviada cuatro meses después, dejándolo sin plaz…. [...]

    Pingback av El Parlamento oscuro del Blog de Enrique Dans | Camp. Pendleton — 7 september 2011 @ 10:13

  19. [...] även: SR – musikaliska örhängen kan få förlängt skydd, HAX, Christian Engström Fotnot: inlägget handlar naturligtvis om närstående rättigheter och inte den egentliga [...]

    Pingback av Retroaktiv förlängning av upphovsrätten – en liknelse « Upphovsträtan — 7 september 2011 @ 13:18

  20. @nejtillpirater

    If you believe in copyright then extending the protection terms is, in fact, plundering the public of the ”property” they are to gain – by continually extending the deadlines which were previously agreed to by the body politic. This is bad even if the copyright extension is not – as was done in the US – retroactive (which meant robbing the right of access from the public to works which were already ”public”).

    Depending on the method this extension is done by it is either grand larceny or breach of a previous contract. Is ”public property” any less sacred than ”personal property”?

    And if you do not believe in copyright – given the truly insane terms it lives under, failure of belief comes easily – then of course you are opposed to any legislation which renders the insanity even worse. There’s nothing strange about that.

    So basically you are just tossing out a one-liner meant to prop up yet another implied guilt-by-association attempt?

    Kommentar av Scary Devil Monastery — 7 september 2011 @ 15:46

  21. @nejtillpirater:

    Are you aware of the items coming out of the leaked cables, identifying people all over world who were targetted by diplomatic pressure from the US at the behest of organisations such as the RIAA and the MPAA? Are you aware of the appearance of corruption throughout the European Council? Are you aware of the massive refusal of certain entertainment organisations to adapt to the changing needs of consumers? Are you aware of the way the copyright infringement has a seemingly positive effect on economies, through the increased purchasing of those who do, indeed, pirate? Are you aware that approximately 90% of all income from copyrighted works comes within the first 7 years? Are you even capable of thinking for yourself?

    I am, and I pay attention. It’s time to vote out these morons and replace them with more morons.

    Kommentar av Anonym — 8 september 2011 @ 10:18

  22. [...] his promise to signed the request, unfortunately his support was not enough and copyright extension passed the EU Council on September 7th (against Luxembourgs opposition). The result is disappointing, however special [...]

    Pingback av Updates, Follow-Ups, Stats and special #Thanks « Jay.lu: Law and Politics — 8 september 2011 @ 23:21

  23. [...] Christian Engström, élu sous l’étiquette du Parti Pirate, indique que le projet d’extension de la durée de protection des droits voisins du droit [...]

    Pingback av Droits d'auteur : 20 ans de plus pour les producteurs et musiciens | NShare — 9 september 2011 @ 11:38

  24. [...] Europarlamentet tyvärr ja till en förlängning av upphovsrätten. I våras skrev jag på ett upprop för att få också det här parlamentet att ta upp frågan på nytt. Det är ju trots allt nya [...]

    Pingback av Förlängd upphovsrätt gynnar inte innovation och konkurrenskraft | Lena Ek — 9 september 2011 @ 15:37

  25. [...] också schackrandet bakom kulisserna som det belysts av Christian Engström. Share [...]

    Pingback av Retroaktiv kvalitetsförbättring att vänta från Björn Ulvaeus..? « Viktualiebrodern — 12 september 2011 @ 15:58

  26. [...] Party MEP Christian Engstrom already predicted the negative outcome last week, and left the following grim [...]

    Pingback av Music Copyright “Pension” Extended to 70 Years | TorrentFreak — 12 september 2011 @ 22:03

  27. [...] Party MEP Christian Engstrom already predicted a disastrous outcome final week, and left a following grave [...]

    Pingback av Music Copyright “Pension” Extended to 70 Years | Internet Privacy And Security — 13 september 2011 @ 1:22

  28. [...] realtà, come osservano alcuni, gran parte dei proventi dei diritti d’autore (tra il 70 e l’80 per cento) non arriva [...]

    Pingback av Diritto d’autore, l’Europa lo allarga a 70 anni - The New Blog Times — 13 september 2011 @ 5:28

  29. [...] alábbi weboldalon.) Rendkívül hasznos bejegyzések olvashatók az elmúlt napok eseményeiről Christian Engström blogján (az EU Parlament svéd kalózpárti képviselője összefoglalja, hogy bár megpróbálták [...]

    Pingback av Messze még a sanzon reneszánsza | Gépnarancs — 13 september 2011 @ 21:38

  30. [...] Other vocal opponents to the extension included Christian Engström, Pirate MEP. [...]

    Pingback av Copyright term extension – music to some ears « jossblog — 24 oktober 2011 @ 23:54

  31. Thank you for the good writeup. It in fact was a amusement account
    it. Look advanced to more added agreeable from you!
    By the way, how can we communicate?

    Kommentar av Fat Decline And You: How To Make It Get the job done — 5 oktober 2012 @ 5:04


RSS-flöde för kommentarer till det här inlägget.

Rubric-temat. Blogga med WordPress.com.

Följ

Få meddelanden om nya inlägg via e-post.

Gör sällskap med 1 943 andra följare

%d bloggers like this: