As Mike Godwin wrote [1] about music licensing in 2014, there are a few things on which almost everyone in copyright policy can agree: “markets should be competitive; the public has an interest in copyright; and public policy should meet its constitutional aim to encourage both creative and technological innovation.”
A bill introduced last year — and now strategically folded in with the eminently more-reasonable Music Modernization Act — does nothing to achieve any of these goals. The Compensating Legacy Artists for their Songs, Service and Important Contributions to Society (CLASSICS) Act [2] (now Title II of the new Music Modernization Act [3]) compounds the problem by adding new rights and regulations designed to transfer wealth to legacy industries. Simply put, the act is a handout to big content companies [4], tailor-made to legally mandate new payments (which prevent new music startups) while conveniently skirting many protections for libraries, consumers and artists.
[…Read the full op-ed over at The Hill [5]]Meredith Rose coauthored this op-ed.
Image credit: vexworldwide [6]
Endnotes
- “wrote”: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150813/11230831934/split-works-debate-raises-thorny-issues-music-companies-rest-us.shtml
- “Compensating Legacy Artists for their Songs, Service and Important Contributions to Society (CLASSICS) Act ”: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/3301/text?format=txt
- “new Music Modernization Act”: https://judiciary.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/HR___-MMA.pdf
- “big content companies”: https://www.riaa.com/historic-coalition-213-musical-artists-calls-congress-pass-classics-act-fix-pre-1972-loophole-legacy-artists/
- “The Hill”: http://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/382464-congress-must-update-music-licensing-for-the-modern-era
- “vexworldwide”: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/vexworldwide