I post under a consistent username, and I'm registered here. The majority theme around here is that copyright is completely unnecessary and has never done any good for society, and proponents of copyright are actually the one's "stealing" from the public. Nearly anyone who comments here that is in any way supportive of copyright is a "maximalist" and not infrequently called a "liar" or worse. Thank you.įiled Under: copyright, copyright extension, gershwin, royaltiesĭark, let's be honest. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise - and every little bit helps. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support.
#WHO OWNS THE RIGHTS TO WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS REGISTRATION#
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites - especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis. Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets.
We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. But, apparently, that's not the way these things go.
One would think these heirs (none of them actually direct descendants of either George or Ira - since neither had children) would be thrilled that the government went back on the promise it made to the public and granted them even more monopoly rents for a few more decades and kept quiet. When those songs were written, the "promise" copyright gave them would have already put all those songs in the public domain by now. Of course, they're fighting over who still gets to make money on songs that were all written prior to 1937 (when George died).
Yet, if it's not about money, why are the Gershwin heirs suddenly involved in legal battles all about who gets the money?Ĭopycense points us to the news of a variety of legal battles from the heirs on different sides of the family squabbling over who gets what rights to foreign royalties. They insisted that it wasn't about the money, but about making sure that their work wasn't presented in a way of which they disapproved ("Someone could turn 'Porgy and Bess' into rap music" was the complaint from Mark Gershwin, conveniently ignoring that much of the Gershwin's work pulled concepts from African American music). The heirs of George and Ira Gershwin (the famous songwriting brothers) were leaders (right alongside Disney) in the fight for copyright extension a decade ago.
0 kommentar(er)
