On 23 Oct 2007 at 16:24, Johannes Gebauer wrote: > However, although you might say that copyright doesn't help the artist > but the industry, this, as such, might well be more the American > situation than the European. So, although obviously UE was more after > protecting their own assets, they are, also, protecting some composer's > assets, or at least their heir's assets.
I think the issue with the UE cease and desist order was not that they didn't have the right to enforce copyright (for themselves and their composers), but that they were being unreasonable in their demands of action to protect their IP rights. The list of composers that I saw was pretty shocking, in that the laws don't seem to me to protect their music anywhere, so it was difficult for me to understand how they could demand that the music be pulled down. Copyright law is out of whack worldwide and this is a symptom of that fact (70-year-old music should be public domain, let alone music written by composers dead for 70 years already). That doesn't change the fact that I support UE's right to protect their copyrights as defined in the various jurisdictions. I only question the Draconian nature of their demands for the IMSLP -- it makes them look like assholes who aren't really that interested in public good, and only in lining their own pockets. -- David W. Fenton http://dfenton.com David Fenton Associates http://dfenton.com/DFA/ _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list Finale@shsu.edu http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
