All correspondence with David Lepper goes here.
Letter1
09/06/2005
Dear David Lepper,
I have read today in the Times that the Labour government is planning to extend copyright to allow record companies to continue to make vast profits at the expense of the public domain, the public ability to reuse culture and have the effect of reducing innovation and creativiy.
James Purnell is quoted on http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1641428,00.html as saying that this is the only way to ensure that the major record labels will continue to invest in new talent. This is a weak, illogical and frankly unsupported claim that is in essence a direct quotation from the public relations department of the record industry. Where is the much-lauded New Labour pledge for evidence-based policy making. Evidence is not assertion, and it is certainly not assertion from a special interest group on an issue on which they stand to make huge amounts of money!
I am not the only one to question the value of most of the corporate, anondyne and monocultural products of the oligopolistic record industry. It only takes a short listen to Radio or Television to see that these companies already have a strangehold on British culture and to then consider extending these companies' copyrights beggars belief. They have already reaped the benefits of the ownership of copyright (often at the expense of the musicians) and push for distasteful means of increasing their profit (through for example 'work for hire' contracts). This is in effect handing them a huge cash bonus at the expense of the public that granted them a limited copyright in the first place.
We should be encouraging new talent, new industries and most of all not granting special interest favours to these old media industries. Copyright is a form of monopoly and as such should be balanced with the needs of society and to encourage creativity.
To quote Thomas Babington Macaulay in 1841 to the British Parliament: "Copyright is monopoly, and produces all the effects which the general voice of mankind attributes to monopoly... the effect of monopoly generally is to make articles scarce, to make them dear, and to make them bad...It is good that authors should be remunerated; and the least exceptionable way of remunerating them is by a monopoly. Yet monopoly is an evil. For the sake of the good we must submit to the evil; but the evil ought not to last a day longer than is necessary for the purpose of securing the good."
I run a record label, Loca Records, http://www.locarecords.com , that embraces the new Creative Commons licenses (sometimes called Copyleft). We wish to find and develop new music, new talent and exciting new bands and seek to move them into the public arena. Our business is blocked at every step by the major record labels who control production, distribution and radio play through their massive control of the industry. This is neither healthy nor desirable for an economy that wishes to move towards creativity and innovation. We should be encouraging the smaller, innovative and productive companies rather than granting these lazy, rentier, monopolies even more power and profit.
I hope that you can raise a question in Parliament about the lack of Parliamentary debate on these issues and question the minister about why the decision making and policy process through the Membership of the Creative Industries Intellectual Property Forum is packed full of industry lobbiests (e.g. Intellect, Alliance against Counterfeiting & Piracy etc) and the major corporations and so little represented by small labels, artists, writers, creators and the public.
I also hope that you will take an active and critical stance on these issues and consider very carefully the means by which the Government should be encouraging a 21st Century economy rather than one that is routed in the questionable practices of a bygone age.
Yours sincerely,
David Berry Brighton
Letter 1 Reply:
David Berry received this letter from David Lepper, which was a forwarded response from the DCMS (Department of Culture Media and Sport).
David Lepper MP House of Commons LONDON SW1A 0AA
12 July 2005
Dear David,
Thank you for your letter of 30 June to Tessa Jowell enclosing one from your constituent, Mr David Berry of xxxxxxx, about the copyright term on music.
The music industry is keen to see an extension of the copyright term for sound recordings, which is currently set at 50 years. Many UK recordings dating from the early 1960s - such as those by The Beatles and the Rolling Stones - are still selling well, and companies like EMI are concerned about their income streams once these recordings start to go out of copyright from 2010.
Despite the report in the press we have not in fact made a decision on whether the copyright term on music should be extended. We are, however, discussing the issue with other Departments, and have now reached agreement to commission an independent study to assess the pros and cons of change. Any change in copyright term would be a matter for EU law, so all relevant Government interests, as well as our EU partners, would need to be convinced that change is justified and in the best interests of UK stakeholders generally.
Yours
James Purnell MP
Minister for Creative Industries and Tourism
DCMS