Sony Issues Dylan CDs to Extend Copyright

This reminds me of "The Fantastic Four" movie first released in 1994. Done in about a month for a (relatively) meager budget by Roger Corman, the movie was rushed out solely to keep the option to make a bigger film in the future.<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fantastic_Four_(film)" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fantastic_Four_(film)</a> for more info...

That's surprisingly honest from Sony labelling it as what it is, rather than pretending whilst we all can see what it's purpose was.<p>Seems like another example of how much copyright laws need reworking when things like this are par for the course though.

How does extending copyright on already created works encourage people to produce new works??<p>There isn't a single valid reason to ever extend copyright retroactively unless the goal is forever copyright. Does the gov't at least get a portion of the take when granting longer monopoly privileges?

To be clear, these CD are publishings of <i>newly published</i> works, in order to get them grandfathered in to the copyright law of today. This publication is not about copyright of already published works.

<i>recordings cannot benefit from the 20-year extension unless they were published before the 50-year term expired.</i><p>I think I've found out what made me pause when reading this: they implicitly assume that previous works will automatically have their protection extended.<p>Of course this kind of logic only works in the whole "copyright" kerfuffle of corruption. Money can even buy you works in the public domain back, if you missed to lobby in time for a new ex post facto extension.

It is a bit odd that they only half-heartedly tried to monetize this. It's something I would have gladly paid for but instead I was forced to download a torrent to hear the tracks (all fantastic - the songs from the Freewheelin' album are much clearer than the actual release!).<p>It shocks me that they are essentially forcing fans to obtain this illegally when they could have sold this set digitally with little effort (they are, but only in a couple countries) or took a bit of time and made a desirable physical release with a few photos and a nice box.<p>For me this is a perfect example of just how incredibly aloof the major labels are. They want to extend a copyright but simultaneously cannibalize the future sales that they were hoping the copyright would ensure.

This isn't really anything interesting unless you're a Dylan collector.<p>No boundaries of copyright are being pushed, no new faces of record label greed are being shown, there's nothing to even talk about really. It's just a major label releasing some work to opt into the 20 year extension on copyright in the UK. With out the words Bob and Dylan this is just normal, lame, day to day record label business.

Is there any reason for copyrights so long? I see what labels gain from it, but I guess the politicians approving these must have argued it to the public somehow. Or did they just say that the labels want this law so they will implement it?<p>I can't see any reason in it. The 50 years was way too long anyways.

Somewhat off topic, but the articles inconsistent and occasional use of "Mr Dylan" makes me think of Blanche Devereaux in The Golden Girls referring to "Mr William Shakespeare" and "Mr Burt Reynolds"