IssueRaiser

The thing is, while it's obvious that this is the case for Happy Birthday, it's less obviously the case for almost everything else.

The thing is, while it's obvious that this is the case for Happy Birthday, it's less obviously the case for almost everything else. We incorporate works of art, and especially music, into our lives and our social interactions. What kinds of music we like become part of our identity. And the current state of copyright law doesn't allow for this. We should have copyright exemptions for non-commercial performances and derivative works. As just an example of this, when my father died, I put together a slideshow of photos of him throughout the years. I used four of his favorite songs as the music, since it connected with memories that I and others have of him. We played it at his memorial and many people found it quite moving and asked me to upload it to Youtube. But because it had the music in it, I couldn't. Luckily Dropbox doesn't have anything like ContentID yet, but it still seemed wrong that copyright law would prevent me from sharing this piece of my dad with everyone that knew and loved him. There was no profit to be made from the sharing and what I wanted to share wouldn't cause any financial harm to the artists or labels who own the copyrights...if anything it would convince many people to buy those songs in a format that would work on music players. It's frustrating that our current laws don't take into account that the creations that they make become part of our lives. The laws need to strike a better balance between compensating the creator and realizing that, once creations are released, they take on a life of their own and become meaningful to others. Humans seem programmed to share music...it's almost a tribal/instinctual thing. And no law that tries to controvert basic human instincts will ever be successful.

Posted by curun1r on Jul 13, 2015, 7:10 PM

Tags

Related issues

Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.5,500 issues0 comments

hackernews (Other)

The thing is, while it's obvious that this is the case for Happy Birthday, it's less obviously the case for almost everything else.

curun1rJul 13, 2015, 7:10 PM

The thing is, while it's obvious that this is the case for Happy Birthday, it's less obviously the case for almost everything else. We incorporate works of art, and especially music, into our lives and our social interactions. What kinds of music we like become part of our identity. And the current state of copyright law doesn't allow for this. We should have copyright exemptions for non-commercial performances and derivative works. As just an example of this, when my father died, I put together a slideshow of photos of him throughout the years. I used four of his favorite songs as the music, since it connected with memories that I and others have of him. We played it at his memorial and many people found it quite moving and asked me to upload it to Youtube. But because it had the music in it, I couldn't. Luckily Dropbox doesn't have anything like ContentID yet, but it still seemed wrong that copyright law would prevent me from sharing this piece of my dad with everyone that knew and loved him. There was no profit to be made from the sharing and what I wanted to share wouldn't cause any financial harm to the artists or labels who own the copyrights...if anything it would convince many people to buy those songs in a format that would work on music players. It's frustrating that our current laws don't take into account that the creations that they make become part of our lives. The laws need to strike a better balance between compensating the creator and realizing that, once creations are released, they take on a life of their own and become meaningful to others. Humans seem programmed to share music...it's almost a tribal/instinctual thing. And no law that tries to controvert basic human instincts will ever be successful.

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Start the discussion.

Comment on this issue