February 2009
Breaking News: Cliff Richard Gets 95 Years
Cliff Richard and other performers have been celebrating this month with news that copyright protection for sound recordings may be extended to 95 years. The Legal Affairs Committee of the European Parliament has approved legislation extending the term of protection with the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers due to vote on it in March.
Previously performance rights and the copyright in the sound recordings of those performances lasted only 50 years compared to life plus 70 years which was afforded to creators of copyright works such as song writers and the composers. This meant that artists who recorded performances in the late ‘50s were seeing their royalty payments starting to dry up. This was a particular concern for artists such as Cliff Richard whose early hits like “Living Doll” were penned by other songwriters, so they did not own any rights in the underlying copyright works.
This development is contrary to the findings of the Gowers Review of Intellectual Property in 2006, who advised against extending the term of protection in the UK. If the law is changed in the EU then it will extend to the UK. Recently the government has indicated that it was considering a U-turn with the Culture Secretary announcing at a music industry conference that:
“There is a moral case for performers benefiting from their work throughout their entire lifetime. An extension to match more closely a performer's expected lifetime, perhaps something like 70 years, for example, given that most people make their best work in their 20s and 30s.”
Therefore it seems that there could still be a long way to go before this finally becomes law and the government has suggested that they will be trying to keep the duration limited to 70 years.
Meanwhile Sir Cliff is pretty happy with himself telling the Times:
“The wheels have turned slowly but I’m so glad that at last the balance is restored and artists and their dependants will have the security of 95 years of copyright income. Of course I’m pleased for myself, but the relief will be huge for those performers whose pension is largely made up of royalties from perhaps just two or three recordings in the fifties or sixties. Well done and thanks to the lawmakers for a good and just decision.”
Briffa’s Comment
The Gower’s Review has already looked at this point and took the view that there were limited benefits to extending the term of protection. The change is likely to benefit record companies who usually own the copyright in the underlying works more than the artists and performers. Although this concern has been addressed by proposing the creation of a fund which pays session musicians at least 20% of royalties producers will gain from the term extension. However a more important point is the relevant value of a recording after more than 50 years and certainly 95 years. The Gowers Report again found that most sound recordings do not sell for 50 years and therefore the cost to the industry of extending protection versus the benefit to the rights holders would be limited.
Nonetheless lobbyist have been gathering momentum over the last number of years both in the UK and the rest of Europe and it seems that a change to the term of protection is inevitable.
For more information contact info@briffa.com