Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T13:04:35.185Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Copyright and the music business

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 November 2008

Extract

For the music industry the age of manufacture is now over. Companies (and company profits) are no longer organised around making things but depend on the creation of rights. In the industry's own jargon, each piece of music represents ‘a basket of rights’; the company task is to exploit as many of these rights as possible, not just those realised when it is sold in recorded form to the public, but also those realised when it is broadcast on radio or television, used on a film, commercial or video soundtrack, and so on. Musical rights (copyrights, performing rights) are the basic pop commodity and to understand the music business in the 1980s we have to understand how these rights work. In this article, then, I begin and end with record companies' uses of copyright law and ideology to defend themselves against current technological and political threats to income, but I also want to ask questions about how the law itself defines music and determines the possibilities of musical ‘exploitation’. And this means putting contemporary arguments (for and against the blank tape levy, for example) in historical perspective.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Burch, M. 1986. Street Sounds, press release, 11Google Scholar
Christgau, R. 1986. ‘Down by law’, Village Voice, 25 03Google Scholar
Classical Music, 31 05 1986Google Scholar
Coon, O. W. 1971. ‘Some problems with musical public-domain materials under United States Copyright Law as illustrated mainly by the recent folksong revival’, Copyright Law Symposium, Vol. 19 (New York)Google Scholar
Collier, J. L. 1985. Louis Armstrong (London)Google Scholar
Coover, J. 1985. Music Publishing, Copyright and Piracy in Victorian England (London)Google Scholar
Dickson, L. 1975. Radclyffe Hall and the Well of Loneliness (London)Google Scholar
Flint, Michael F. 1985. A User's Guide to Copyright (London) 2nd ednGoogle Scholar
Frith, S. 1978. The Sociology of Rock (London)Google Scholar
Frith, S. 1987. ‘The industrialisation of music’, in Popular Music and Communication, ed. Lull, James (Beverly Hills)Google Scholar
IFPI. 1984 a. IFPI'83 (London)Google Scholar
IFPI. 1984 b. The Case for a Home-taping Royalty (London)Google Scholar
IFPI. 1985. IFPI Video Newsletter, 04Google Scholar
IFPI. n.d. ‘Private Copying: What the Critics Say’ (London)Google Scholar
Laddie, H., Prescott, P. and Vitoria, M. 1980. The Modern Law of Copyright (London)Google Scholar
McFarlane, G. 1980. Copyright: the Development and Exercise of the Performing Right (Eastbourne)Google Scholar
Music in Sweden, 1, 06 1982Google Scholar
Osterberg, R. C. 1983. ‘Striking similarities and the attempt to prove access and copying in music plagiarism cases’, Copyright, Entertainment and Sports Law, 2:85, p. 87Google Scholar
Peacock, A. and Weir, R. 1975. The Composer in the Market-place (London)Google Scholar
Plant, Sir A. 1953. The New Commerce in Ideas and Intellectual Property (London)Google Scholar
Ryan, J. 1985. The Production of Culture in the Music Industry: The ASCAP–BMI Controversy (Lanham, Maryland)Google Scholar
Sanjek, R. 1983. From Print to Plastic (New York)Google Scholar
Seltzer, L. E. 1978. Exemptions and Fair Use in Copyright (Cambridge, Mass.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, D. 1974. As Time Goes By (London)Google Scholar
Wallis, R. and Malm, K. 1984. Big Sounds From Small Peoples (London)Google Scholar