We haven't been able to take payment
You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Act now to keep your subscription
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account or by clicking update payment details to keep your subscription.
Your subscription is due to terminate
We've tried to contact you several times as we haven't been able to take payment. You must update your payment details via My Account, otherwise your subscription will terminate.

In rock’n’roll, life just flashes by

Fifty years seems like a long time, but in rock’n’roll, life just flashes by.

In two years time, Sir Cliff Richard’s songs will start going out of copyright, because, copyright in a music recording expires after 50 years in the UK and Europe - and it seems that the Government is unwilling to extend that term.

Compared to everywhere else, this is the weakest form of protection around. In the US, the copyright term lasts 95 years after first recording, while even in Europe authors of the calibre of Jordan and Wayne Rooney get to enjoy royalties for the whole of their life, with their heirs getting another 70 years after that.

If anything seems excessive, it is the long term enjoyed by authors - and you can imagine the fuss in literary circles if anybody tried to trim it back. But that is not what is at issue: because music is not a written art form, recorded music enjoys a more limited protection.

Advertisement

There are some who believe there should be no copyright at all, and plenty of unsigned bands who want to give away their music for free because they need the publicity. But the court battle over the authorship of A Whiter Shade of Pale is a reminder that only a few musicians are as successful as Sir Cliff, and what makes sense for an up and coming 18 year old may not look so smart at the age of 70.

Andrew Gowers, who is reviewing the subject on behalf of the Treasury, has concluded that British music is healthy enough within the existing rules. There are certainly no shortage of new British acts, some of which - Coldplay most recently - get to conquer America too.

So, on that basis an extension is not justfied. Another argument trotted out in favour of moving to 95 years, along the lines of the US, is the support it provides to the record business. After all, recorded music is barely profitable (margins only slightly above 10 per cent) and music is such a dysfunctional business activity that there are only four serious companies left in the world.

Supporting the economics of the British record business should help A&R - the industry spends about 14 per cent of sales on men visting grubby pubs to hear grime, or whatever is in vogue - but this benefit is too intangible. Going out of the way to help out Sir Cliff Richard (who even lent his Barbados holiday home to Tony Blair one summer) or the music business is not a popular enough cause, which is why the Andrew Gowers and the Treasury will leave the 50 year rule unchanged.