What copyright violation by playing Bach? Yes, on YouTube

Music, like any other artistic expression, may be subject to copyright. Although the laws may change from country to country, it is usually said that: The rights of exploitation of works in collaboration to last throughout the life of the co-authors and seventy years from the death or declaration of death of the last author to the survivor and in addition to that, the rights of exploitation of the collective work will last for seventy years from the lawful disclosure of the work. As well, there will come a time in which the works pass into the public domain, and where no one has to pay one peso for play or touch, for example in music, works of composers with many years of deaths.

Feminists are criticizing Apple for the size of the iPhone

But the case of James Rhodes, a pianist, falls in practically the unknown dimension. He played a composition of Bach at his account of Facebook, but could not go very far, as the system of filters of rights of author of the social network removed her entry and accused him of infringing the copyright by Sony Music Global says that it is the owner of 1100 works of Bach, of something that was composed by someone who died over 300 years ago. Put another way, the poor pianist was the victim of an act of censorship by others out of place.

But this is just the tip of the iceberg. In a week the European Parliament will vote on a proposal to force all on-line services to implement the censorship of content, but not only for videos but also for audio, text, images fíjas, code, everything, absolutely everything.

However, there are other cases: In 2017, YouTube censored 90 seconds to the half of the Partita No. 2 who played the pianist Ukrainian Valentina Lisitsa as according to the system of identification of copyright of YouTube, looked too much like the recordings of Glen Gould, 1957, in which Sony holds the copyright.

And then it could be that this clarification of the picture. Rhodes was not censored by tapping to Bach, but because he played 43 seconds of a work of Bach that plays Glen Gould (1957) also and that seems too both interpretations, and that in addition, it has the rights to Sony. However, it is the media putting that now no s epuede to play Bach by copyright, although that is not the truth.

Last week, the music teacher of German, Ulrich Kaiser, showed her research on censorship of the classical music where he found that it was virtually impossible to put any article by composers such as Bartok, Schubert, Puccini and Wagner, as fraudulent companies, large and small, say they have the copyright of the entire catalogue of these composers, although new, has the rights of self of the performers of these works, but not the original works, to be precise and accurate.

And is that maybe all these absurd regulations are based on a central theme: the Internet fell down from surprise and soon all of the laws that were used became obsolete. And then suddenly found that she had to legislate on the rights of the music, the books, the videos, of movies, of everything that moved on to digital. And then occurs a curious phenomenon: to invent, proposals little less than ridiculous as this that has to do with censorship.

Coolest-hacks.com and Partners.

Check out more Related Articles around Cool Life Hacks