Copyright on sound recordings extended to 70 years

[barber olly]

OK - I think I can live with that - I mean allowing the original artists to at least retain some interest in the copyright until they die or for a limited period after that.

What happens to so-called cover versions of songs - common enough in the popular entertainment "industry"? Are they created, but do the artists who make them then do a deal with the original copyright holders? There seem to be many of these cover versions - particularly on sites such as Napster and Spotify, and of course in many cases they bear little relation to the "real thing" - so perhaps that keeps up the CD sales for some of the genuine albums in the popular genres.

Also, are we simply talking about copyright on the original recording, which would stop firms such as Naxos offering reissues of older recordings? For example, if Paul McCartney made a new version of one of his old songs, wouldn't the coyright on the new recording be based on the new date rather than the old? Of course with bands, such as the Beatles, which have disbanded for one reason or another, this might not be an option.

I think we need to deal with recordings and songs separately. Macca's new recordings of Beatles songs date from the time of the recording eg he has done a number of live albums over the last 20 years or so and Give my regards to Broad Street in the 80s had a handful of Beatles songs, I think with Ringo on drums! . If he owns the song, he's quids in for both the song and the recording. I guess we'll not see any 50s recordings for a while or is it that they can continue up to 1961 but then not continue beyond a certain date until 2031?