Copyright laws have been around for a long time, since 1710 actually. But why do we have them? Originally copyright was a contract between the author and society, the author agrees to continue to make more things and society won’t copy it. The whole purpose was to promote the creation of more books and movies (originally music wasn’t included). However, newer copyright laws have subverted this intent.
Some people claim that the current copyright term is too long and authors don’t benefit from copyright terms that extend beyond their death. That because of the strict laws, we lose the opportunity for new creative renditions of already great works like Star Wars or Harry Potter. But there are arguments that support the expanding of copyright protections.
One argument for the expansion of copyright protections is that the larger payoff from longer terms may encourage publishers to take risks on new authors. It also supports heirs, so once the author dies the family still reaps benefits. And as mentioned earlier, original copyright didn’t include music and recordings, now musicians benefit from copyright protections as well. And now there are performance royalties, today composers receive royalties when their works are performed.
- Purpose and character of use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for non-profit educational purposes
- Effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work
- Amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
- Nature of the copyrighted work
“Fair use is intended to serve some productive, publicly beneficial purpose, such as criticism, parody, teaching, or research” (soundscapemusictherapy). Music therapy seems like it would fall under this because it’s all about helping people, that’s certainly a beneficial purpose. Unfortunately, music therapy is not specifically addressed in copyright law so it’s determined on a case-by-case basis in court.
A question that is often asked is “is copyright law fair?” I think that’s for each person to determine on their own but here’s my opinion. I believe that it is fair. Currently a work is copyrighted until the owner’s death plus 70 years. While this does not benefit the owner directly after they die, I think it’s great that their children can benefit from their hard work. Copyright laws are strict and as someone who uses other people’s works I don’t benefit from them but what if one day I write my own music? Then of course I would want all the protections copyright has to offer. People work hard to create their own works, I think they deserve those protections.
https://libguides.library.umkc.edu/music-copyright
https://soundscapemusictherapy.com/2010/10/14/copyright-issues-for-music-therapists-part-three-infringement-fair-use-and-licensing/?fbclid=IwAR1Ldp0rxDqXgV6HRxWsyw5-kvpAXXsTCAF53zZ6zo7DsR7-5SHsJpkT_Fw
What do you think? Is copyright law fair?
How does copyright affect music therapy? We play familiar copyrighted songs to patients all the time so how do we avoid copyright infringement? The answer lies in using the material in a manner that falls under the fair use doctrine or to secure licensing rights from the copyright holder. Fair use gives people a limited privilege to use a copyrighted work without the owner’s consent and without paying royalties. There are four main factors that are considered when determining fair use:
My Music Therapy Journey 