Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
Would it not be fairer to argue that you shouldn't previously have had the right to perform it for free? It is unjust that the work does not receive the protection of copyright in the US when contemporary works published in the US do receive that protection. You seem to be arguing against what I'd see as a clear case of "doing the right thing".
|
In a word - No.
Should you have the right to, say Zane Grey's post 1923 works that are still under copyright in the US but not the UK? Or should you be paying royalties? If Berne is about reciprocity...
Under such a circumstance, what is the "right thing"? What was the "right thing" when the UK went from life + 50 to life + 70, and those items (such as Kipling) in the gap went back into copyright?