Legal differences
From WikiContent
Twentieth-century media adopted legal practices from past media--contracts with artists, copyright, trademarks--but created a virtual revolution in the legal regime.
Key laws were passed in 1909 in the United States--that is, at the time the new media were beginning to become commercially significant--extending copyright to music, phonograph recordings, and motion pictures. In Britain, copyright was extended to phonograph recordings in 1911, and to motion pictures and broadcasts in 1956.
When the Berne Convention (adhered to by a wide range of countries, particularly in Europe) was revised in 1948, it extended copyright coverage to a comprehensive range of works: cinematography, choreography, art, and architecture, just to name a few. Finally, the 1961 Rome convention gave broadcasters control over reuse of their broadcasts; it was adopted by many European countries.
The Internet brought a concerted reaction from media companies. For instance, in 1998, the U.S. passed the No Electronic Theft act to prevent Internet users from posting unauthorized copyright material online. The law was spurred by infringement of software but applies to any copyrighted work. The main historical significance of the law was that it focused on criminal penalties (including jail) instead of civil penalties (damages from lawsuits) for copyright infringement, bringing government in to do the media's job in policing copyright enforcement.
An even more important 1998 law was the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Among its numerous provisions (some of them benign) was the notorious prohibition on "circumvention," which basically broke new ground by ruling some technologies illegal in the interest of protecting the copyright interests of movie and music providers. The support of these major corporations has given this provision an international impetus, getting it adopted or considered in numerous countries and international treaties.
But the biggest change in legal regime in the United States was to make copyright extend far longer than before. Copyrighted works now remain under copyright long after the death of everyone who is living when the work is created, perhaps even after the deaths of everyone's children. There is certainly a precedent for a long copyright term (the 1886 Berne Convention defined a copyright term covering the lifetime of the author plus 50 years) but a 1996 treaty made it even longer, and recent U.S. laws have gone even further than the treaty.
It is now assumed, among creative people seeking access to twentieth-century works, that works currently falling under copyright (those created from 1923 on) will never be available for copying and reuse. Governments will keep extending copyright terms at the behest of major studios, while the technical measures that are illegal to "circumvent" will also keep works from being used from any purpose except those that the studios think can contribute to their revenue streams.
Copyright and technological measures cover text and other traditional media too, but the most important works have fallen into the public domain by now. Ask anyone to cite the ten most influential works of the twentieth century, and few books or works of fine art are likely to appear; the list will be dominated by sound recordings and film. Thus have the intrinsic emotional power and market dominance of the new media caused them to displace the older ones. And the legal regime of permanent copyright and digital controls over reuse help to cement the division in the history of culture.
