“in a bid to get the cause whittled down to 35 years”

I agree with Jon that 35 years is too much.
For a singer over 30 years at time of recording, 35 years would mean:

a. No royalty earnings for 35 years.

b. Being able to promote the recording at age 65.
This is the age when most people are retired, the kids graduated from college or are otherwise independent and the mortgage has been paid.
Earnings after this age may actually be useless.

Artists and songwriters should get he rights to their works if after about five year the current right holder is not paying “adequate” royalties, even if the works are being “marketed”.

The establishing of adequate royalty levels would prevent pseudo marketing for the purpose of saying that marketing has not stopped so as not to loose the rights.

BTW, in the USA the vast majority of songs assigned to music publisher never earn any income and are never returned to the songwriters and songwriters feel they cannot get the songs back in court or the legal process is beyond reach as too costly. My gut feeling is that in Europe the situation is similar.

I appreciate there are some still in that deluded mindset that envisage such a privilege being useful (exploitable) in 35 years’ time, but people are playing, sharing and building upon each other’s music TODAY, and we should be concerned with stopping them from being prosecuted for that – as soon as enough people realise that the corporations are unethically privileged with their liberty.

Until the artists stop thinking this struggle is all about how to get their privileges back (so they can prosecute their fans themselves, or in their dreams, the publishing corporations), and realise it’s about how EVERYONE can live without fear of prosecution for what comes naturally, free of anyone else’s privilege to stop them, we’re not singing from the same song book.

The problem is, most artists have bought the lie that the privilege of stopping others copying their work is their natural right that they should get back. How are we going to enlighten artists that we are all born with the natural right to copy, and that this natural liberty is then suspended by an 18th century privilege intended for the Stationers’ guild (the precursor of modern cartels) that shouldn’t have been granted in the first place?

Natural rights are not transferable, and they don’t last for arbitrary periods. They are inalienable and only limited by lifespan.

So, the artists already have all their natural rights (if they stop to think about it). What they need is to stop publishers (and any other copyright holder) being able to prosecute them for enjoying them.

Abolish copyright.

35 years is still a very long time. What’s wrong with 15 years? Even 5 years should be long enough, if something is not released within 5 years, it probably won’t ever be.

Cheers!

Most music is more often “consumed” during a certain period of time relating to when it was written. If the label doesn’t see fit to use it somewhere around the time it was submitted, it would be more beneficial to have it handed right back. Holding it in limbo would have to take a helluva lot of value off it.