Garcia and McCrary (2019)

From Copyright EVIDENCE
Revision as of 11:16, 21 August 2020 by AThomas (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{MainSource |Source={{Source |Name of Study=Garcia and McCrary (2019) |Author=Garcia, K.; McCrary, J.; |Title=A Reconsideration of Copyright’s Term |Year=2019 |Full Citatio...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Advertising Architectural Publishing of books, periodicals and other publishing Programming and broadcasting Computer programming Computer consultancy Creative, arts and entertainment Cultural education

Film and motion pictures Sound recording and music publishing Photographic activities PR and communication Software publishing (including video games) Specialised design Television programmes Translation and interpretation

1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)? 3. Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors) 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption) 5. Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)

A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right) B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction) C. Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing) D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability) E. Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts) F. Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Source Details

Garcia and McCrary (2019)
Title: A Reconsideration of Copyright’s Term
Author(s): Garcia, K., McCrary, J.
Year: 2019
Citation: Garcia, K. and McCrary, J. (2019) A Reconsideration of Copyright’s Term. Alabama Law Review, 71(2)
Link(s): Open Access
Key Related Studies:
Discipline:
Linked by: Garcia, Hicks and McCrary (2020), Intellectual Property Office (2018)
About the Data
Data Description: Data were obtained from a database detailing commercial music sales. The study uses a sample of 1,200 albums released between 2008 and 2017, gathering data on units sold, both physical and digital, and stream counts (in regards the latter only data between 2016-2017 was gathered). Thereafter, a random sample of 120 albums from the initial dataset were stratified per year between 2008 and 2017. The study uses Poisson regression to analyse the count data.
Data Type: Primary and Secondary data
Secondary Data Sources:
Data Collection Methods:
Data Analysis Methods:
Industry(ies):
Country(ies):
Cross Country Study?: Yes
Comparative Study?: No
Literature review?: No
Government or policy study?: No
Time Period(s) of Collection:
  • 2008 - 2017
Funder(s):

Abstract

“For well over a century, legislators, courts, lawyers, and scholars have spent significant time and energy debating the optimal duration of copyright protection. While there is general consensus that copyright’s term is of legal and economic significance, arguments both for and against a lengthy term are often impressionistic. Utilizing music industry sales data not previously available for academic analysis, this article fills an important evidentiary gap in the literature. Using recorded music as a case study, we determine that most copyrighted music earns the majority of its lifetime revenue in the first 5-10 years following its initial release (and in many cases, far sooner than that).
Our analysis suggests at least two results of interest to legislators, lawyers, and scholars alike: First, it contributes to the normative debate around copyright’s incentive-access paradigm by proposing a more efficient conception of copyright’s term for information goods; namely, one that replaces the conventional “life plus” durational standard with one based on the commercial viability of the average work. Second, it demonstrates that advocates’ and legislators’ tendency to focus on atypical works leads to overprotection of the average work, suggesting that copyright’s term is not nearly as significant for copyright owners as conventional wisdom submits.”

Main Results of the Study

The study finds that sales of albums and songs fall rapidly after their initial release. After two months, an album will lose approx. one third of its initial song sales volume. This falls to half of its initial peak after four months. By the end of the first year of release, sales fall to approx 20% of their initial volume. Looking further ahead, for entire albums, sales become almost non-existent after one year.

The study also takes account of streamed songs and finds that, overall, songs are streamed far more often than they are purchased. Further, the dramatic fall in sales is less obvious for streamed content. Whilst this may prolong the commercial viability of the average album, the study cautions that due to the low reimbursement rates of streaming it is unclear to what degree this economically benefits the rightsholder.

Policy Implications as Stated By Author

The study suggests that the current duration of copyright is excessive for music. Instead, the optimal duration for protection of music is somewhere between five to ten years. This configuration ensures the creator benefits from protection when they are most likely to benefit from the work (early on in its release), whilst also lessening that protection when it becomes less burdensome to the author.



Coverage of Study

Coverage of Fundamental Issues
Issue Included within Study
Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare
Green-tick.png
Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?
Harmony of interest assumption between authors and publishers (creators and producers/investors)
Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption)
Understanding consumption/use (e.g. determinants of unlawful behaviour; user-generated content; social media)
Coverage of Evidence Based Policies
Issue Included within Study
Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right)
Green-tick.png
Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction)
Mass digitisation/orphan works (non-use; extended collective licensing)
Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability)
Fair remuneration (levies; copyright contracts)
Enforcement (quantifying infringement; criminal sanctions; intermediary liability; graduated response; litigation and court data; commercial/non-commercial distinction; education and awareness)

Datasets

Sample size: 1,200
Level of aggregation: Albums
Period of material under study: 2008-2017