The Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP
Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport
Department for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport
2-4 Cockspur Street
London SW1Y 5DH

19 May 2011

Dear Jeremy,

I am writing with regard to the regulations surrounding intellectual property rights, specifically the length of copyright on sound recordings.

I believe that European Commission proposals to extend the length of copyright on sound recordings represent a threat to the creativity of the music industry, and will primarily benefit the big four major record companies (Universal, Sony BMG, Warner Music and EMI). This view is supported by the Centre for Intellectual Property Policy and Management (CIPPM, Bournemouth University) and the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Law (CIPIL, Cambridge University).

Both these bodies observe that, although the European Commission argues any extension of copyright will benefit anonymous session musicians, in fact copyright applies to the owner of the recording rights - usually the recording company. The chief beneficiary of the proposed change would, therefore, be the owners of large back catalogues of recording rights, namely the big four record labels.

The terms of reference of the recent UK review of intellectual property and growth includes examining "the cost and complexity to SMEs of accessing IP services to help them to protect and exploit IP", and "the interaction of the IP and Competition frameworks". I fear that any moves to help SMEs and ensure competition flourishes will be undermined by moves at EU level to grant the big four major record labels an additional windfall as a result of their extensive back catalogues of recording rights.

The CIPPM and the CIPIL further note that the European Commission argues that the cost of their proposals will not be borne by the consumer. This finding is based solely on one report written on behalf of the BPI. Both CIPPM and the CIPIL argue that the report's conclusion is questionable, as it is drawn from highly selective evidence. Instead they argue that "the cost of impeded competition through term extension will be borne by consumers". It should be noted that the current fifty year copyright term is already far higher than in other research and development heavy industries, so the benefits of extending it further are questionable.

I believe extending the length of copyright on sound recordings would be inconsistent with the Government's desire to overcome barriers to growth in the IP system and call on you to vote against this at the Council of Ministers.

Yours sincerely,

Caroline Lucas, MP, Brighton Pavilion