Originally Posted by: KFS1972Its funny that you would mention Gershwin specifically.

Rhapsody in Blue was written in 1924. George Gershwin died in 1938.

I love Gershwin's music. :)

To me the issue isn't so much that companies are milking it. That's fine with me. I appreciate the fact that companies like Disney use RIB & Stravinsky's Firebird in the wonderful Fantasia 2000 DVD. I love it & watch it with my kid, too! :)

I think the issue I take is with that exclusive rights & extended copyrighting could belong to someone other than the creator, chosen heirs & those the creator sold rights to.

JeffS65 brought up some great points in a closely related, but separate issue: mechanical reproduction. The copyright belongs to the creator unless willed or sold. The rights to record, publish & distribute some physical object that is a manifestation of the work copyrighted is a separate issue. It is often referred to as licensing or mechanical reproduction rights to publish.

So, for example, there is a difference between recording your own version of a Hendrix or Gershwin song & using the actual recording someone else already made (Hendrix or Gershwin, for example). And you can possess the copyright and, or the right to publish. Or buy the right to publish.

But I've seen on sheet music for some Gershwin tunes "Copyright 1930, Renewed 1954". And I think, "Renewed? By who? George died in 1938!"

But, anyway, I've purchased the rights to record & publish my own versions of Gershwin songs. It's easy, inexpensive & legal. But, yes quite obviously someone other than the creator & his heirs are benefiting.