The Moai on Sir Cliff and royalties:
“And quite bloody rightly too. In fact, I'd reduce it. Why should a patent only last twenty years while musical copyright lasts 50? A patent requires serious technical effort and a demonstrable contribution to human progress, as well as requiring a lot of application and renewal fees. And this tosser wants to bleed more royalties from his inane early fifties pap, which requires no application fees, no demonstrable excellence and no renewals? If it hasn't yielded royalties in twenty years it doesn't deserve to. Looks like all the brown-nosing was in vain, Cliff, ha bloody ha.”
Of course, now I have the fucking dreadful Mistletoe and Wine droning through my head…
Mr Strangeness
ReplyDeleteSorry if I'm missing the point here. But why should we care if Mr Richard's crap records have copyright for 1000 years, noone in their right mind would want to cover them surely?
I'm just happy to go with anything that pisses off Cliff Richard, to be honest...
ReplyDelete