The tone of this article at Reuters on the topic is revolting. They speak as if it's a law that incites the murder of artists in the street...
"I regard this week's anniversary as a wakeup call and a call to arms to step up a gear or two in our campaign to lobby for a similar term in the EU," said Peter Jamieson, executive chairman of British Phonograph Industry, in a recent speech.Jamieson added, "The end of the sound recording copyright on the explosion of British popular music in the late '50s and '60s, not just the Beatles, but many other British artists, is only a short period away. If nothing is done they will suffer loss of income not just for their sales in the U.K. but their sales across the globe."
I'm beginning to suspect the rerelease of this single was just to highlight this "issue".
Elvis and his recording company knew at the time that they would only have exclusive rights to the tracks for 50 years. The single itself hasn't been released for decades.
It's very obvious that the world has forgotten the original intention of copyright and the public domain.
I mean, it's not even Elvis' song. It's a bloody cover. The only thing hitting the public domain is that particular record Elvis made of the song 50 years ago. If he re-recorded it 10 years later, that recording is still in copyright. Live versions years later are still in copyright. The song itself (as in the music and lyrics) are still in copyright. Just THAT ONE RECORDING is out of copyright.
I think that record companies being so worried about losing profits from recordings 50 years old really points out just how much trouble they're in and how rubbish today's music "assets" must be.