While most may consider a copyright of 50 years for a recording more than long enough, the BPI (British recording industry) is finding this period too short and is campaigning to extend this.  For example, some early recordings of Elvis Presly were made back in 1954, but these will lose their copyright next year since their 50 year copyright period will be depleted. 

The BPI claims the recording copyright duration is unfair compared with the longer 70 year Copyright period for the work of authors, composers and song writers in the UK (varies in other countries).  They wish to extend the recording copyright duration in order to protect its heavy investment in developing new artists, rather than to protect against piracy/abuse after their copyright period expires or offer the artists a longer period to profit from their work.  GristyMcFisty submitted the following news via our  news submit :

While the recording industry is finding 50 years too short for investing in new artists, they should be happy that music can still be a good seller even if it's like 20 to 50 years old.  This is a much longer period compared with the non-music products from other companies.  For example, while the music industry still easily makes profit on music from the 80's, very few other companies can sell any products this old, let alone dating back a few years such as mobile phones.

On the other hand, most modern music seems to be developed like other products which have a short 'shelf life'.  For example, most music now is often poorly mixed or quickly composed with its volume maximised to clipping point, beats and lyrics drowned out to make the over volume stand out over the rest.  Wait until a year later and this once popular music will likely be gathering dust and forgotten about.  For example, I can easily recall song titles from the 80's, but can put very few names to recent music over a year old that I would be willing to play again. 

Source: PCPro News (Subscription)