While I don't wanna sound like a killjoy, anyone that posts music on internet websites or blogs for distribution by streaming, downloading (free, or for charge) which they themselves did not create is in violation of copyright. 1925, 1945, 1965, 2005, the year doesn't matter.
Unless the work falls into public domain, any person or estate descendant of the copyright claimant (usually the songwriter, but not always) has every legal right to pursue and file a lawsuit against said person who violates the copyright by illegally distributing the work.
I don't buy into this "well the internet has changed everything" attitude. Youtube notwithstanding. It's just FAR more rampant in today's world. What the 'net has done is make violations much more transparent and easy to ascertain. Before the internet, with regards to obscure '60s music songs released on bootlegs, the folks who wrote / own / retain the copyright had to be made aware. Today, a simple surf of the internet reduces that former massive time and work effort required (plus awareness, personal connections, and happenstance) to that of boiling water.
Larry (you all remember him, right?) of the Mods was one who would not stand for his songs to be freely distributed on the internet. If you wanted to hear them, he says, buy the Back From
The Grave / Teenage shutdown comps. Yes, he gets a miniscule cut of money for every sale of the LPs/CDs
But he told me it isn't about the money - it's the principle. Just because something is old, and obscure doesn't translate into a free-for-all of public sharing.
The Library Of Congress is wrestling with such obstacles via "free use" (another law that is being broken, based on what I see daily on Youtube) and deciding what to do with "orphan works". In the case of the latter, anyone who can prove they tried to locate and contact the copyright claimant is somewhat protected from any legal damages if the claimant comes forward after the fact weeks / months / years later. Monies, the law says, should be set aside to cover damages should a claimant come forward.
But NO ONE who chooses to upload songs on the internet will ever take on the time and effort involved to do this. So, we'll always have blogs, website and Youtube chock full of violations. It just depends on when someone who feels violated decides to take a stand - and they have every right to do so. Thankfully, not every copyright claimant feels that the letter of the law is more important than a willingness to share their obscure and nearly forgotten works.
Think of it this way - violation of copyright law via the internet is akin to breaking the posted speed limit when you are driving your vehicle. You know that posted 35mph limit on a straight two lane road is too slow for traffic flow - old, outdated, probably established during the year 1950 when cars drove far slower in speed. Therefore, you proceed to drive a reasonable 55mph. Other cars are also traveling near or over that rate of speed. But a cop car hidden behind a row of trees darts out to chase after you, and pulls you over for speeding. Say what you want, but - you broke the law, and you got caught!
