Did India really get the Copyright act right?

Boing Boing and Ars Technica are talking about how India got the copyright act right. Essentially, they’re comparing the bill introduced in Indian parliament to current US law on the issue of DRM.

I’m going to touch upon a different aspect of the draft bill, however, one that livemint picked up. The bill seems to specify that the copyright to the music must remain with the authors and lyricists – something that the recording companies are understandably unhappy about.

This is being done under the guise of empowering the artists. Here’s why this is wrong: owning the rights to a song is like owning a risky asset. There are companies willing to buy this asset from the musicians for a price. Why should the musicians not be allowed to transfer the risk? Who does it empower when you limit the options?