[Table of Contents]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ARSCLIST] Capitol vs. Naxos



At 04:27 PM 10/6/2003 -0400, Steven Smolian wrote:
If I were a record compnay which possibly held rights to a recording, I'd
want my lawyers to look at any relevent paperwork to be sure there was
nothing that might come back and bite me later, regardless of potential
sales.  This is just good corporate policy.

And that's were the expense comes in- no small edition reissue label can
bear this cost, especially when multiplied by, say, 20 cuts.

At $ 5.00 per cut, wouldn't the companies loose money just on the cost of
posting and other bookkeeping expenses?

A solution should be proposed that covers the issues as seen by the
copyright owners as well as those based on our own collector's passions.

Perhaps a "hold harmless" insurance policy for which a small reissuer could
apply might be worth consideration.

Speaking of Capitol-Naxos, enough time should have elaped by now to
determine if Capitol actually did file an appeal.  If not, the case stands
as decided.  Anyone know?

Unless there is a sense of serving the public, no waiver of rights will make sense to the companies. If anything proved that, the Capitol/Naxos case does.

I've heard nothing further on the subject of appeals since the time for
filing was extended - not even when the appeal must be filed if there is to
be one.


Mike mrichter@xxxxxxx http://www.mrichter.com/


[Subject index] [Index for current month] [Table of Contents]