[ARSCLIST] Reissues--was: Vinegar syndrome audio tapes [ARSCLIST] Memorex CDs and more

[steven c <stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

see end
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tom Fine" <tflists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> You have spoken very eloquently to this point several times and in several
different forums. I agree
> there is a lot of attempted freeloading going on here. However, do you see
some sort of middle
> ground, where stuff that is now moldering in megaglomerates' vaults can be
released in some forum -- 
> and not of low-grade iTunes MP4 quality? I think the iTunes concept is
great -- but I would want the
> quality of the obscure/out-of-print songs I buy for $1 each to be CD
quality, not several leagues
> inferior. We might be moving this way anyway, I know Elliot Mazer is
involved in a venture that
> sells full 44.1/16-bit CD-quality files for prices more akin to printed
CD's. My only beef with that
> is, it's not market price. You're paying for a full ride but getting no
packaging, liner notes or
> aluminum/semi-permanent CD in the deal. I guess my point is, I was hoping
that some of the new
> technologies to buy songs in digital form and have at least some copyright
protection would lead to
> more vaults being sprung open by Big Music, and that's not happened very
much or very fast. Again,
> iTunes is a very good start but surely we can raise the bar very much.
>
The problem is, "Big Music" only understands Big Numbers...because those are
what
they are (were) used to. I tend to favour a "use it or lose it"
approach...in
other words, the copyright to a sound recording would only last as long as
that recording were readily available in the current catalog of the
copyright
owner at regular price. If they no longer had it for sale, they would not be
able to block other reissuance of the recording (although royalties would
still be payable on any reissues where they were due).

As it stands now, nothing will become p.d. in the US until 2067 (if the law
doesn't extend that further). Worse yet, since there are presumably
publisher
royalties due on most recorded songs, the Harry Fox Agency wants 9.1 cents
per issued song per CD, and wants prepayment for 500 copies...or $45.50
times
the number of songs reissued on a CD...

...stevenc
http://users.interlinks.net/stevenc/
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Bob Olhsson" <olh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Steven C. Barr wrote:
> >>... the owners of the copyrights of most
> >>sound recordings fall firmly into group I, and are employing the classic
> >>"dog in the manger" attitude toward sound recordings...e.g.
> >>"We own it...you CAN'T reissue it...and we WON'T reissue it because
> >>it doesn't promise enough profit!"
> >>
> >>To make things worse, they are apparently trying to extend the US
> >>concept of pseudo-eternal copyright to all known countries
> >
> >
> > I fall firmly in the first camp yet I don't own even a single copyright!
> >
> > Massive financial interests lie behind the volumes of press releases
promoting this idea that
> > "copyright," (i.e. individuals having the right to equity in what they
create) has become
> > excessive. This is because they stand to profit handsomely from forcing
contemporary "content
> > providers" into accept lower royalties because they are competing
economically with a larger
> > public domain. Stock values have soared behind the public perception
that electronic distributors
> > will take a dominant position in negotiations for "content" over
traditional media.
> >
> > I'm concerned about this because it's a classic case of killing the
goose that laid the golden
> > egg. Copyright equity is how we in the creative community finance
everything we do. Limiting
> > copyright can only lead to a return to the government or corporate
patronage of the 18th century
> > arts community.
> >
> > -- 
> > Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN
> > Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
> > Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!
> > 615.385.8051    http://www.hyperback.com
> >
>