Re: [ARSCLIST] Fraudulent recordings

To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Fraudulent recordings
From: Roger and Allison Kulp <thorenstd124@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 12:36:41 -0800
Comments: To: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <ARSCLIST@loc.gov>
In-reply-to: <yam10638.594.156751560@smtp.ntlworld.com>
List-archive: <http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=ARSCLIST>
List-help: <http://listserv.loc.gov/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=ARSCLIST>, <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV?body=INFO ARSCLIST>
List-owner: <mailto:ARSCLIST-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
List-subscribe: <mailto:ARSCLIST-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:ARSCLIST-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV>
Message-id: <20070216203641.19106.qmail@web38704.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Reply-to: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx>

The Gramophone article is especially revealing.
There is also a discussion at: 
http://www.popsike.com/newsportal/thread.php?group=rec.music.classical.recordings&first=201&last=300
      


                              Roger

Don Cox <doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: An interesting case of fraud in the classical record market.

http://www.charm.rhul.ac.uk/content/contact/hatto_cover.html

The research technique used to detect the fraud is new to me.

Kind regards
-- 
Don Cox
doncox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx



"If you're not on somebody's watchlist,you're not doing your job"

                          Dave Von Kleist
 
---------------------------------
It's here! Your new message!
Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar.

References:
- [ARSCLIST] Fraudulent recordings
  - From: Don Cox

Prev by Date: [ARSCLIST] Somewhat old but interesting article
Next by Date: Re: [ARSCLIST] Fraudulent recordings
Previous by thread: [ARSCLIST] Fraudulent recordings
Next by thread: Re: [ARSCLIST] Fraudulent recordings
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Table of Contents]

Re: [ARSCLIST] Fraudulent recordings

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