Re: [ARSCLIST] Copyright Extension Rejected In UK

["Steven C. Barr(x)" <stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "seva" <seva@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> At 5:25 AM -0700 7/26/07, Karl Miller wrote:
> >you don't make any money unless your record company keeps your 
> >recording in print.
====
> an artist (author, etc). should simply include a "Right Of Reversion" 
> clause, so that if something is out of print, then all rights revert 
> to the originating author.  the initial reaction from the people you 
> might deal with is "no", but if you insist they simply show it to 
> their lawyers, then the lawyers will recognize the properness of it 
> and approve it.  (from experience, not theoretical).
> reversion could come because of it being out of print, the company 
> going bankrupt (and they can't use your materials as assets, they 
> would actually like to have less assets at that point), non-payment 
> of royalties for xx days and so forth.
> 
In fact, this was often the case in the immediate-postWWII era. Eddy
Howard, for example, would up with ownership of all his Majestic masters
after that label went to the "great record store in the sky..." and took
them to Mercury, who signed him and also reissued some of his Majestic-
era hit recordings...!

Steven C. Barr