From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad
On 12 Jun 2003 at 9:49, Karl Miller wrote (extract only):
> It also seems interesting to me that, due to Edward J. Smith and others,
> there are plenty of examples of the Met not "protecting" their interests.
> I guess I wonder how much of this effects not only the commercial market,
> but archives as well.
----- a good friend of ours, the author of the Vilhelm Herold
discography published in the Record Collector, now deceased, had
a large collection of Smith records, and he told us that he had to
become a member (or was it just an honorary member?) of the
Metropolitan Opera Choir in order to be able to receive the
recordings as a participant in the performance Smith purported he
had reproduced. As a participant (or at least the presumption of
being one) there would be no copyright infringement.
I am a firm believer in the distinction between pirating (a
commercial undertaking), private copying for personal and in
particular deferred listening, and fair use (study purposes).
However, the rights owners think in nothing but rights and do not
believe in its "consumption", i.e. that it gets used up through a first
sale. Other products protected by registered intellectual property
rights *are* consumed, for instance patents and trade marks. That
was part of the original anti-trust and anti price-fixing laws
developed in the US and which have spread into the rest of the