LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  March 2006

ARSCLIST March 2006

Subject:

Re: Copyright and Marston Records

From:

James L Wolf <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 16 Mar 2006 17:37:49 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (34 lines)

Based on a close reading of Sutton and Nauck's book and what reserach I could do, here are a few more possible orphans.

There's some speculation that pre-November 1924 Vocalions are effectively orphaned, since there is some evidence that these items were not included in the sale of Brunswick music holdings to Decca in the 1930's.

Also, despite some claims that Capitol/EMI is the owner, Emerson seems to be another orphan. There is evidence that Capitol bought the pressing plant owned by the Scranton Button Company (at least that's all Sutton and Nauck said they bought), but none that Capitol purchased the entire Scranton company or the Emerson masters which it owned, which would have been worthless at the time. 

I've heard that Gennett is orphaned, though I've also heard that Fantasy claims it.

Paramount is another mystery, along with Black Swan which may or may not have been bought out by Paramount (accounts differ). George Buck claims to own Paramount's masters, but from what I've seen, it's not well backed up. Oberstein (I think) supposedly bought up all of Paramount's physical property, including many metal masters, but it's unclear if he bought the rights.

In the cases of Paramount and Emerson, the original contracts or bills of sale might clear up confusion, but to my knowledge, nobody has seen these in recent years.

Of course, these are only my opinions and speculations based on what I could find out. They are subject to change in the face of contradicting evidence, and in any case, don't necessarily reflect any official stance or policy of the Library of Congress.

James

>>> [log in to unmask] 03/16/06 4:42 PM >>>
Bob Olhsson wrote:

> >I hope details will be forthcoming, especially if they can serve as a
> >badly needed licensing model for US companies.
> >
>
> There are no US companies for the early stuff and little need for a licensing model because Sony/BMG owns everything EMI doesn't and they both own a lot of it jointly. Universal kicks in during the '30s.

Nope..Universal owns Brunswick's pre-1932 catalog so it goes back to the late 1910s whether it knows it or not.

> Independent label ownership only begins in the '40s when the last of the electrical recording patents expired.

Crown, Hit of the Week, Grey Gull are among the more prominent independent labels and as far as I know, all are orphaned (despite the claims that Crown went to Oberstein and everything Obie owned became part
of Savoy).

dl

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager