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  June 2009

ARSCLIST June 2009

Subject:

Re: Orphan Audio Symposium?

From:

Sam Brylawski <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Thu, 18 Jun 2009 10:58:05 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (151 lines)

Victoria's summary is really useful, I think. In the case of audio,
consider this, too:

There was no federal copyright registration process for sound
recordings before Feb. 15, 1972. In my opinion, many "pre-'72"
recordings *might* be considered orphans, too, because their rights
holders are so difficult to track down. We may know how to contact
Sony Music Entertainment rights offices for Victor and Columbia output
but what about all the post-WWII independent labels? The challenges
faced in compiling the NRPB study conducted by Tim Brooks and Steve
Smolian, "Survey of Reissues of U.S. Recordings"
(http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub133/pub133.pdf) are cases in
point.

Also, I think that we can add most recordings of radio broadcasts to
this category. 99.9% of them have certainly been abandoned by their
rights holders, at least until a party with rights gets wind of
someone trying to distribute them. It could be argued that these are
the opposite of "orphans." They have too many parents. But the
problems surrounding them are the same as those for orphans.

May I suggest that someone involved in the film orphans symposia
summarize the objectives and accomplishments of these conferences?
Then we can see how audio orphans might benefit from such attention.

Sam

------------
Sam Brylawski
Editor and Project Manager
Encyclopedic Discography of Victor Recordings
University of California, Santa Barbara
http://victor.library.ucsb.edu


On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 10:39 AM, VICTORIA <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> To reference orphan films, the definition of "orphan"  by way of Dan
> Streible is the following:
> Narrowly defined, it's a motion picture abandoned by its owner or caretaker.
> More generally, the term refers to all manner of films outside of the
> commercial mainstream: public domain materials, home movies, outtakes,
> unreleased films, industrial and educational movies, independent
> documentaries, ethnographic films, newsreels, censored material, underground
> works, experimental pieces, silent-era productions, stock footage, found
> footage, medical films, kinescopes, small- and unusual-gauge films, amateur
> productions, surveillance footage, test reels, government films,
> advertisements, sponsored films, student works, and sundry other ephemeral
> pieces of celluloid (or paper or glass or tape or . . . ).
>
>
> For orphan audio one could adapt the terminology to include:
> A work or collection of audio that has been abandoned by its owner or
> caretaker. More generally, the term refers to all manner of audio outside of
> the commercial mainstream: public domain materials, home made, unreleased
> audio,  independent documentary recordings, ethnographic recordings, early
> and public radio programming, censored material, underground works,
> experimental pieces,early recordings, government tapes, advertisement
> recordings, student works, and sundry other ephemeral pieces surrounding
> audio recordings, and other obsolete format recordings not under copyright.
>
> I think orphan audio can mean a number of categories similar to those above
> mentioned, but basically a work or collection that has been abandoned, and
> those collections that have no current known rights holders. So the term
> "orphan" is more of an umbrella term for a number of categories , all which
> have no current place for recognition or prolonged preservation /storage.
>
> In saying that, can we further model the above terminology to better suit
> audio? And can we perhaps bring this area of topic to a platform for broader
> discussion-is a symposium a worthy option to recognize these "orphan"
> collections?
>
> Best, Victoria
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 7:35 PM, Michael Biel <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > Could you give us a definition of what you mean by "Orphan Audio"?  I
> > can think of several meanings, one being recordings made by people or
> > companies which have no current known rights holders.  This is how I
> > have heard this term being used, specifically by Sam Brylawski and Tim
> > Brooks in discussions of copyright searches and use of recordings by
> > companies which have disappeared.  But reading your messages, looking at
> > the referenced web sites, and even looking at transcripts of several of
> > the talks, it looks like it could also mean collections that have been
> > put together by private collectors, now deceased, or institutions which
> > no longer are actively caring for them or making them accessible.
> > Considering several of the postings earlier today by people wondering
> > what to do with their collections, this is also a major issue.  So, what
> > do YOU mean by "Orphan Audio"?
> >
> > Mike Biel  [log in to unmask]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From:  VICTORIA
> > >
> > > I am wondering if anyone knows of any symposium dedicated to orphan audio
> > > collections? I know the Orphans Symposium dedicated to film collections
> > has
> > > included audio components in the past. But as far as i know, no such
> > > symposium for audio as feature, exists. (aside from the ARSC conference
> > > which covers an array of issues surrounding audio) Let me know if i am
> > > wrong, and who is doing this with regards to orphan collections. Or,
> > > perhaps what can be done as a community to launch such efforts. ?
> > >
> > > I have been working with a number of un-housed audio collections, and am
> > > curious as to how to shed more light on this expansive area of
> > unpreserved,
> > > orphaned audio.
> > >
> > > Very best,
> > > Victoria Keddie
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Barnett, Kyle
> > <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
> > > Victoria,
> > >
> > > While I don't know of a symposium specific to orphan audio, however, I
> > know
> > > that Dan Streible of the Orphans Film Conference is also interested in
> > sound
> > > as well as image. In lieu of an orphan audio conference, you might
> > consider
> > > applying to present at future Orphans film conferences (
> > > http://www.nyu.edu/orphanfilm/orphans7/).
> > >
> > > And, of course, with ARSC's interest in recorded sound and intellectual
> > > property issues, I'm sure the ARSC conference would be amenable to an
> > > expanded conversation with orphan audio -- and conversations may already
> > be
> > > going on.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Kyle
> >
>
>
>
> --
> VICTORIA KEDDIE
>
> T  646.684.5494
> E  [log in to unmask]
>
> www.victoriakeddie.com

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

December 2020
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