I agree with most of what is said. As a former Law Librarian, one
needs to understand "recordings" ergo "discs" did not grow copyright
until (P) Performance copyright appeared in the 70s. What was
copyright-able on phonograms (discs) was the music itself, not the
performance, nor the rendition in sound.
     So for older, rare recordings one has to determine if there was a
copyright in the music...and remains via the fiasco of the 70s and 80s
extensions grandfathered if copyright had not been renewed.
     Many works rewritten as new editions of the same piece have also
been since copyrighted. So you have to know which edition is used in the
recording.
Paul

On 5/23/2017 11:47 AM, John Haley wrote:
> I hesitate to weigh in on this topic, because it is a big one. But, with
> all due respect to Steve, everything is not under copyright. For starters,
> US federal copyright law did not exist for sound recordings until 1972, so
> there are only state law concerns regarding all such pre-1972 material. (we
> are talking only US law here). What is dubbed "state law copyright law"
> exists in only a handful of states, and it is really a branch of property
> law, not true copyright law, which is all federal. The state law is fairly
> pernicious, IMHO (I'm a retired lawyer who has studied this stuff for
> years), and in the case of NY state law, ill-founded but still there. The
> law of copyright as it pertains to recordings really needs to be
> federalized by Congress, to get rid of the patchwork of inconsistent and
> unclear state law. Given the state of Congress today, I do not look for
> anything like that to be happening anytime soon, and given what is going
> on, perhaps it is best that they don't, at least for now.
>
> The words "public domain" get misused a lot. For something to reach PD in
> the US, it must pass thru copyright protection. Pre-1972 recordings, which
> have never had any federal protection, are not in PD and cannot reach it,
> because they never were copyrighted. They are protected by neither federal
> copyright law nor PD. In general, PD has been nibbled away over the years
> such that it barely exists in the US, at least in any of our lifetimes.
>
> As for record company lawyers, my (long) experience is that very few IP
> lawyers understand much about copyright for sound recordings, and the
> easiest legal opinion to give someone is always "no," especially where the
> lawyer doesn't really know and the answers are not readily ascertainable.
> Big record companies will just take the view that they own everything in
> sight--that is plainly incorrect. And incorrect assumptions are very
> plentiful in this area.
>
> The law of the rest of the world is much, much clearer when it comes to
> copyright of sound recordings. Such law is generally covered by statute,
> and and those statutes are reasonably clear, embracing a rational approach
> to PD that is alien to our US law.
>
> Best,
> John Haley
> .
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 1:21 PM, Gary A. Galo <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> I thought that the Edison and Aeolian/Vocalion catalogs were public
>> domain, because the owners declared them to be so. My memory could be
>> faulty, also. Tim Brooks would know.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:
>> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Steven Smolian
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 23, 2017 12:45 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Another copyright question
>>
>> As far as I know, just about everything from 1877 to the present is
>> protected in one way or another. There are orphan labels with uncertain
>> ownership.
>>
>> In my opinion, putting commercial sound recordings on a web site has a
>> greater potential down than upside. Other opinions may differ.
>>
>> There is a choice to be made between what you can probably get away with
>> and the probable liabilities, should things turn nasty. People do this all
>> the time. People acting as employees of institutions are putting their
>> institutions at risk. Institutions have lawyers on staff to advise. My
>> opinion.
>>
>> Steve Smolian
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List [mailto:
>> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of James Roth
>> Sent: Monday, May 22, 2017 12:53 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: [ARSCLIST] Another copyright question
>>
>> Hello again
>>
>> I have an LP made by A.B.C. (J. Naftali Records). Of singer Albert Ortiz
>> (The Yiddish Golden Voice of)
>> I need to know if there's any chance of copyright issues.
>>
>> Might there be a list of labels that are definitely not copyrighted
>> anymore.
>> Of course, there's are the artists that might still be alive and
>> copyrighted.
>>
>> I don't intend to make copies or sell them, just to put it on a free
>> website.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Ben
>>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
>