It's somewhat interesting to speculate on who might have an
inventory record, and how the industry differs from company to company.
Having worked with a music publisher, TRO, inc., which serviced
some 32+ publishers, domestic and foreign (mostly paper contracts for
writers, lyricists, and investors) through Songways Service, we
maintained contracts, copyright files, and inventory, and eventually the
maintenance of a catalog of print and recordings held, after a lawsuit
was lost...the reason I was hired as Information Manager.
It will be interesting to see what transpires with the Universal
Music Artists' lawsuit, and how that might influence all music industry
groups to keep better records, and indeed making money available for
preservation and safe storage. I suspect there will be a number of
Information Managers hired to alleviate such future problems as the
result of the lawsuit.
There is a vast industry wide issue now with metadata already noted
in this discussion:
And, as at TRO, with a song with multiple writers, lyricists, and
publishers, without a one-stop database, much gets ignored in payments
The patchwork flow-charts here, where music content trades and
mergers exacerbates the problem; who is even known to be keeping track
...and again, "Record, record, whose got the record?" all over again.
On 6/19/2019 11:43 AM, Steve Greene wrote:
> +1 insightful, Matt Snyder! Those of that work (or have worked) for public
> sector organizations find it easy to mythologize the resources private
> sector archives can bring to bear. This incident emphasizes that archives
> tend to be the "red haired step child" wherever they're found. I think it's
> easy for private sector companies to view the archives as a cost center,
> rather than a source of future profit.
> Steve Greene
> (301) 842-8923
> An independent archival professional specializing in still photography,
> moving images and recorded sound.
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 2:04 PM Paul T. Jackson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Perhaps this lawsuit will result in an inventory.
>> Paul T. Jackson
>> Trescott Research
>> Steilacoom, WA 98338
>> [log in to unmask]
>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019, 10:28 AM Corey Bailey <[log in to unmask]
>>> Hi Matt,
>>> Your point is well taken.
>>> When I was the Sound Director for MGM, we were given the task of sorting
>>> the sound elements from the UA library because Worldwide Services had
>>> mostly misinformation in their database. What we discovered, was that
>>> many elements were in very poor shape and if they weren't restored,
>>> transferred, etc., they would not be accessible the next time. These
>>> included some very recognizable titles like "Marty" & "The Alamo", just
>>> to name a couple. Worldwide Services complained about the cost & I was
>>> told to stop the restoration work, only to identify the elements and
>>> correct the database. I ultimately took the problem to the number 2 man
>>> at MGM and was told that there was no money to save the elements. That
>>> funding came from estimated revenues from after market release on a
>>> title-by-title basis. It turned out that this is an industry wide
>>> practice. No investment is made, by anyone, in maintaining what they
>>> My $0.02
>>> Corey Bailey Audio Engineering
>>> On 6/19/2019 8:24 AM, Matthew Snyder wrote:
>>>> Alex, behind your very good question is an assumption that UMG had a
>>>> complete and detailed inventory of the contents of the building in the
>>>> first place. There is no reason to believe that they did. They didn't
>>>> enough about their holdings to invest money in protecting them, so why
>>>> would they have spent money to catalog what they had and where it was?
>>>> Sure, one guy had a pretty good knowledge of what was there, but that's
>>>> the same as a paper or database trail.
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.