 |
 |
Please disregard my last post. It was in my archive and was never meant to be seen. It was sent accidentally instead of deleted. Any opinions that slip through are definitely NOT belonging to the Library. Sheesh. James >>> [log in to unmask] 10/06/03 03:06PM >>> Mike brought up an important distinction bewteen "abandoned" and "unissued" recordings Abandoned material is that which has been infringed upon with no response from the copyright holder (with the understanding that the copyright holder had or should have had knowledge of the infringement and had means to respond in court). IMHO one need only look at the large number of jazz, country, and blues unauthorized reissues on European and domestic labels available for sale in the US for the last 30+ years to find examples. And just because they're PD in Europe doesn't mean the "bootlegs" are automatically allowed to be distributed in the US, as we've seen with the Metropolitan Opera recordings. The judge that ruled on Capitol v. Naxos seemed to say that abandonment was a significant factor to be taken into account in copyright violation rulings. Whether or not this opinion stands is another matter. Non re-issued and uninfringed material, such as obscure Columbia cylanders, are still fully protected under current law until 2067. As we all know, this is an absurd catch-22. These recordings lack the commercial value to support a large enough "bootleg" (European or domestic) operation that the copyright holders would even notice. They also lack the commercial potential for the copyright holders to bother with requests to license them. A friend of mine tried once to license some 1901-1910 Victor sides and was turned down summarily because he could not garauntee 10,000+ sales! Something that breaks this logjam is needed before the recordings deteriorate beyond recall. I think Mike's "title fee" idea is quite good, as long as the cost was under $5 or so per recording. This way the companies would be making more money off their old recordings than they are now, wouldn't have to bother with the cost of licensing, yet would retain their current rights. Considering their clout on Capitol Hill, a proposal like this seems far more likely evade their corporate veto. James The idea is to distinguish abandoned from unissued material. My suspicion is that most of those with rights to material of interest to us are unaware that they have those rights - or even those recordings. Only if the item is brought to their attention (e.g., by an "infringing" release) would they take notice. Why Capitol initiated this contest is hard to imagine, but at this stage I am delighted that they did. Note that the numbers you are suggesting are quite substantial on the scale we're dealing with. $1 may be too low, but reality for a 78- or 45-rpm side would be no more than $10 unless there were a commitment for a substantial release. Few sides other than those of the "superstars" would be worth $100 or anything approaching it. IMHO, there should be a corollary: any title abandoned by that definition should require some sort of "title fee" comparable to the renewal fee would be needed for someone to issue the title without infringement. Needless to say, a reissue of twenty sides that carried a title fee of $20000 would be unthinkable; even $200 would decrease interest substantially. That fee would not only address the costs of the paperwork but would also make the proposal far easier to negotiate with holders of rights. Mike [log in to unmask] http://www.mrichter.com/