 |
 |
At 04:27 PM 10/6/2003 -0400, Steven Smolian wrote: >If I were a record compnay which possibly held rights to a recording, I'd >want my lawyers to look at any relevent paperwork to be sure there was >nothing that might come back and bite me later, regardless of potential >sales. This is just good corporate policy. > >And that's were the expense comes in- no small edition reissue label can >bear this cost, especially when multiplied by, say, 20 cuts. > >At $ 5.00 per cut, wouldn't the companies loose money just on the cost of >posting and other bookkeeping expenses? > >A solution should be proposed that covers the issues as seen by the >copyright owners as well as those based on our own collector's passions. > >Perhaps a "hold harmless" insurance policy for which a small reissuer could >apply might be worth consideration. > >Speaking of Capitol-Naxos, enough time should have elaped by now to >determine if Capitol actually did file an appeal. If not, the case stands >as decided. Anyone know? Unless there is a sense of serving the public, no waiver of rights will make sense to the companies. If anything proved that, the Capitol/Naxos case does. I've heard nothing further on the subject of appeals since the time for filing was extended - not even when the appeal must be filed if there is to be one. Mike [log in to unmask] http://www.mrichter.com/