Print

Print


<<If they don't want it out in the world, it has no commercial value
because it will be litigated into submission.>>

Tom, there would be nothing to litigate.  If its an unreleased recording,
it's in Public Domain in the non-US world.  Under the wording of the
copyright statutes (outside US), it gets only 50 years (not 70, which
applies to released recordings). There would literally be no position to
take to stop it.  This is not just my opinion--it's simple fact coming
right from the words of the statutes themselves.

As for the US, of course the record is not copyrighted at all under federal
law, especially since sound recordings could not be copyrighted under US
federal law until 1972.  As for state law, that's the usual swampy mess,
but that would not stop anyone from releasing these recordings outside the
US, and then every child with a computer could figure out how to buy them
on the internet.

If these same recordings have already been released by their owners
(bootlegs don't count), then the analysis is different.

As a group, we don't need to make copyright law any harder than it already
is.

Best,
John Haley



On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> Right, but this was a one-off, probably for Brian Epstein to take around
> to various record companies or maybe club or tour booking agents. If "Mint
> Records" is correct and this is a 78RPM lacquer cut from tunes on the Decca
> demo tape, then it's interesting as a one-off artifact used in promoting
> and spreading the word about the Beatles, but it may not be the only source
> for this music. It's also likely that if Sir Paul, Yoko Ono, George
> Harrison's widow and Ringo wanted this material out in the world, it would
> be have been included in the Anthology CDs. If they don't want it out in
> the world, it has no commercial value because it will be litigated into
> submission.
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven Smolian" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 10:10 AM
>
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] 'Holy Grail' Beatles record to be auctioned
>
>
> Then they should be two single-sided lacquers to allow plating of each
>> selection.
>>
>> Steve Smolian
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Aaron Levinson
>> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 9:58 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] 'Holy Grail' Beatles record to be auctioned
>>
>> My understanding is that these were export copies made for the Indian
>> subcontinent and that due to the absence of rural electrification at the
>> time they could be played on hand cranked machines.
>>
>> AA
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Feb 26, 2016, at 9:48 AM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Does the Decca audition tape still exist?
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mint Records"
>>> <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 9:28 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] 'Holy Grail' Beatles record to be auctioned
>>>
>>>
>>> I think it was the only speed available to be cut by HMV Oxford
>>>> street at the time. Associated Redifusion - a UK ITV franchise - were
>>>> also still cutting 78rpm acetates at this stage too.
>>>> Are these not just cuts from the Decca audition tape? If so the
>>>> recordings themselves are not that rare, which hardly makes them holy
>>>>
>>> grail territory.
>>
>>> If not then it's something different altogether.
>>>> As a historical artifact, however, as a disc made personally for
>>>> George Martin by Brian Epstein and pretty much the reason why they
>>>> got their contract, it's something altogether different.
>>>> I would have thought the acetate made in Hamburg with Lu Walters
>>>> would be the ultimate holy grail though.
>>>> On 26 February 2016 at 13:05, seva, soundcurrent mastering <
>>>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> i'd think it's a 78 simply because there were so many of those
>>>>> machines already in place, it's cheaper and straight to portable
>>>>> product playable "anywhere". there's been a few 78s from the mid
>>>>> 50's to early 60's people have brought to me for transcription
>>>>> (although most are wartime, 2 decades previous).  after all, if it
>>>>> works, don't buy something new.  j
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 7:14 AM, Tom Fine
>>>>> <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > Why would they have made a 78RPM disk in 1962? Was this cut on an
>>>>> > old 78-era disk recorder, no tape involved? If so, why, in 1962?
>>>>> >
>>>>> > -- Tom Fine
>>>>> >
>>>>> > ----- Original Message ----- From: "CJB" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> > Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 5:42 AM
>>>>> > Subject: [ARSCLIST] 'Holy Grail' Beatles record to be auctioned
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > An extremely rare and valuable Beatles record that was found
>>>>> >> languishing in a loft is to be auctioned next month.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Described as "a Holy Grail item", the 1962 10-inch record of Till
>>>>> >> There Was You and Hello Little Girl lay forgotten in the home of
>>>>> >> Les Maguire for decades.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-35660169
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> best
>>>>> seva
>>>>>
>>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>>> www.soundcurrent.com
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>