All Activity

Basically I agree with you almost all the way, mainly because this is a can of worms where sooner or later others might try to sneak their "art" into these laws too and nobody knows where to draw a line that will STAND. Yet I think some of your examples are a bit far-fetched or off-target, such as destruction (on purpose or not) or loss. Because - no sale, no royalties due. It's as simple as that. And if an object remains unsold but is passed on through the generations (whichever way this occurs) then it's no royalty-inducing (recorded) sale either. As for rare or one-off classic cars - fair point, but is this ever enforceable on a wider level? Not nearly all of these are linked to any single designer who would qualify as an artist who would be entitled to royalties in the sense of the EU Directive, for example. But getting back to the topic of this thread, I still fail to see how this could ever be invoked for any of the collectible records we are talking about. Even a pressing run of only 500 or 700 makes any of these highly "collectible" LPs mass products by comparison. A high-$$$ sale would relate to only one copy of a far larger number of copies of the "original" but not to THE "original" work of art, and these copies of the orignal pressing run all are the same and do not nearly meet the criteria of the "limited productions or signed works" outlined in the directive. "Signed works" (of art) typically would refer, for example, to printings of some drawing or picture specifically produced by or on behalf of the artist in a limited run identified as, for example, the x-th copy of a run of y copies (as in "5/50" next to the artist's signature on the object, for example). No record signed individually by an artist for the record owner at some later date would even remotely be covered by this. If it was about, say, one-off test pessings or acetates or metal masters of a (later) regular release, this might be different, but would such test pressings or acetates meet the "visual art" criteria? The only case where conclusions about whether records could ever be covered IMO would occur if collectible bibliophile books (either first printings or limited runs identified specifically as the "x-th copy of a total of y numbered copies" would somehow end up being covered under this Directive. Would my numbered copy of the "Kenton Era" 4-LP box set on Capitol all of a sudden become eligible for royalties to either the Kenton Estate or the (uncredited) designer of the cover and booklet if I were to sell it? (Highly unlikely, given the condition of my copy of that set, but you get the idea )

Grateful Dead 60th Anniversary box set, “Enjoying the Ride” Deer Creek Music Center, Noblesville, IN (7/15/89) disc 2

I imagine that AOL's biggest problem with keeping dial-up services going is finding a supplier of the dial-up modem chipsets to replace that aging infrastructure. Companies that made those stopped making them a long time ago. Any stocks of them have to be depleted or deleted by now. On top of that, not many companies make a dial-up modem for today's modern PC architecture, likely due to the same problem. I can see it now... some doomsday Windows 95 user on a 30 year old PC is now upset that he can't log into his alt.talk. newsgroups.

Great music on all three. 'Reckoning' is a very special album

I still think this is really messed up. I see that glasswares and ceramics are on the list of "artworks" that fall under this. So when someone drops this glassware/ceramic and it smashes to bits, is the owner now liable for lost resale value? If a buyer of artworks has a house fire and the works of art are destroyed, will his insurance have to send money to the artists to compensate them for lost resale revenue? If an art buyer purposefully destroys art, can they be sued for loss of income? The list of potential problems goes on & on. And why limit "art" to these things alone? That is the craziest thing here. I see the legal spin revolves around copies made in limited copies. There are a lot of cars that fall into that category. I imagine that someone that owns a super rare Ferrari or Lambo would be a bit upset if they had to pay an extra fee when buying that rare car on the secondary market.

Joel Ross “Parable of the Poet” Blue Note cd Immanuel Wilkins on alto saxophone, Maria Grand on tenor saxophone, Marquis Hill on trumpet, Kalia Vandever on trombone, Sean Mason on piano, Rick Rosato on bass, Craig Weinrib on drums, and special guest Gabrielle Garo on flute. One of the best releases imo of this decade.

Going to be a hot one. Starting off with Gary Burton “Lofty Fake Anagram” RCA/Sony Japan cd From 1967, with a great quartet: Gary Burton vibes, Larry Coryell guitar, Steve Swallow bass and Bob Moses drums..

Indeed it is! Beyond all legal terms and convolutedness, the below link may also help in clarifying the EU Directive in a more down-to-earth way: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Al26049

Oh, I didn't realise that had been reissued. I may have to join you in purchasing it.

👍

August 11 Donny McCaslin - 1966 The Donny McCaslin - Uri Caine Quartet was with Scott Colly (b) and Antonio Sanchez (dr) in Göttingen on November 6, 2010

👍

I guess it's kind of obvious but there's also a wikipedia entry on this whole topic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Droit_de_suite (the German one about the "Folgerecht" may actually be even clearer). It's all limited to visual art... In the case of True Blue one might ask how big Reid Miles' contribution to the value of the whole thing is and whether he might have a small entitlement

👍

Thanks for the info. Amazing that this aspect did not get mentioned here (at least I cannot recall any single instance) when sales of works of art received media coverage. I think I found a link to the European law: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32001L0084 Not easy to see offhand how this could be made to apply to sound recordings, though. Not least of all because even the pressing runs of jazz LPs make these "mass goods" compared to the works of art covered by the directive.

Not a court ruling, but law. There are 90 countries that have artist’s resale right legislation guaranteeing artists will earn a share from the resale of their work, including European Union countries, but not the US of A. Canada talks about it a lot, but no law yet.

Not specifically. But - quote: "it's not like artworks in which -- and this is a fairly recent development -- estates or artists can make claims on a percentage of sales via auction houses." To me this reads like there must have been a stipulation or ruling somewhere that opens up this course of action, isn't it?

Revisiting R.E.M.'s discography chronologically, starting with: and

…potentially leading to a free for all orgy in rhythm w much moanin’?

Philips 840 447 P - Johnny Griffin " Night Lady" - rec. 1964 - Engineer: Wolfgang Hirschman

I just checked his website again. It's available and I ordered it. They must have received a LOT of requests.