Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Brad

Sony Issues Bob Dylan CDs to Extend Copyright

22 posts in this topic

I started a thread about this last week, but no one seemed too interested in it then either. :shrug[1]:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm interested, both as a music business development and for the music itself, but if there's no way that I can hear it, then...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok what is this i don't even...

But Sony is not alone. Universal, which owns the Motown catalog, has released a series of jazz, gospel and rhythm and blues albums under the rubric “Motown Unreleased 1962,” which makes a large body of its unissued archives eligible for the European copyright extension.

https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/motown-unreleased-1962-gospel/id585361950

https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/motown-unreleased-1962-jazz/id585005250

and what else? and why? 50+ years old, nobody ever gave a shit about this and now they do? Sortakinda? Really? Reeks of desperation? Maybe? Uh, yeah?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if they'll do this with Miles? They've already emulated Dylan with the "bootleg series".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok what is this i don't even...

But Sony is not alone. Universal, which owns the Motown catalog, has released a series of jazz, gospel and rhythm and blues albums under the rubric “Motown Unreleased 1962,” which makes a large body of its unissued archives eligible for the European copyright extension.

https://itunes.apple...pel/id585361950

https://itunes.apple...azz/id585005250

and what else? and why? 50+ years old, nobody ever gave a shit about this and now they do? Sortakinda? Really? Reeks of desperation? Maybe? Uh, yeah?

This is about careers, nobody wants to get fired for not protecting their assets...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is interesting about the "use it or lose it" clause in the new EU law. I have always been of the opinion that this clause is exactly what is needed to support reasonable copyright laws that balance the rights of artists, companies, and the public. If only we had something like this in the US!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is interesting about the "use it or lose it" clause in the new EU law. I have always been of the opinion that this clause is exactly what is needed to support reasonable copyright laws that balance the rights of artists, companies, and the public. If only we had something like this in the US!

But if they can literally press 100 copies and essentially sit on them, that hardly seems reasonable and yet meets the letter of the law.

Not sure about the Motown stuff whether it can be found in a tangible format, but iTunes is widely available, even if I have decided to opt out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is interesting about the "use it or lose it" clause in the new EU law. I have always been of the opinion that this clause is exactly what is needed to support reasonable copyright laws that balance the rights of artists, companies, and the public. If only we had something like this in the US!

But if they can literally press 100 copies and essentially sit on them, that hardly seems reasonable and yet meets the letter of the law.

Not sure about the Motown stuff whether it can be found in a tangible format, but iTunes is widely available, even if I have decided to opt out.

Yes, there are loopholes, but it would still be a major step forward. Most larger record companies couldn't even be bothered any more to go to their vaults to keep music available, even if they might defend themselves against all copyright violations as a matter of principle. As far as the definition of availability, legit downloads are fine in this day and age (IMO). Of course, one would hope for high quality downloads...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It'll be interesting to see how "music" is defined. If music at a certain resolution and bitrate is protected by copyright, would the same music under a higher or lower resolution be considered the "same" music?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's funny is how by issuing this stuff to the public, even in such a dramatically limited number as the Dylan stuff, or only as downloads as with the Motown stuff, it's all but a guarantee that the material will now be circulated amongst those who really want to hear it in perpetuity. So although this might (and I stress, might) prevent the Jordi Pudols of the world from finding something to do with an unreleased George Bohannon Workshop Jazz session in terms of product, well hey, I would suspect that said Bohannon material is probably already available to anybody who wants to hear it on some (or more) file-sharing service/torrent/site/whatever. Same only more so with the Dylan material - I'd be willing to wager somebody's-other-than-mine proverbial left nut that there's a helluva lot more than 100 "copies" of that material out there right now - and counting!

So...protection? Really?

Then again, maybe peoples have plans to license all this stuff for motion pictures, commercials, ringtones, etc. In that case (as if), then ok, your assets are now covered. But otherwise, good luck on all that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the Dylan case, much of the previously unreleased stuff has been available for decades on unofficial bootlegs... and Dylan has pretty much looked the other way at fans who have traded (and let's face it, sold) it over the years. By pressing only 100 "real" copies, it seems clear they've also accepted that fans would be downloading and trading this material. Sure, it's a legal move to retain copyright - and more power to them for that - but also (imo) a tacit acknowledgement that the outtakes are of limited value except to the most die-hard fans. They want to keep shady record labels from profiting from these, but not necessarily fans from hearing them. I'm sure it's a compromise of sorts as what label wants to just "give stuff away," but it also suggests that they're well aware of the real life implications of their actions.

Or what Jim said... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They want to keep shady record labels from profiting from these..

And even at that, it just takes one country who doesn't subscribe to any of the new/existing copyright protection laws and one person who knows how to "set up shop" there on paper, and BOOM! All gone.

That's the downside of this for the companies. The upside is that, really, who's going to pay for this stuff now? Scorched earth, baby!

Oh,wait a sec. I forgot - some people still buy CDs of needle-drops and rips just to have an "object".

Never mind, start scouring the globe, ye bootleggers. A new home awaits somewhere over the horizon!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Freewheeling outtakes are pretty interesting. I think they're planning to release some of them on a new "bootleg" release.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Freewheeling outtakes are pretty interesting. I think they're planning to release some of them on a new "bootleg" release.

Yes. In general, there is a surprisingly large amount of bootleg Dylan that is of very high quality, and often unique. For some reason, his best stuff often didn't make it to the legit records. Witness the current "Bootleg Series," which has already released a huge amount of material of mostly first rate quality, not just alternate takes and minor variations on what is already out there.

Edited by John L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder whether Sony will be doing this again now to protect their unreleased 1963 Dylan recordings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder whether Sony will be doing this again now to protect their unreleased 1963 Dylan recordings.

They already have.

And expanded it. They released a few at top dollar through one store only, and now have preorders up for even more on amazon. 6 LP sets.

http://www.amazon.com/50th-Anniversary-Collection-Bob-Dylan/dp/B00GC2MF3K/ref=sr_1_7?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1386709569&sr=1-7&keywords=bob+dylan

Edited by jazzbo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the Beatles are doing something similar with bootlegged titles from 1963 but via iTunes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weird with this new one ... seems there are fairly many copies around in Germany - and many seem to think this was it - but what's with that Dec. 10 release date that all of a sudden turned up?

This whole practice of Sony's is pretty silly ... the new set (all info on wiki) omits tracks from the sessions/concerts covered that already saw official release (i.e. on Bootleg Series 1-3) so you pay premium money and don't even get complete sessions ... you get some moronic music business attempt to save, well, what exactly? The stuff is already floating around, much or most of the 1963 seems to have been bootlegged long time ago ... why not release it officially, design a cheapo sub-series of the Bootleg Series that is probably selling pretty well anyways?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder whether Sony will be doing this again now to protect their unreleased 1963 Dylan recordings.

They already have.

And expanded it. They released a few at top dollar through one store only, and now have preorders up for even more on amazon. 6 LP sets.

http://www.amazon.com/50th-Anniversary-Collection-Bob-Dylan/dp/B00GC2MF3K/ref=sr_1_7?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1386709569&sr=1-7&keywords=bob+dylan

Is there a track listing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.