crisp Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 I'm for the music staying in copyright to Universal. Putting it in the public domain just results in zillions of incoherently compiled cheapjack releases mastered from secondary sources. I'd rather have the music licensed and given a unique, top-quality release by a company such as Mosaic. Speaking of which, nobody mentioned this quote in the article: Michael Cuscuna, the jazz record producer and historian who runs Mosaic Records, a label specializing in jazz reissues, said of the Universal donation, “This is very crucial material for us, and we’ve been assured it will be an active archive that is not going to be tied up in bureaucracy, and that we and others will have access to it.” Sounds like Cuscuna will be investigating the archive for Mosaic sets before long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonnymax Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 why don't they give it to me? Oh, but they will. Bend over, please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDK Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 I'm for the music staying in copyright to Universal. Putting it in the public domain just results in zillions of incoherently compiled cheapjack releases mastered from secondary sources. I'd rather have the music licensed and given a unique, top-quality release by a company such as Mosaic. Unfortunately, very little of this will ever get a "top quality" release - or any real release at all. Most is stuff that's no longer popular or profitable - which is why Uni hasn't released it thus far. Best shot for any of us ever hearing this stuff in any realistic way is for it to be digitized and made available on the 'net. All of this is already out of copyright in Europe anyway, so nothing is going to stop those "cheapjack releases" - which is probably the only way most of this stuff was available previously. Hell, the best "archivists" I've seen lately are traders and bloggers posting rare stuff for free on the web. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigshot Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 http://www.npr.org/blogs/therecord/2011/01/10/132803768/200-000-recordings-donated-to-library-of-congress Good news for long forgotten recordings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllenLowe Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 ok article but if I hear about that f*cking White Christmas one more time I'll call my Senator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nessa Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 I think it is just fine to have LOC in possession of the source material (remember the recent fire), I am really bugged Universal is getting kudos for bailing on their responsibilities and having the LOC do their work for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonnymax Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 ok article but if I hear about that f*cking White Christmas one more time I'll call my Senator. mwah ha ha ha! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RDK Posted January 11, 2011 Report Share Posted January 11, 2011 I think it is just fine to have LOC in possession of the source material (remember the recent fire), I am really bugged Universal is getting kudos for bailing on their responsibilities and having the LOC do their work for them. Exactly! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave James Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 (edited) From Monday's Los Angeles Times: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/music_blog/2011/01/universal-music-library-of-congress-bing-crosby-ella-fitzgerald.html Edited January 12, 2011 by Dave James Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghost of miles Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 ok article but if I hear about that f*cking White Christmas one more time I'll call my Senator. You mean Olympia Snowe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllenLowe Posted January 12, 2011 Report Share Posted January 12, 2011 now you're gonna get it - one additional question - will the LOC actually release a list of what this stuff is? Because I wanna know if they have Bing's B side (same melody, new lyrics: "I'm Cheating on My Wife Dixie"). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sonnymax Posted January 13, 2011 Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 now you're gonna get it - one additional question - will the LOC actually release a list of what this stuff is? Because I wanna know if they have Bing's B side (same melody, new lyrics: "I'm Cheating on My Wife Dixie"). Like Bing, you're an angry drunk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster_Ties Posted January 13, 2011 Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 I don't know what you guys are worried about. Nobody uses Bing. It's a joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BERIGAN Posted January 13, 2011 Report Share Posted January 13, 2011 ok article but if I hear about that f*cking White Christmas one more time I'll call my Senator. You ought to call her. She might be lonely, and would like to chat with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neal Pomea Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 "Where in the world can you just stay at home, sit back, and enjoy unfettered access to art that is owned and preserved by someone else?" Well, it's now owned and being preserved by the LOC. Not someone else. If you understand the LOC to "own" this music, you should re-read the article. This would be in the public domain if it weren't for the continued extension of the term of copyright. Where is it going end? Perpetual copyright? Is that what you want? This company has already enjoyed windfall profits from the extensions. This should have already been in the public domain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nessa Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 (edited) What about others without "windfall profits"? Under the 50 year rule, my first sessions will become PD in 6 years. I still pay royalties on these recordings and the PD folks won't have to. The creators of the works lose. Someone can issue this stuff without my contractual obligations. My issues, at this point, will cost me a couple of bucks per copy more than the "freeloaders". Do you think you will get the best possible transfers/mastering then? Edited January 19, 2011 by Chuck Nessa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neal Pomea Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 (edited) I'm for the music staying in copyright to Universal. Putting it in the public domain just results in zillions of incoherently compiled cheapjack releases mastered from secondary sources. I'd rather have the music licensed and given a unique, top-quality release by a company such as Mosaic. Speaking of which, nobody mentioned this quote in the article: Michael Cuscuna, the jazz record producer and historian who runs Mosaic Records, a label specializing in jazz reissues, said of the Universal donation, “This is very crucial material for us, and we’ve been assured it will be an active archive that is not going to be tied up in bureaucracy, and that we and others will have access to it.” Sounds like Cuscuna will be investigating the archive for Mosaic sets before long. But the copyright does not need to remain with Universal in order for this to happen. Mosaic could do this if the music were in the public domain. There does not seem to be any sense of urgency whatsoever among the jazz community, or at least this board, that something will be lost (some things already lost) if nothing ever goes into the public domain. I must be looking at these issues from a completely different vantage point when I see in my culture (Cajun) the urgency of preserving and remembering our folk art rather than letting "the market" decide what gets sold and what gets forgotten and allowed to just disappear. From the 1960s on there have been deliberate, conscious efforts by musicians to help the Cajun French language and culture survive through the appreciation of our folk art. It may sound like an idealistic dream to you, but it is not to me and many people in Louisiana. Having the music available is part and parcel of instilling pride, enough pride to make efforts to keep our heritage. The music needs to be heard by people within the culture, not forgotten or thrown away because it has no profitable market. Maybe no one feels this way about jazz music, but there are other perspectives and other needs that can be best met by the public domain rather than private ownership. What about others without "windfall profits"? Under the 50 year rule, my first sessions will become PD in 6 years. I still pay royalties on these recordings and the PD folks won't have to. The creators of the works lose. Someone can issue this stuff without my contractual obligations. My issues, at this point, will cost me a couple of bucks per copy more than the "freeloaders". Do you think you will get the best possible transfers/mastering then? Who said I favor the 50 year rule? I don't. I hope you hold copyright for your lifetime and that you continue with your contracts. I can put emoticon frowns, too, at your apparent lack of concern for the survival of my culture, if I wanted to twist things the way you are twisting my arguments. Freeloader indeed! Not every argument for the public domain is some kind of weaselly clause used by freeloaders/. Edited January 19, 2011 by It Should be You Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christiern Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 "This would be in the public domain if it weren't for the continued extension of the term of copyright. Where is it going end? Perpetual copyright? Is that what you want? This company has already enjoyed windfall profits from the extensions. This should have already been in the public domain." Yes, the company has made rather large amounts of money on this material, but, rather than see it enter the public domain, I think it would make sense to shift royalty payments to the artists and/or their estates. These—with very few exceptions—are the largely uncompensated victims of record industry greed. I'm sorry, but, as consumers, we don't deserve a penny of that money—the creative people earned it, we didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Nessa Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 I'm for the music staying in copyright to Universal. Putting it in the public domain just results in zillions of incoherently compiled cheapjack releases mastered from secondary sources. I'd rather have the music licensed and given a unique, top-quality release by a company such as Mosaic. Speaking of which, nobody mentioned this quote in the article: Michael Cuscuna, the jazz record producer and historian who runs Mosaic Records, a label specializing in jazz reissues, said of the Universal donation, “This is very crucial material for us, and we’ve been assured it will be an active archive that is not going to be tied up in bureaucracy, and that we and others will have access to it.” Sounds like Cuscuna will be investigating the archive for Mosaic sets before long. But the copyright does not need to remain with Universal in order for this to happen. Mosaic could do this if the music were in the public domain. There does not seem to be any sense of urgency whatsoever among the jazz community, or at least this board, that something will be lost (some things already lost) if nothing ever goes into the public domain. I must be looking at these issues from a completely different vantage point when I see in my culture (Cajun) the urgency of preserving and remembering our folk art rather than letting "the market" decide what gets sold and what gets forgotten and allowed to just disappear. From the 1960s on there have been deliberate, conscious efforts by musicians to help the Cajun French language and culture survive through the appreciation of our folk art. It may sound like an idealistic dream to you, but it is not to me and many people in Louisiana. Having the music available is part and parcel of instilling pride, enough pride to make efforts to keep our heritage. The music needs to be heard by people within the culture, not forgotten or thrown away because it has no profitable market. Maybe no one feels this way about jazz music, but there are other perspectives and other needs that can be best met by the public domain rather than private ownership. What about others without "windfall profits"? Under the 50 year rule, my first sessions will become PD in 6 years. I still pay royalties on these recordings and the PD folks won't have to. The creators of the works lose. Someone can issue this stuff without my contractual obligations. My issues, at this point, will cost me a couple of bucks per copy more than the "freeloaders". Do you think you will get the best possible transfers/mastering then? Who said I favor the 50 year rule? I don't. I hope you hold copyright for your lifetime and that you continue with your contracts. I can put emoticon frowns, too, at your apparent lack of concern for the survival of my culture, if I wanted to twist things the way you are twisting my arguments. Freeloader indeed! Not every argument for the public domain is some kind of weaselly clause used by freeloaders/. My "freeloader" comment was referring to the labels issuing recordings sans royalties, not you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crisp Posted January 19, 2011 Report Share Posted January 19, 2011 But the copyright does not need to remain with Universal in order for this to happen. Mosaic could do this if the music were in the public domain. The problem with that is that the masters remain in the original copyright holder's vaults. There's no incentive to make them available to independents and, since the market is glutted with rips of 78s and LPs, no incentive on the part of Mosaic to seek access to them. Result: zillions of shoddy releases with the odd half-decent one lost among them. I think Christiern's solution is the best one, although it would potentially be a legal minefield. Even so, Bing Crosby's estate has found a way to bring out his latterday recordings, by licensing them to Mosaic and Collector's Choice, so it can be done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neal Pomea Posted January 20, 2011 Report Share Posted January 20, 2011 My "freeloader" comment was referring to the labels issuing recordings sans royalties, not you. I am sorry that I misunderstood your comment. I apologize. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjzee Posted October 28, 2012 Report Share Posted October 28, 2012 Hate to say it, but... Historical treasures missing from National Archives Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Ayers Posted October 28, 2012 Report Share Posted October 28, 2012 This board has two principles: what's mine is mine and the internet is my friend. Libraries hold materials, they don't own copyrights. If you don't know why stuff needs archiving or how come it's not your right to have everything sent to your house free...well, I can see most folks don't. I'll let you get back to your friend - s/he's the only one who understands your needs, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjzee Posted October 28, 2012 Report Share Posted October 28, 2012 Was that a reply to my post? I didn't understand it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AllenLowe Posted October 28, 2012 Report Share Posted October 28, 2012 I was wondering myself....thought it was a secret code. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.