More on Pujol from Jazzwax

[David Ayers]

Well the 'lie' here is interpretation of the law around importation of such goods. So what is the law? As I explained with reference to PD in Japan, it would be the same for Japanese PD issues. And for importations from the European branch of labels that formerly owned material which is now PD. Without facts, this is all just behavior.

[JSngry]

[JSngry]

I'll ask this question once again, since it seems to be the elephant in the room - do PD laws anywhere compel that the material in question be sold?

[Big Beat Steve]

Well the 'lie' here is interpretation of the law around importation of such goods. So what is the law? As I explained with reference to PD in Japan, it would be the same for Japanese PD issues. And for importations from the European branch of labels that formerly owned material which is now PD. Without facts, this is all just behavior.

Indeed.

Thanks for summing this up so very much to the point. Your reference to Japan and its PD laws, in particular, deserves to be recalled indeed.

do PD laws anywhere compel that the material in question be sold?

PD laws anywhere (INCLUDING Japan) first of all do not compel that material to be BOUGHT. Each and everyone is free NOT to buy it.

But passing judgment on those who do buy them, well ...

BTW, if I wanted a free yet ethical download of P.D. recordings, I'd look here, for example:

http://westernswing78.blogspot.com/

Please note the fine print about "physical product" reissues.

Do the download sites that you advocate follow the same principle?

[A Lark Ascending]

I always wonder how many of those who adopt the moral high ground on these issues can put their hand up and say that they have never bought a bootleg.

Yes, there's a difference of degree between buying something you know is unauthorised and making money selling music you might not have a right to.

But given the moral absolutes being declaimed here...

Always seems like there's more than an element of US protectionism involved in these debates. The 'Open Door' was only ever intended to swing one way.

Edited November 13, 2011 by A Lark Ascending

[David Ayers]

I can also now happily tell you what the law is. Have a look here: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap10.html

To save you reading it, when you import recorded media which are subject to copyright you pay 3% on the transfer price, the money basically goes to the Treasury, and then interested parties can claim it back. That's the law and if you pay the 3% you are covered. Pujol says he imports legally (this means he pays the 3%). Does anyone have evidence that he doesn't? Or that others do?

Um, this page adds another dimension to that: http://www.harryfox.com/public/Import.jsp

But who says Pujol doesn't do this? On what evidence is Larry calling him a liar?

Edited November 13, 2011 by David Ayers

[Big Beat Steve]

Always seems like there's more than an element of US protectionism involved in these debates. The 'Open Door' was only ever intended to swing one way.

Which is what I meant when I spoke above about "being afraid of losing control".

[Niko]

But who says Pujol doesn't do this? On what evidence is Larry calling him a liar?

Larry was quoting Laurie Pepper (jazzwax comments)... those claims about not being involved with Lonehill etc are somewhat thin anyway because Pujol is one of their main distributors it seems...

[Larry Kart]

So if I lie to my friends and associates, including (should it come to pass) you, that's "today's world being the way it is," and you have no problem with my behavior?

Of course I do. Among friends, in particular. But today's world being the way it is, if I expected my business associates and clients NEVER to lie to me on business matters I'd be utterly naive and probably unfit for business. Be that on alleged business deadline constraints, alleged money constraints, input to be provided from business associates or clients but being withheld for reasons that clearly are just excuses, etc. etc. (Note I have been self-employed in a freelance job for a very long time now so I've had some dealings here and there too and have come to take more than one business statement with a grain of salt and YET had to accept them at face value, despite the fact that I knew better . Knowing darn well you are being lied to right in your face sometimes is just part of the game.)

And just to repeat my question (and sorry for being quite to the point now), and may I - with all due respect - please ask you not to be evasive: What would your guess be what OTHER P.D. reissue labels would say if they were asked the same question about the legitimacy of those products being sold in the US (where the P.D. laws differ from those in other parts of the world)? And please don't tell me they had not been asked and that this question is therefore beside the point. Because it is not (as the underlying problem exists with those "other" labels too and we all know it) but in this case I would have to assume that you prefer not to know and not to find out. Which in the end would put us all very close together in how we prefer to deal (or should I say "cope") with "the world being the way it is today".

To answer your question, of course I would expect other PD labels (and labels that were, like Pujols', non-PD in part before they became predominently PD according to the laws of their own countries) to answer in much the same manner Pujols has if they were forced to. So? My feelings about those labels are the same as they are about Pujols and his family of labels. One tends to focus on Pujols in part because he doesn't hide in the shadows (do any of those other PD labels have a highly visible owner-spokesman?) but puts himself forward as a noble poster boy.

[David Ayers]

But who says Pujol doesn't do this? On what evidence is Larry calling him a liar?

Larry was quoting Laurie Pepper (jazzwax comments)... those claims about not being involved with Lonehill etc are somewhat thin anyway because Pujol is one of their main distributors it seems...

Larry claims Pujol is lying to our faces in the interview. Yes he mentions Laurie, whose remarks have a bearing only if Pujol is the owner of Lonehill and not just the distributor. So let me ask, what evidence is there that Pujol owns Lonehill, rather than just being the distributor? And what other lies does Pujol tell?

[AllenLowe]

if he denies doing anything wrong BECAUSE he does not own Lonehill, yet he distributes Lonehill, there does seem to be an element of hypocrisy or contradiction.

[David Ayers]

if he denies doing anything wrong BECAUSE he does not own Lonehill, yet he distributes Lonehill, there does seem to be an element of hypocrisy or contradiction.

So no lie then? You can buy Lonehill from amazon and Dusty Groove. So...?

[Larry Kart]

But who says Pujol doesn't do this? On what evidence is Larry calling him a liar?

Larry was quoting Laurie Pepper (jazzwax comments)... those claims about not being involved with Lonehill etc are somewhat thin anyway because Pujol is one of their main distributors it seems...

Larry claims Pujol is lying to our faces in the interview. Yes he mentions Laurie, whose remarks have a bearing only if Pujol is the owner of Lonehill and not just the distributor. So let me ask, what evidence is there that Pujol owns Lonehill, rather than just being the distributor? And what other lies does Pujol tell?

I'll get back to you on that after the football game.

[JSngry]

Always seems like there's more than an element of US protectionism involved in these debates. The 'Open Door' was only ever intended to swing one way.

Which is what I meant when I spoke above about "being afraid of losing control".

Ok, I'll call MEGA bullshit on this.

If there's no legal compulsion to sell PD material and it is indeed ok to freely giving it away/sharing it, then the real heroes are the people who do just that, the real gangstas are the ones who sell needle drops and CD burns, and the real junkies are the people who are dumb enough to think they're being done favors.

Some y'all seem like it's a moral triumph or something to finally being able to make money off of something that fell into your lap. FUCK that. That's not about losing control, that's about taking control.

Sorry y'all din't have the cultural wherewithal to make all thismusic, but now taht it's been made, now that it's been 50 years, and now that there's the internet, selling it in the trifling-ass way that is being done by Fresh Sounds, etc. is a fool's game, and the fools are those of you who buy it thinking that you're not getting played for the chumps you are.

[Larry Kart]

Whoops -- another football game (my team won the other one). I'll respond later tonight or tomorrow.

[Big Beat Steve]

If there's no legal compulsion to sell PD material and it is indeed ok to freely giving it away/sharing it, then the real heroes are the people who do just that, the real gangstas are the ones who sell needle drops and CD burns, and the real junkies are the people who are dumb enough to think they're being done favors.

Some y'all seem like it's a moral triumph or something to finally being able to make money off of something that fell into your lap. FUCK that. That's not about losing control, that's about taking control.

So it seems like there really are those who feel sorry about not being able to take control (or to see control being taken by somebody they would feel comfortable with) on something that they've lost control of (because these items have gone PD elsewhere) so they now start acting like "if I cannot ensure control is being taken by those who I'd like to take control then I'll see to it that these things are distributed freely so nobody takes control."

The bottom line?

Sour grapes, that's all.

Now I'll call GIGA-bullshit on that.

Because it's not about any MORAL "triumph" at all. It's only about availability of marketable goods in a package that suits the buyers' expectations and pocketbooks. You pay what you are prepared to pay. If you are not prepared to pay - fine. But others decide differently and that's only THEIR VERY OWN decision and judgment, not yours. Because nobody forces them to pay. Just like some would even want to shell out double or triple the normal amount of money for Mosaics though fidelity or packaging cannot be possibly three or four times better than on other, more "mundane" reissues (PD or not). Tastes and expectations vary, and the legal situation being the way it is, there is room for everybody within that legal framework.

Edited November 14, 2011 by Big Beat Steve

[mikeweil]

I think this will never be resolved.

If all record producers were the likes of Nessa or Horwich or Cuscuna, there would be no need to discuss this. But that's not the way the recording business is run.

If the owners of the respective rights would reissue the music in question at reasonable prices or just made available at all, again there would be no need to discuss this. But much of the music was never reissued by them. Remember Cuscuna had to close the West Coast Classics series because sales figures were too low? Of course the conditions he works under are different, but still ...

It's a very small market we are talking about, it probably should be run differently, perhaps the way Nessa and Horwich do it, and no other way. But as long as there's the internet with its blogs and labels jumping at the lack of reissues in many fields of jazz, it won't be that way. I think many of those label owners, Pujol in partcular, really care about the music, others obviously don't. If moral issues are to be applied, then to everybody in the chain from production to distributors (!) to the end buyer.

I for myself can live with burning in hell for a few hours for the CDs of doubtful provenance that I bought - I bought far more legal releases, and if they would have been available in every case where I really wanted the music, I wouldn't have touched them boots.

I really can't be angry at the European labels for jumping at the Fantasy catalogue now that so much was deleted after the label was sold. As long as there was the OJC series, they didn't have a chance, but now ... same for other labels. It's about profit - if there was any in sueing those labels for copyright violations, I bet it would happen. Since they do not, there's either no profit to be made or they simply do not care - now which alternative is the better one?

[Big Beat Steve]

I really can't be angry at the European labels for jumping at the Fantasy catalogue now that so much was deleted after the label was sold. As long as there was the OJC series, they didn't have a chance, but now ... same for other labels. It's about profit - if there was any in sueing those labels for copyright violations, I bet it would happen. Since they do not, there's either no profit to be made or they simply do not care - now which alternative is the better one?

And even if you look well beyond the Fantasy catalog, where do you often end up in the case of FS, for example? Does ANYBODY actually think that big bucks are to be made by reissuing the "Bob Graf sessions", the Bob Davis LP on the Zephyr (whazzatt??) label, the "Westchester Workshop", the Don Bagley LPs, etc.? If it really was only about making as many bucks (relatively speaking) as could be made even in this tiny niche market, then wouldn't there be lots of "name" artists out there who'd be the prime "targets" any time because they'd attract lots (relatively speaking again) of prospective buyers who'd even buy any previously unreleased or long OOP lo-fi CD of those name artists practising in their closets.

Realizing that there IS a shady area by some yardsticks (but not shadier than with any other PD reissue projects) I'd really, really hate to use the used and abused term of a "labor of love" to describe these reissues but I'd still say a fair amount of idealism has to go into resurrecting THAT kind of obscure music and not the more obvious names.

Edited November 14, 2011 by Big Beat Steve

[Kevin Bresnahan]

Now tell me, if you will, please - where are the U.S. enforcement bodies that will curtail importing these goods (CD) if they are so illegal there? Sleeping on the job? Too indifferent to care? See where the blame definitely lies too (or even primarily)?

I thought I made it clear in my other post but I'll state it more plainly - It costs 10's of thousands of dollars to bring a copyright infringement lawsuit against these labels and/or distributors. Most labels (or copyright holders of defunct labels) cannot justify spending $50,000 in legal fees to stop the sale of a CD that *might* generate a few thousand dollars in sales.

Years ago, I worked for a small electronics company that had some really cool technology that they patented and made into a product. It sold OK. Not enough to keep the company afloat (by itself) but nice extra income to help. Another company violated their patent. It was blatant. I was in the meeting with the lawyer where we were told that it would cost between $50,000-200,000 to take them to court and the likely outcome would be a percentage of their previous sales and a ban on future sales. He estimated that this lawsuit would take 2-4 years to settle. Our little company didn't have the money to fight it, so we let it slide.

This is most likely what is happening here. I know people in the industry and believe me, they know when their stuff is being stolen. They also know that the accountants and lawyers discuss most violations and choose which ones to go after. There's a reason most of the stuff the Andorran crew go after is small label stuff - no one's around to stop them.

BTW, did you ever wonder why Dusty Groove doesn't seem to sell any new Lone Hill/Fresh Sound PD stuff? They stopped right around the time that they started up their own reissue label. I sure that the companies they were obtaining licenses from had something to do with that.

I can also now happily tell you what the law is. Have a look here: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap10.html

To save you reading it, when you import recorded media which are subject to copyright you pay 3% on the transfer price, the money basically goes to the Treasury, and then interested parties can claim it back. That's the law and if you pay the 3% you are covered. Pujol says he imports legally (this means he pays the 3%). Does anyone have evidence that he doesn't? Or that others do?

I read this as saying that this is how royalty payments are made period. Nothing in this document states that all someone has to do to violate copyright is pay 3%. If this were true, some Andorran company (25 years for PD in Andorra) would come out with "The Complete Beatles" for $50 and pay the 3% (and make millions!).

Um, this page adds another dimension to that: http://www.harryfox.com/public/Import.jsp

But who says Pujol doesn't do this? On what evidence is Larry calling him a liar?

Who says that Pujol doesn't get "the express authorization and consent of the copyright owner of the musical compositions embodied on the phonorecords, even if the phonorecords were manufactured lawfully outside of the U.S"? Who says he does? I'm sure Laurie Pepper knows about Art's copyrights. She says he doesn't have permission. I've heard of more people saying he doesn't than does.

Edited January 13, 2012 by Kevin Bresnahan

[JSngry]

If there's no legal compulsion to sell PD material and it is indeed ok to freely giving it away/sharing it, then the real heroes are the people who do just that, the real gangstas are the ones who sell needle drops and CD burns, and the real junkies are the people who are dumb enough to think they're being done favors.

Some y'all seem like it's a moral triumph or something to finally being able to make money off of something that fell into your lap. FUCK that. That's not about losing control, that's about taking control.

So it seems like there really are those who feel sorry about not being able to take control (or to see control being taken by somebody they would feel comfortable with) on something that they've lost control of (because these items have gone PD elsewhere) so they now start acting like "if I cannot ensure control is being taken by those who I'd like to take control then I'll see to it that these things are distributed freely so nobody takes control."

The bottom line?

Sour grapes, that's all.

Now I'll call GIGA-bullshit on that.

Because it's not about any MORAL "triumph" at all. It's only about availability of marketable goods in a package that suits the buyers' expectations and pocketbooks. You pay what you are prepared to pay. If you are not prepared to pay - fine. But others decide differently and that's only THEIR VERY OWN decision and judgment, not yours. Because nobody forces them to pay. Just like some would even want to shell out double or triple the normal amount of money for Mosaics though fidelity or packaging cannot be possibly three or four times better than on other, more "mundane" reissues (PD or not). Tastes and expectations vary, and the legal situation being the way it is, there is room for everybody within that legal framework.

Sour grapes? Look Styve- I think the shit should be given away. Who "controls" that? It's PUBLIC DOMAIN. and the technology now exists to do just that - give it away. Distribute those basic music files in lossless format, anybody. Add value by bringing new original mastering, relevant essays, something that amounts to getting something for your money besides a cheap xeroxing of the music. Or is all this talk about "fairness" only apply to the musical tire dealers who want to make money sell retreads?

This shit lowers the quality of life for everybody.

You're acting like the highewst level of Public domain is to allow any bottom-feeded to sell stuff. It's this mentality that thought it was cool to fuck Judy Garland when she was 40. Sure she was a washed up mess of limite ability, but by god, she was JUDY GARLAND. A freakin' TROPHY for the vulgarian.

Read your own words: It's only about availability of marketable goods in a package that suits the buyers' expectations and pocketbooks. What part of universal availability at no cost is so offensive to you and fires up those "must possess" genes? The fetishism of "physical product"? I think so. So what kind of physical product? Sloppy seconds, that's what kind, if you're happy with needledrops and xeroxes of other people's work. If you're going to pay for something, pay for value ADDED, not valued removed. A little piece of plastic and some pisspoor photocopy of an old album cover with some little wankjob of "liner notes" is not value added. It's rat bait, pure and simple.

Here you go, "Big Beat" (which is what you'll be before this is all over). The new marketplace of inferior product at a price you can afford in a format that gives you a stiffie awaits. It's all yours!

Fucking vulgarians, they'll stick their stuff into any damn thing and be happy about it.

Edited November 14, 2011 by JSngry

[Big Beat Steve]

Now tell me, if you will, please - where are the U.S. enforcement bodies that will curtail importing these goods (CD) if they are so illegal there? Sleeping on the job? Too indifferent to care? See where the blame definitely lies too (or even primarily)?

I thought I made it clear in my other post but I'll state it more plainly - It costs 10's or thousands of dollars to bring a copyright infringement lawsuit against these labels and/or distributors. Most labels (or copyright holders of defunct labels) cannot justify spending $50,000 in legal fees to stop the sale of a CD that *might* generate a few thousand dollars in sales.

To make this clear again: I am not talking about lawsuits by the companies. THAT problem is known. The question of whether authorization to reissue P.D. material has been granted is an entirely different matter because the product as it is is totally legal in specific parts of the world. So contrary to the example you named where the (pirate-copy) product in question should not have existed in the first place, here it is a case of a product that is legally marketed in one part of the world but strictly speaking cannot be marketed in another (BTW, are you 100% sure that ALL Japanese reissuers of P.D. recordings come away that much cleaner in this question of the 50 vs 70 year P.D. cutoff date, especially with copying being the ultimate form of flattery by Asian "standards")?

Now if there are such copyright laws then it ought to be commonly known (to the authorities in charge) that the import of certain goods (in this case CDs in violation of U.S. copyright/P.D. laws) is against the law in the USA. Just like importing certain goods from the USA (certain medical goods in my example above) is against the law in certain European countries. Now why aren't U.S. importing laws being enforced by the AUTHORITIES that are supposed to do the enforcement? Just like corresponding laws are enforced over here (not 100% but enough to deter many). THAT is where you have to start asking questions. Because even if you cannot catch them all, one mega-big clampdown would no doubt go a long way to deter a lot of importers. Or is it that you'd rather not want to be tempted at all and would therefore prefer the product not to exist (even in those parts of the world where it is legal)?

[JSngry]

(BTW, are you 100% sure that ALL Japanese reissuers of P.D. recordings come away that much cleaner in this question of the 50 vs 70 year P.D. cutoff date, especially with copying being the ultimate form of flattery by Asian "standards")?

Japan has beautifuler women, tastier food, better manners, and higher audio standards than anything in the land of Proper, LoneHill or Fresh Sound. They get at least a 20 point headstart on Style Points alone.

My advice to Jordi Pulledhole - take some lessons from the Japanese. Get some prettier girls, some better food, learn some manners (at least learn how to tell lies better), and learn how to make your shit sound right.

Oh, but that's too much work, and really, there's no incentive when his market is make up to The Sloppy Secondeers.

Japan is lucky that way...

[Big Beat Steve]

I think the shit should be given away. Who "controls" that? It's PUBLIC DOMAIN. and the technology now exists to do just that - give it away. Distribute those basic music files in lossless format, anybody. Add value by bringing new original mastering, relevant essays, something that amounts to getting something for your money besides a cheap xeroxing of the music.

You're acting like the highewst level of Public domain is to allow any bottom-feeded to sell stuff.

Read your own words: It's only about availability of marketable goods in a package that suits the buyers' expectations and pocketbooks. What part of universal availability at no cost is so offensive to you and fires up those "must possess" genes? The fetishism of "physical product"? I think so. So what kind of physical product?

Who's keeping you from promoting free downloads and using them till you drop? Certainly not me. I neither find downloads offensive not would I keep anybody from using them if they prefer so and would not even mind them in specific cases myself either. That's a decision for each and everybody to make - based strictly on where one finds added value in the product and how one would value that added value in terms of cost (or free availability). Yardsticks and preferences on that vary and there is no universally applicable rule of what is supposed to be worth how much to whom, least of all yours.

Of course, if we look closer at your claim that P.D. stuff ought to be GIVEN away and not be used to make money with, then obviously this leads us to those "customers" who only want the bare-bones music and do not value artwok, booklets, liner notes, discog info or whatever and therefore go for free downloads. Would all of these "bare-bones" listeners differentiate by reissue label of the physical product (not all of them have axes to grind with specific reissue labels, you know Most downloaders are just listeners )? The material in question being in the P.D., if you search hard enough I'd almost guess download availability would even include entire MOSAIC sets too, right, then? (Remember, there are indeed some who really do not go for liner notes etc. and just want to listen to the music) But where would THAT end?? If you want to condone that - O.K., so be it ... but that's for you to decide. Because - remember: Yer pays what yer are prepared to pay for (or ain't prepared). But once free downloads of P.D. material (ANY P.D. material) are advocated there will be no further distinctions of what "ought" to be downloadable (because one man's "value added meat" is another man's "irrelevant, superfluous poison").

Edited November 14, 2011 by Big Beat Steve

[AllenLowe]

you know, we could probably resolve all this if Larry didn't spend so much time watching football games - I sure hope he has a legal cable hookup.

[JSngry]

Big BS - your fetishism of objects has revealed itself to be damn near absolute, quality be damned just give you something you can hold in your hands, OBJECTS, no matter how piss-poorly and/or half-ass done they are.

Enjoy your Sloppy Seconds with Judy. The supply will be endless believe me, as will the damn fools who can't tell the difference between PD done right & PD done for and by cheap thrill-seekers.

Evolution be damned, some folks just can't wait to head back to the mud!

you know, we could probably resolve all this if Larry didn't spend so much time watching football games - I sure hope he has a legal cable hookup.

I just hope he's not a Patriots fan!

Edited November 14, 2011 by JSngry