 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm a rube, but I thought the problem of recording without a pre-negotiated license is that you then have to pay royalties at the "mechanical" rate, which is very high.
And the other thing is, you can only do that if the original artist has had their recording out there first for a required period of time, during which cover versions require express permission.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jan 6, 2017 - 2:21 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
mortenbond
(Member)
|
I'm a rube, but I thought the problem of recording without a pre-negotiated license is that you then have to pay royalties at the "mechanical" rate, which is very high.
And the other thing is, you can only do that if the original artist has had their recording out there first for a required period of time, during which cover versions require express permission.
All UK releases pay the normal MCPS Mechanical rate...which is not too high...and is pro-rata based on number of tracks and amount of music...but in America I believe Harry Fox, the collecting agency there, still are living in the past and base their mechanical fees on LPs of 14 tracks and about 40 minutes of music...once you go over that in both number of tracks and running time then the USA mechanicals get rather high....so sometimes labels "negotiate" a rate with the publishers....or has this changed? I am sure MORTENBOND can confirm this .... ?
James, this is what is quoted on the Harr Fox site: "The statutory mechanical royalty rate for physical formats (CDs, cassettes, LPs) and permanent digital downloads is:
9.10¢ per copy for songs 5 minutes or less, or
1.75¢ per minute or fraction thereof, per copy for songs over 5 minutes.
So, I think they have moved into this century.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jan 6, 2017 - 2:32 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
mortenbond
(Member)
|
JamesFitz wrote: The trouble for non-lawyers this is such a "grey area" and the publishers think in USA and UK that they have more control than they actually have. For example the publishers of Cole Porter, Gershwin, Rodger and Hammerstein and Leonard Bernstein, Stephen Sondheim, ALL INSIST that any new recording of any songs by these composers can only be done if the arrangement and orchestration is approved in advance by them! And if not approved, then the singer must "hire" the "original arrangement" direct from them and not alter anything incl the key. So in theory "Summertime" can only be sung in one key .... any new recording of any song from West Side Story MUST use the show orchestration...one is not even allowed to use the Film orchestration .... And any Rodgers and Hammerstein song recorded has to be "approved" by Boosey and Hawkes! And, Ennio Morricone and his publishers seem to believe that Ennio is the only person who should ever record his music.
Legally it all seems clear ... but in practice not quite so easy. I am currently being threatened with legal action by a production company who have objected to my new recording of a score...even though I have not actually recorded any "new" cues, just existing cues, on that particular disc.....
It is a well known tactic to threaten legal action - knowing that most non-lawyers would be scared away. I am not proud to say I use this tactic myself every day - even though I know my legal ground is shakey. Some people, like you . know that the legal point is invalid, but would not risk going ahead should legal action be taken. Threats of legal action are only followed up when there is certainty of winning. If not they will only spend money on legal fees and even risk paying the oppositions fees as well. That is very seldom risked - only in cases where there is substantial sums to be won. That is hardly the case with the Moonraker recording. Some companies therefore spend ****you-money in order to scare. But that will never happen in a case involving so little gain for them as here. I think a Moonraker recording should be safe.
As to your examples with Ennio, Rodgers et al. That is perfect examples of copyright protection gone mad - and they all know it. But I would do the same if I wanted to control an asset on behalf of a client. Even though I knew it was bullshit. It is even a matter of freedom of speech and the Ennio/Rodgers/Gerschwin view is obviously in violation of such freedoms. I say, go ahead and record!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jan 6, 2017 - 3:00 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
JamesFitz
(Member)
|
JamesFitz wrote: The trouble for non-lawyers this is such a "grey area" and the publishers think in USA and UK that they have more control than they actually have. For example the publishers of Cole Porter, Gershwin, Rodger and Hammerstein and Leonard Bernstein, Stephen Sondheim, ALL INSIST that any new recording of any songs by these composers can only be done if the arrangement and orchestration is approved in advance by them! And if not approved, then the singer must "hire" the "original arrangement" direct from them and not alter anything incl the key. So in theory "Summertime" can only be sung in one key .... any new recording of any song from West Side Story MUST use the show orchestration...one is not even allowed to use the Film orchestration .... And any Rodgers and Hammerstein song recorded has to be "approved" by Boosey and Hawkes! And, Ennio Morricone and his publishers seem to believe that Ennio is the only person who should ever record his music.
Legally it all seems clear ... but in practice not quite so easy. I am currently being threatened with legal action by a production company who have objected to my new recording of a score...even though I have not actually recorded any "new" cues, just existing cues, on that particular disc.....
It is a well known tactic to threaten legal action - knowing that most non-lawyers would be scared away. I am not proud to say I use this tactic myself every day - even though I know my legal ground is shakey. Some people, like you . know that the legal point is invalid, but would not risk going ahead should legal action be taken. Threats of legal action are only followed up when there is certainty of winning. If not they will only spend money on legal fees and even risk paying the oppositions fees as well. That is very seldom risked - only in cases where there is substantial sums to be won. That is hardly the case with the Moonraker recording. Some companies therefore spend ****you-money in order to scare. But that will never happen in a case involving so little gain for them as here. I think a Moonraker recording should be safe.
As to your examples with Ennio, Rodgers et al. That is perfect examples of copyright protection gone mad - and they all know it. But I would do the same if I wanted to control an asset on behalf of a client. Even though I knew it was bullshit. It is even a matter of freedom of speech and the Ennio/Rodgers/Gerschwin view is obviously in violation of such freedoms. I say, go ahead and record!
that's exactly what my legal team in UK say ...... record and be damned ! But I am still going through the "niceties" with EON and EMI so that at least armed with permission letters as it was the American lawyers trying to create shit when MOONRAKER was first brought to their attention...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe I know where the "Lost Tapes" are at.
Oyster Bay
Tightly Control'd by Those Devious Barry's lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
I believe I know where the "Lost Tapes" are at.
Oyster Bay
Tightly Control'd by Those Devious Barry's lol
There probably is a copy there, yes. Anecdotally, it is said Barry kept recordings of all his scores after 1975. Including Raise The Titanic.
But (a) that' anecdotal and (b) if they are there you've got no chance that they'll be availed to any of the soundtrack labels.
They may as well be lost.
Cheers]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There probably is a copy there, yes. Anecdotally, it is said Barry kept recordings of all his scores after 1975. Including Raise The Titanic.
But (a) that' anecdotal and (b) if they are there you've got no chance that they'll be availed to any of the soundtrack labels.
They may as well be lost.
The GNP release of STAR TREK "The Cage" and "Where No Man..." was mastered from Alexander Courage's personal tapes. And TNG "The Best of Both Worlds" got a CD release based on Ron Jones' private tapes. Both were later re-mastered from studio tapes.
Another case would be the Joe Harnell CDs, including THE BIONIC WOMAN, which were made from his own tape copies. That makes me wonder if Oliver Nelson's estate has tapes from THE SIX MILLION DOLLAR MAN.
So it would be pretty nice if the Barry estate were amenable to releasing RAISE THE TITANIC and MOONRAKER. But for sound quality, Barry's take-home dubs would pale before the re-recordings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are many cases where the composer's personal tapes came into play (several Elmer Bernstein releases, for example). I don't think the problem is whether or not they could be used, but whether or not they would be made available in the first place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So tapes are either lost or very hard to access. Does this not make another attempt at a Kickstarter relevant? Can it be done again? Any update with Bond people on Moonraker?
They are not lost.
Unless the film's director Lewis Gilbert (who, according to Barry in Jon Burlingame's book "The Music Of James Bond" was accused by Barry by lowering the volume of the music in the film) had them buried under the Eiffel Tower.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd be up for it as I've said many times, but I'd be looking for an improvement on those original Bond Back In Action recordings. Forgive me for saying so, but I didn't think they were very good. But that was back in the early days and they have gotten so much better since.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
