mark ellis Posted December 19, 2004 Posted December 19, 2004 then stop bleating mr.self righteous and speak with goldmine! oh and by the way...all v.a.t and tax properly accounted for at all your gigs over the past 20 years? You have Tim Brown's number...call him. The persons responsible for creating the music we love shouldn't be taken advantage of, especially when the profiteers later stand beside them on the stages of various venues up and down the country & milk applause for giving us the opportunity to see and hear OUR HEROES in the flesh. Having no business knowledge I'll stand to be corrected on this, but if the artists don't receive their cut who does? The quality of the finished article is another factor, plus the legal and contractual costs saved aren't reflected in the price of the end product when unlicensed material is used. Can only speak for myself but taking into account what the Thatcher government, (Blair's not much better) did to many people living close to where I do, fair play to anyone who can put one over on them. If anyone actually has at all (smokescreen?), the point of the original post was about not paying artists royalties they are entitled to. Mark.
mark ellis Posted December 19, 2004 Posted December 19, 2004 Come on then, Mark - out with it Cyberspace never was my thing, long live stamps, envelopes, basildon bond &, ink plus the royal mail.
Mark Bicknell Posted December 19, 2004 Posted December 19, 2004 Is the season to be merry, happy christmas. Regards - Mark Bicknell
stomper45 Posted December 20, 2004 Posted December 20, 2004 I've got enough shit going on in my own life to worry about a dead person link you've made an average of 20 posts per day since you joined, maybe some time management needed in your life. (like most of us) don't get so worked up pete its a soul site, no gestapo involved, and a great place to put the record straight (sorry bout pun) yours in soul danny D
Pete S Posted December 20, 2004 Posted December 20, 2004 you've made an average of 20 posts per day since you joined, maybe some time management needed in your life. (like most of us) don't get so worked up pete its a soul site, no gestapo involved, and a great place to put the record straight (sorry bout pun) yours in soul danny D link 20 posts a day - it's cos I work on the computer about 12 hours a day...
Guest Posted December 20, 2004 Posted December 20, 2004 then stop bleating mr.self righteous and speak with goldmine! oh and by the way...all v.a.t and tax properly accounted for at all your gigs over the past 20 years? You have Tim Brown's number...call him. link IMO I would have thought that someone who licences the product would be more than likely to make full returns of VAT etc. Bit of a cheap shot really. and something that can be levelled at ANY promoter, record dealer etc. Is that the way we're going to go now. Ady can quite rightly be pissed off on two points, 1. The morality, and 2, he's not on a level playing field when it comes to business, if what he says is true, as his costs are necessarily greater. With regard to Pete Smiths comments, you may not like what he says, but at least he's open with his views and doen't go down the holier than though route. It should also be apparent that he's not afraid to name names when making a point. Pity others cannot always be so open. Thin skins and ego's yet again my friends. But this is Northern Soul !
timthemod Posted December 22, 2004 Posted December 22, 2004 I've only just come across this post but feel I'm qualified to reply to it, working in the music copyright environment. I completely agree and understand Ady's point's. We've spoken about it on a number of occasions. The main problem is that although the record industry is a multi million pound industry, goldmine is only a very small label. The major part of copyright theft concerns the bootlegging of major label Cd's and DVD's, and it' s the major copiers that the industry targets.
Mike Posted December 22, 2004 Posted December 22, 2004 I've only just come across this post but feel I'm qualified to reply to it, working in the music copyright environment. I completely agree and understand Ady's point's. We've spoken about it on a number of occasions. The main problem is that although the record industry is a multi million pound industry, goldmine is only a very small label. The major part of copyright theft concerns the bootlegging of major label Cd's and DVD's, and it' s the major copiers that the industry targets. link two things first ask all to keep this thread to the original topic posted, that is about legitimate companies following the correct licencing procedure if want to talk about boot cds, diy cds, tapes, record selling, soul police, moralities, who did what and when .... and all the rest that was dragged up, then start up a new topic! secondly tim if qualified, could you knock up a quick brief info thing on how the copyright works when licencing tracks, as sure some may be interested just for info last of all, yeah be easy to shut this thread but thinking is if cant discuss stuff like this then brings into question whole forum
Guest Billy Freemantle Posted December 22, 2004 Posted December 22, 2004 (edited) two things first ask all to keep this thread to the original topic posted, that is about legitimate companies following the correct licencing procedure if want to talk about boot cds, diy cds, tapes, record selling, soul police, moralities, who did what and when .... and all the rest that was dragged up, then start up a new topic! secondly tim if qualified, could you knock up a quick brief info thing on how the copyright works when licencing tracks, as sure some may be interested just for info last of all, yeah be easy to shut this thread but thinking is if cant discuss stuff like this then brings into question whole forum link It's very difficult to avoid morality and probably most of the other issues that naturally cropped up in response to the original post. They are part and parcel of the whole issue. Some of the arguments aimed at justifying illegitimacy and the ripping off of artists are laughable. They are as absurd as arguments that go: "What... I killed someone? Haven't you ever killed a (fly, bee, frog) ? You have, haven't you! Gotcha.! " Yeah right. As I said earlier, the way for soul fans to deal with this despicable behaviour is to boycott these CDs. This is just like a collector transferring his discs to CD, printing up a label and flogging the CD! Edited December 22, 2004 by Billy Freemantle
timthemod Posted December 22, 2004 Posted December 22, 2004 It's my last day at work today, so what I'll do is start a new thread in January with the correct inform for how the copyright laws work. Probably just as well as I'll have to talk to some of my colleagues to get the full picture.
Little-stevie Posted December 22, 2004 Posted December 22, 2004 It's my last day at work today, so what I'll do is start a new thread in January with the correct inform for how the copyright laws work. Probably just as well as I'll have to talk to some of my colleagues to get the full picture. link I know Mike that some think it opens a can of worms but a lot of people on here are interested in this topic..I and others would like to know that if we are paying top dollar for a cd then we would like to think that some of the money will find its way to the writer/artist/etc...I would like to know that i and others are not being shafted...The soundtrack that i sell with soul function was done the right way and Kent follow guidelines...Its nice to think that some cash is going into the pockets of the artists that gave us what we have....Not all in the pocket of some scab that dont give a hoot....
Little-stevie Posted December 22, 2004 Posted December 22, 2004 Can't understand that mate...Email someone else and ask them to look,see if they have the same problem..Plenty people been looking today from all over the world...Are you on some kind of blacklist or register(joke)... steve
Pete S Posted December 22, 2004 Posted December 22, 2004 This is just like a collector transferring his discs to CD, printing up a label and flogging the CD! link What's up with that???
Pete S Posted December 22, 2004 Posted December 22, 2004 (edited) I know Mike that some think it opens a can of worms but a lot of people on here are interested in this topic..I and others would like to know that if we are paying top dollar for a cd then we would like to think that some of the money will find its way to the writer/artist/etc...I would like to know that i and others are not being shafted... link Okay, we are going round in circles here. You are in a minority when you say you want to know where the money is going when you buy a CD. If I go in HMV and buy a CD, I hand over my money and that is it - I have done my part, I've paid for the CD. What happens after that is none of my concern. OK so this morning I bought a 3cd best of hip hop thing for my girlfriend, I don't care if Busta Rhymes or NWA get a penny from what I just bought, why should I?? It's the record companies' job to get them the royalties, not mine. The same applies if I buy a Kent cd or a Goldmine cd - they have my money, give me my cd, end of story. If you want to follow the trail of where the money goes then thats great, but you are in a minority and this must surely be the only music scene in the world where this kind of thing goes on, fans being sniped at for not trying to find out if the artist is getting royalties for 40 year old tunes - and it appears, expected to find out. Yeah right. Edited December 22, 2004 by Pete-S
Pete S Posted December 22, 2004 Posted December 22, 2004 There is one more thing I have to say, to do with royalties, and thats to consider the plight of the reggae singer from the 60's (and 70's), they would be paid a flat fee for a session and that was it - so the producer then owned the rights to the record and could license it to who he wanted, as many times as he liked, and the artist would still only have his £10 studio fee. Some of these records have gone on to sell a million copies all over the world. At least the soul artists that you make a case for did have a chance of a royalty in the first place when their single was released, the Jamaican artists got nothing. I can 100% see the case for righting the wrongs in this instance.
Mike Posted December 22, 2004 Posted December 22, 2004 ever get the feeling... reckon only way this thread could ever move on is if do it way suggested did ask that just try and keep to the topic ask all to keep this thread to the original topic posted, that is about legitimate companies following the correct licencing procedure cause as shown, we just end up going down the same old road again which to me has no ending, and will only lead to bad feeling and such At moment dont think anyone has posted just what is the requirement, our newly found resident expert says he come back in Jan with a definite 100% answer, so untill that or get one elsewhere, suggest that put it all on hold. So again ask all and do mean all to avoid taking this thread off all over the place
Pete S Posted December 22, 2004 Posted December 22, 2004 Has it gone off topic??? You ought to close it anyway.
Mike Posted December 22, 2004 Posted December 22, 2004 ok as pointless this going on until get the definite score , stuck thread on hold Once get full score from tim or elsewhere will reopen Any concerns pm us ta mike
Recommended Posts