copyrights

Silkcitycd@aol.com Silkcitycd@aol.com
Sun Jan 23 18:11:56 EST 2000


In a message dated 1/23/00 2:49:29 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
cookieholley@mcsi.net writes:

<< We should organize and vehemently fight this bullshit amendment and make
 them repeal it!! >>

As a label owner, I think I need to explain this... This has NOTHING to do
with Publishing and NOTHING to do with the rights to songs.. Those rights are
covered by other legislation and are a different matter..

This in effect reinforces that the product (the recording itself) belongs to
the company that paid for it's production.  The artist is still entitled to a
performance royalty (as he/she negotiates prior to the recording and it's
release) for the duration of the term of agreement.

The issue at hand with this legislation is that the record company has the
right in perpetuity to exploit the product for current and future revenue
(including unlimited repressings, reissues, license to other compilations or
labels, or selling the recording for TV or Radio commercials)...

I know I will get flamed by the "anti-business" contingent on this list for
stating that a company that invests in an artist has a right to protect and
reclaim it's investment and (heaven forbid) maybe even make a small profit
(which almost none of us do...)  Any programmers out there ever sell any code
outright and regain control of their product from Borland, Microsoft, or
anyone else you made the initial sale to...?  Sometimes our industry (Music
Recording) has legislation that far exceeds the benefits of other
industries...

Andy



More information about the Blues-l mailing list