Does anyone know if an LP released in the UK during the 1970's and no longer available for sale from the record company could be legally digitised and shared on a not-for-profit basis?
I understand that out-of-print books no longer available from the publisher can be legally copied for personal, educational or research use (at least in Australia) and I'm hoping that sound recordings might be treated the same under copyright law. The Roots Music Listening Room website in the US has a 'public domain disclaimer' http://www.juneberry78s.com/sounds/pdmp3sx.html
It would be good to share some old recordings of great irish players, if this could be done completely legally.
I'd think it best to get written permission from all involved in the original recording or you could have a mess on your hands. If it was non profit, they could make you stop if they felt like it. Over here the copyright would still be owned by the original creators, plus 50 years after their death by their heirs.
It's just polite to ask too. There should be ways of finding at least some of the parties. They may even help you on the project. I know I'd be furious to find one of the books I had written in the 80s up at some website, with my artwork and all. If I sold out and no longer wished to get it back in print, since my books are instructional, I may say...great..go for it, but if I just found something on a site while browsing, I for sure would make them pull it, even if they made no profit on it. It's just not their call.
It's a sore spot for me, due to many copyright infringements over my artwork for 28 years. My stuff is just real good background material and has gotten much unauthorized use on book jackets, ads, brochures, package design etc. and I fought it every time, and won.... so maybe I am too sensitve on this issue on one hand, but you should be aware that artists/musicians can and do fight this and generally win, even if they don't get attorneys.
Just ask... I'd bet they may be flattered. I have had cases where non profits, museums etc. wanted my art for brochures, ads whatever, and could not pay the usual fee, or only a fraction of it, and I'd say, sure go ahead, just give a credit line. However, unauthorized use.... it boils many a musician and artists' blood.
Just my two cents, better to stay safe and not get in touble. People have a way of finding out in time. I don't know about Australia, but if any of my books go O/P I still own all rights, and they are even noted in my will to go to an heir, as well as all my artwork copyrights, for 50 years after my death.
If you can't buy these recordings legally, then just go for it. If the recording is not important enough for the record company to rerelease on CD, then nobody is losing any royalties that they would otherwise have.
It is not just about royalties as Craymcla suggests. This is where most people always get it wrong. They think that as long as they don't make money off it, or as long as the owner is not using it for making money, then it is OK to copy it.
This is wrong. That is not how it works. If you get sued, you WILL lose.
Imagine if I took your car because you're not using it at the moment. Or I move into your house because you are currently living in another one. You may argue that it is not the same thing, but that is why people keep getting it wrong - it is exactly the same thing.
Would you go to your neighbour and ask him whether you could borrow his spade, or would you jump over the fence and help yourself to his tools from his garden shed without his permission? Would you really be surprised if he calls the police when you do, even though he probably would have been quite happy to lend it to you if only you had asked?
It is not yours, it does not belong to you. If you have purchased a record or CD, you have only purchased the right and means to listen to it, not to use it in any other way.
Dammit, now you've ruined my day. The more I think about it the angrier I get. It is exactly that kind of attitude that screws everybody over. You're the kind of person who would tresspass on private property in spite of all the sign asking you not to. You justify it it to yourself with "Oh, as long as I don't do this or that, the rules don't apply to me" or "He wasn't using it anyway" or "I need it more that he does".
Laws are always made after the fact. Someone does something that hurts someone else, so a law is made to prevent that from happening again. Copyright laws are no different. They exist to protect the world against people like you.
I think a lot depends on what you mean by "shared on a not-for-profit basis." If it means just handing them out to your friends I doubt anyone will object. If it's confined to a specialized club or some such limited audience, I doubt anyone would raise a fuss either. If you make them available to the public at large is where you might get in trouble.
Doing your homework can work out to the benfit of all. There have been folks who with the blessings of Topic, as an example, have rereleased some valuable recordings, for one example, a Globestyle CD or Topic recordings:
As others have said, and I have had to contend with in work for a university, the copyright is help by all parties concerned, but often, if you contact the original recording company, not always easy, or the big conglomerate that bought out their rights, EMI as and example, you can find them cooperative. What can happen after the fact is definitely not worth the risk... I am in agreement with all those previous, minus the crayfish.
If you want some constructive help with this, let us know exactly what recordings you are considering. Some of us have experience and connections or possess knowledge that might help lessen the hassle... So, give us the specifics and let's see if there's hope ~ well, there's always hope, but we may be able to help it find substance...
Yes, it's one of those less frequent situations where getting forgiveness afterwards is NOT easier than getting permission beforehand.
Having said, that there has been a recent announcement in the UK that it will be OK to copy one's own cd tracks onto mp3 for one's own personal use - something which hitherto has been illegal in the UK because of old legislation framed in the days when cd, mp3 etc hadn't even been thought of. For once, the authorities are being reasonable in recognising that technology and common usage has overtaken the old law.
I still hold my ground, but I must say...objectively, that maybe there shouldn't be anger at Craymcla... over the decades, I have been infringed by some who truly were unaware of the laws. I never came on heavy in the beginning, I literally have a form letter on the computer, and just change the name and the description of my artwork, and even if I don't catch it, ultimately someone in my line of work will, and I try to at least act like I think they didn't realize how the law works. If they buy a piece of my artwork, it doesn't mean they also have the reproduction rights....money involved or no money. Usually money was involved, and someone is making it on my artwork, but still, there were some who didn't realize that. I would ask them to pay my usual fee, and if I didn't hear from them in two weeks I would take action with legal fees and possible damages included, and I would win because I could prove it was mine (I stamp all my work not only copyright, but also a warning notice about reproduction, and to contact me etc.....amazing how many people "never saw it", LOL) and has a distinct look etc.
I got paid immediately in almost every case. Only one where I had to use a lawyer, it took over a year, but I won. They were just obnoxious, saying "We're in Florida, come get us". I am NJ, and they knew hiring a FL copyright atty. was really expensive. I did it another way, but ultimately cornered them.
In the case of copying a CD or LP or some info in a book for a few friends, technically not legal, but everyone does it, the recording companies KNOW everyone does it and no one is going to come after someone who copied a great CD for a few friends, it's laughable. I know record industry people, have worked in the industry, I know my own CD is shared and copied, I've even told people to go ahead and copy it for a friend who couldn't afford it etc. That's different. We're talking about websites, downloads, making things available for masses. For this you need permission.
There have been times people came to me and said, I LOVE your art, I want to use it for a backdrop for my website, I can't afford to pay, but thought I'd ask. If it were a major company, like American Express (who I have done paid work for) I'd say...Oh come on....but a freelance artist for example, or a historical society etc. Sure....just give me a prominent credit line with contact info. They do, and I have gotten other work from being on their site.
The thing is, it is not you decision to make. Just because something is 'retired' doesn't mean it is not owned by someone. Copyright infringement is taken VERY seriously. I know people who have collected MAJOR damages over unauthorized use. You WILL lose if someone catches wind of it and decides to act. There are many who would not be so easygoing and say....just stop. They will turn your hair grey, make you lose sleep and lots of money if they want to, and they have the right to.
So I am not bashing you or mad at you, I think you have good intentions, but you're in shark infested waters with this one. Just ask is all, I'd bet they might be flattered and say go ahead...just get it in WRITING!!
Iris is 100% right. Just because something is out of print doesn't mean that the copyright has expired.
Copyright used to last for 35 years and then could be renewed by the author/artist for another 35, after which the work lapsed into the public domain and could be used by anyone (hence all those cheap reprints of Dickens, Jane Austin etc.)
Under current international copyright law, it lasts for the life of the artist plus 50 years. This means that some of Irving Berlin's later songs will still be under copyright well into this century, even though he started writing in the late 1800's (a bonus of a long life in music!).
Copyright law does allow very limited (let me repeat that, VERY LIMITED) copying for personal and educational use, reviews etc. under the concept of "fair use." This is the clause that lets you make a copy of a cd or record you own to play in your car, photocopy an article out of an academic journal in a library so that you can study it in greater depth, or sing a Beatles song in the privacy of your home, etc. However, "fair use" does not generally allow for ANY distribution except in classrooms -- and even that's a gray area.
Once you start copying for public distribution (or performing in public for that matter), it doesn't matter what the financial arrangements are; you are infringing on the author's copyright (and potentially their livilhood) and permissions and rights come into play. Non-profit organizations/publishers owe royalties just like for-profit ones. The system of permissions and payments varies from medium to medium (performance vs publication vs recording etc.), and different aspects of a work are often copyrighted seperately (eg display vs reproduction rights for visual art) which is why copyright law is a field unto its own. But the principal is the consistent; works under copyright are the intellectual property of the creator, and that person is entitled to control the terms under which it is used.
That said, Iris is correct in saying that it's worth asking. Under current US tax laws publishers pay taxes on items in stock, so unless something is a perennial best seller they don't want to hang onto large back inventories. Sell out quickly and move onto the next hot item is the standard business model. If they feel that the market is too limited to justify their reprinting an old recording, they may be quite happy to pass the rights on to you. Or you might be able to help them work out a deal with an existing publisher of out-of-print recordings like the Smithsonian/Folkways project.
Good info Kate. No one is using my artwork esp. for profit without a big fight.
I have heard loads, of "But I didn't know it was yours" over the years. True enough, a case where it was on a bookcover, the publisher did not know. The outside designer they hired, BTW at more than my fee would have been, did buy my work from an art store and did a paste up board of the cover to be shot. She glued some stupid clip art on it and some lettering.
Still...too darn bad. I was sympathetic with Bantam Books' art director, she absolutley truly didn't know that the art work was not the outside designer's. Even though technically the goof was not their fault, they were still liable, and someone had to pay me, and they did. I guarantee you they never used that designer again, she also may have been badmouthed enough in the industry that other publishers kept away from her. I doubt they collected from her, but maybe they did deal with her after, I don't know. They recognized a fight on their hands, and you know what happened.....they were in no way angry with me, and in fact commissioned me to do the remaining books in that series.
If you did reissues these on CD for example and sold them or even distributed them free you'd have a real mess when found out, and for sure you would be. In a way I'd be angrier if someone was passing out my stuff for FREE.... it proves there IS in fact interest out there and I or the musicians COULD have revived it and sold it. In a way it would be proof they could have sold it...and they may well sue you for what the going rate is now for each one downloaded or whatever means, plus damages, plus legal fees.
They could make a real case for damages in that they could say you made them look like inept people who couldn't push their own stuff, even if they are making it up, it is a valid point. I know someone in my field of work whose design was bought at a store as a "second". It had a minor blotch on it, truly only recognizable by someone in my very tiny weird field of work, which is Paper Marbling. The design was printed as a background in a Bloomingdale's catalog. She made a case that there was not only unauthorized use, but they used the little blotch, tiny inperfection, which she would never have allowed into print, thereby making her look like a bad artist, and possibly having people not hire her in the future for imperfect work. This mistake was barely noticeable to the point where I had to look hard for it and I am in the field.
She collected $20,000. No kidding. Beware!!
What if the musicians didn't like your recording or remastering or simply how it sounded as a download to an old computer with crappy little speakers....the fact that it could potentially sound tinny and awful....and people would say, ugh, lousy recording....that's grounds for bigtime damages.
The copyright laws are very very very pro artist/musician/writer. I have even collected on pieces of art where a store decided, after they bought them for store stock, to cut them in halves, to sell people a smaller and cheaper piece if they didn't need the whole thing. My stamp is just on one back corner. Guess what, doesn't matter. I did have to prove it was mine, which was easy enough, I have my style. The unsuspecting person was still liable. They should have gone to the store for contact info, that was their responsibility. In these cases the person was making money off them, so I deserved my one time use fee for sure.
Great to hear from people clarifying the position on intellectual property rights.
I'm interested because I've done a couple of videos on YouTube (http://youtube.com) and when you upload those you agree that all the contents are totally your own. In the case of my band's performance and our video recordings, they are all our own property or have been done with permission. But it's amazing how many people have uploaded (say) recordings of TV broadcasts, since almost certainly, the TV company only has the rights to broadcast, not the rights to publish in the sense of making multiple copies for distribution and onward use. I guess YouTube's disclaimer means that lawyers will come after the people who post videos, not the site itself.
I'd say beware, and never copy anything for any sort of public release, unless you're absolutely certain you've totally created it yourself (and that includes the rights of the technical crew, or adapted it from something you know, for sure, is public domain.
PS I think it's now 70 years after the composer's death, isn't it? Didn't that change in the mid-1990s? I'm sure there were even some cases where things which had been out of copyright, came back in.
I have come across tracks from our recordings being used as things like theme music for an Irish folk music show, or background music for someone's website, and I have no problem with that and would never consider taking any action. If I heard something we did used in a TV ad or something like that I would be telling a different story. I think the trouble starts when there's considerable profit being made by persons other than the artist. In the case sited in this thread there's no money to be made, so I doubt anyone would be seeking compensation. But if the material is going to be offered to the general public it would be best to at least attempt to contact the artists or their representatives first. If that fails, I can't imagine any lawsuits resulting from something that no money was made on. The most that would happen is that you would be asked to cease and desist distribution. Now I'm no a lawer, and lawers can be paranoid about this sort of thing and tell you quite a different story. This is just my hunch about the issue raised in the first post.
It's not ethical either.
I don't know if there was an earlier instance of breach of the law of copyright, but there was a famous one in Ireland in the 6th century. The High King's ruling: Do gach bo a boin, 's do gach leabhar a choip (To every cow her calf and to every book its copy) led to a war with great slaughter (Cul Dreimhne) and Colmcille's banishment to Iona.
Mairtin
If there is no money involved, it would generally be a cease and desist, unless the artist got real mad and could make some case for damages. Collecting might be hard if there is no money.
I know another person in my field who collected mighty damages because her artwork was used without permission as a background for one the the Letters To Penthouse books. She claimed it made it seem like she was condoning the content of the book. Considering the five figures she got, I kind of wish they had used mine instead, LOL!
I once made a company trash a whole run of brochures with my work as a background. I had just licensed the same design to someone else's company, they happened upon this one and gave me hell, because they thought they were getting a unique look. I had no idea, and tried to tell them...they finally listened. Once I got the other place to trash the brochure that was the end of it.
Why not just check with the company or artist? Shouldn't be so hard to find them in this day and age of online everything.
Thanks everyone for clarifying the issues. My rediscovery of some old 'Le Cheile' LPs released in 1979 by Inchecronin in the UK prompted the original query. I'd just like to give more people the opportunity to hear their playing if possible. I guess I should try contacting Inchecronin to find out the copyright owners and ask for their permission. Does anyone have Inchecronin's contact details?
Maybe in a future world TheSession will have links to [copyright cleared] recordings of tunes, including the variants that we currently see in abc in the comments. Abc is a handy notation tool but we're really not using the multimedia capabilities of the web yet. Actually listening to a recorded tune would give a whole new dimension to TheSession experience (midi is a pretty poor substitute).
Shouldn't be so hard to achieve in this day and age of online everything. [blatant plagiarisation with just a keystroke or two...]
I think you'll find "Online everything" is a copyright of the Tamagochi-Sony-Coca-Cola-Starbucks corporation. A team of lawyers is being fed raw meat as we speak....
I fully agree with Iris. At the same time I have to clarify why this issue got me so angry. I would normally NOT get upset, because I know that people don't always know, and that it is sometimes difficult to know what belongs to whom. But it was the disrespectful "if it's not important enough for them" comment that got me angry. Who are you to decide what is or isn't important to me? It is not your call.
Someone could be putting many years of blood sweat and tears into a project that relies on specific works of art, music, writing or whatever. They may have gone to great lengths and expense to obtain the rights to use this work. To the rest of the world it might look like it is not being used, but you can destroy that person's project by carelessly using the material.
If that brochure company had contacted Iris before the time, she would have said "Sorry, I already promised that piece to someone else, how about this one instead?" It would have saved everybody a lot of heartache, time and money.
I have to emphasise again: it is not about money. This keeps coming up, people keep saying "But I'm not making money out of it". That does not matter. It is not about money. The brochure company who used the art work legally had paid money for a unique look. The company who used it illegally destroyed that uniqueness, whether they were making money out of it or not. Iris could have lost a valuable client through this, but luckily she was able to convince them that it wasn't her fault. Just because you are not making money from it, does not mean you are not costing the copyright owners money.
Oh boy Shrog...what happened was awful, they called threatening to sue ME! I had to prove I didn't sell it to the other people, who were also being obnoxious and uncooperative. When I license a design, it is usually for a specific amount of time and out of respect to them I will not use that pattern in that color scheme and license it to someone else for say a year...I knock it out of use for the specified time, for reproduction purposes anyway. I can still create that paper and sell it to bookbinders or framers or others as original sheets. We're just talking reproduction rights here.
I don't have to do this, because i own the copyright even when licensed and can techincally do what I want...selling out a copyright is an exorbitantly high fee, whereas licensing for a project is not terrible. I agree not to use it on another project for a given period, usually a year, out of respect for the client's desire for a unique look. I put it in writing, though I do not have to, and that's why a lot of people used me over the years, others do not do this.
So.....legally they could have sued me for breach of contract, but the thing is I didn't do it. We did straighten it out, and yes, the other party should have come to me, even if they couldn't pay me and we could have worked something out like a very prominent credit line, but they just figure you'll never find out.
Also another point, by having the music available for download on a website, others may presume it is free and clear and take it here there and everywhere. Say it ends up on some pornsite....ha ha...Irish traditional Strippers dot com for example....just kidding, but making a point, and the original artist finds out and is totally mortified, they could sue for major bigtime damages, suing not only that site, but the first person who made it available (you), and everyone all along the way.
All of this unlikely, but they could own your house next year!
We're not really mad at you, don't take it that way. I for one am just worried about the fate you may meet at the hands of an irate musician, record company etc. I know it from the other end, and know many artists who have dealt with this. On the surface we are nice, sort of low key, gentle artsy types, but mess with us and you'd wish you hadn't. We can turn into total tough guys, much to the surprise of many people. We just don't quit til we win and it can get pretty ugly.
The worst case I ever had, I had this poor woman AND her publisher (though it was HER fault) trembling in fear ultimately. I did stay on the "shady side of legal" but real close to the line. They got no rest for 14 months dealing with me. And I ultimately did it alone because I couldn't afford a copyright attorney, and my own attorney only could take it so far....which I don't understand, because I took it on myself after him and won. It was more work than he could deal with....but for me it was a vendetta, and I could not quit even if I wanted to.....esp. since this stupid woman made it seem that my work was HERS!!!
oh well.....I could go on with this one forever. I have worked with a record label too and used to handle the copyright registrations, and believe me you don't want to be messing with even a small indie label such as Topic. They are pros at this stuff because they have to deal with it all the time, and they do win.
Mark: I think you're right that copyright is now life plus 70 rather than life plus 50. And if I'm not mistaken, one of the parties lobbying for the extension was none other than Disney...poor Mickey Mouse (at least his early incarnation) was approaching the end of his copyright life.
Iris - I was just in Shopright (as opposed to copyright) and they had that belgian framboise beer you like so much!
Some years ago various interested parties tried to get a bill though the British Parliament to grant perpetual copyright to the Gilbert & Sullivan light operettas (Mikado, Gondoliers etc), but common sense prevailed and it was thrown out. The G&S copyrights have now expired.
However, there is an unexpected exception to temporal limitations on copyright. In one of the last sections of the UK 1988 Patents Act it was enacted that J M Barrie's "Peter Pan" would enjoy perpetual copyright, AND that the royalties would go to the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Sick Children in London. At the time I was working in the patent profession and I felt that was the only section of the 1988 Act I came anywhere near to understanding
Kate...I made a real close approximation of it by making "hard cider" with raspberry juice! I also found it right next to the Maplewood session. A bit pricey for me though! Shall brew my own...
thanks though.... you know who really likes it, shall let her know!
I apoligize if this is not the right question for this forum. I am new to this and exploring old CDs of outdated records to make into MP3 recordings for my music loving, but computer illiterate elderly father.
I have a dickens of a time finding the obscure stuff he likes on CD. I am stunned by this lack in the market. However, I think (at least in much of the world) having the record provides license for a personal copy. So, is that the way the license works? If I have the record, I can make a single CD and convert that to an MP3 just for my Dad's Zen Micro?
Legally copying and distributing old LPs
Legally copying and distributing old LPs
Does anyone know if an LP released in the UK during the 1970's and no longer available for sale from the record company could be legally digitised and shared on a not-for-profit basis?
I understand that out-of-print books no longer available from the publisher can be legally copied for personal, educational or research use (at least in Australia) and I'm hoping that sound recordings might be treated the same under copyright law. The Roots Music Listening Room website in the US has a 'public domain disclaimer' http://www.juneberry78s.com/sounds/pdmp3sx.html
It would be good to share some old recordings of great irish players, if this could be done completely legally.
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by dogbox
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
I'd think it best to get written permission from all involved in the original recording or you could have a mess on your hands. If it was non profit, they could make you stop if they felt like it. Over here the copyright would still be owned by the original creators, plus 50 years after their death by their heirs.
It's just polite to ask too. There should be ways of finding at least some of the parties. They may even help you on the project. I know I'd be furious to find one of the books I had written in the 80s up at some website, with my artwork and all. If I sold out and no longer wished to get it back in print, since my books are instructional, I may say...great..go for it, but if I just found something on a site while browsing, I for sure would make them pull it, even if they made no profit on it. It's just not their call.
It's a sore spot for me, due to many copyright infringements over my artwork for 28 years. My stuff is just real good background material and has gotten much unauthorized use on book jackets, ads, brochures, package design etc. and I fought it every time, and won.... so maybe I am too sensitve on this issue on one hand, but you should be aware that artists/musicians can and do fight this and generally win, even if they don't get attorneys.
Just ask... I'd bet they may be flattered. I have had cases where non profits, museums etc. wanted my art for brochures, ads whatever, and could not pay the usual fee, or only a fraction of it, and I'd say, sure go ahead, just give a credit line. However, unauthorized use.... it boils many a musician and artists' blood.
Just my two cents, better to stay safe and not get in touble. People have a way of finding out in time. I don't know about Australia, but if any of my books go O/P I still own all rights, and they are even noted in my will to go to an heir, as well as all my artwork copyrights, for 50 years after my death.
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by irisnevins
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
If you can't buy these recordings legally, then just go for it. If the recording is not important enough for the record company to rerelease on CD, then nobody is losing any royalties that they would otherwise have.
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by Craymcla
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
No, don't do it. I agree with Iris: ask first.
It is not just about royalties as Craymcla suggests. This is where most people always get it wrong. They think that as long as they don't make money off it, or as long as the owner is not using it for making money, then it is OK to copy it.
This is wrong. That is not how it works. If you get sued, you WILL lose.
Imagine if I took your car because you're not using it at the moment. Or I move into your house because you are currently living in another one. You may argue that it is not the same thing, but that is why people keep getting it wrong - it is exactly the same thing.
Would you go to your neighbour and ask him whether you could borrow his spade, or would you jump over the fence and help yourself to his tools from his garden shed without his permission? Would you really be surprised if he calls the police when you do, even though he probably would have been quite happy to lend it to you if only you had asked?
It is not yours, it does not belong to you. If you have purchased a record or CD, you have only purchased the right and means to listen to it, not to use it in any other way.
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by Shrog
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
Dammit, now you've ruined my day. The more I think about it the angrier I get. It is exactly that kind of attitude that screws everybody over. You're the kind of person who would tresspass on private property in spite of all the sign asking you not to. You justify it it to yourself with "Oh, as long as I don't do this or that, the rules don't apply to me" or "He wasn't using it anyway" or "I need it more that he does".
Laws are always made after the fact. Someone does something that hurts someone else, so a law is made to prevent that from happening again. Copyright laws are no different. They exist to protect the world against people like you.
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by Shrog
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
...and just in case there is any doubt, that angry outburst was aimed at Craymcla.
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by Shrog
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
I think a lot depends on what you mean by "shared on a not-for-profit basis." If it means just handing them out to your friends I doubt anyone will object. If it's confined to a specialized club or some such limited audience, I doubt anyone would raise a fuss either. If you make them available to the public at large is where you might get in trouble.
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
Doing your homework can work out to the benfit of all. There have been folks who with the blessings of Topic, as an example, have rereleased some valuable recordings, for one example, a Globestyle CD or Topic recordings:
"The Rushy Mountain: Classic Music From Sliabh Luachra 1952-77"
Submitted on November 5th 2004 by ceolachan.
http://www.thesession.org/recordings/display/1274
As others have said, and I have had to contend with in work for a university, the copyright is help by all parties concerned, but often, if you contact the original recording company, not always easy, or the big conglomerate that bought out their rights, EMI as and example, you can find them cooperative. What can happen after the fact is definitely not worth the risk... I am in agreement with all those previous, minus the crayfish.
If you want some constructive help with this, let us know exactly what recordings you are considering. Some of us have experience and connections or possess knowledge that might help lessen the hassle... So, give us the specifics and let's see if there's hope ~ well, there's always hope, but we may be able to help it find substance...
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by ceolachan
I hpe thse typos abve ar nt a prblm...
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by ceolachan
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
Yes, it's one of those less frequent situations where getting forgiveness afterwards is NOT easier than getting permission beforehand.
Having said, that there has been a recent announcement in the UK that it will be OK to copy one's own cd tracks onto mp3 for one's own personal use - something which hitherto has been illegal in the UK because of old legislation framed in the days when cd, mp3 etc hadn't even been thought of. For once, the authorities are being reasonable in recognising that technology and common usage has overtaken the old law.
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by lazyhound
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
oops, misplaced comma at beginning of 2nd para
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by lazyhound
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
I still hold my ground, but I must say...objectively, that maybe there shouldn't be anger at Craymcla... over the decades, I have been infringed by some who truly were unaware of the laws. I never came on heavy in the beginning, I literally have a form letter on the computer, and just change the name and the description of my artwork, and even if I don't catch it, ultimately someone in my line of work will, and I try to at least act like I think they didn't realize how the law works. If they buy a piece of my artwork, it doesn't mean they also have the reproduction rights....money involved or no money. Usually money was involved, and someone is making it on my artwork, but still, there were some who didn't realize that. I would ask them to pay my usual fee, and if I didn't hear from them in two weeks I would take action with legal fees and possible damages included, and I would win because I could prove it was mine (I stamp all my work not only copyright, but also a warning notice about reproduction, and to contact me etc.....amazing how many people "never saw it", LOL) and has a distinct look etc.
I got paid immediately in almost every case. Only one where I had to use a lawyer, it took over a year, but I won. They were just obnoxious, saying "We're in Florida, come get us". I am NJ, and they knew hiring a FL copyright atty. was really expensive. I did it another way, but ultimately cornered them.
In the case of copying a CD or LP or some info in a book for a few friends, technically not legal, but everyone does it, the recording companies KNOW everyone does it and no one is going to come after someone who copied a great CD for a few friends, it's laughable. I know record industry people, have worked in the industry, I know my own CD is shared and copied, I've even told people to go ahead and copy it for a friend who couldn't afford it etc. That's different. We're talking about websites, downloads, making things available for masses. For this you need permission.
There have been times people came to me and said, I LOVE your art, I want to use it for a backdrop for my website, I can't afford to pay, but thought I'd ask. If it were a major company, like American Express (who I have done paid work for) I'd say...Oh come on....but a freelance artist for example, or a historical society etc. Sure....just give me a prominent credit line with contact info. They do, and I have gotten other work from being on their site.
The thing is, it is not you decision to make. Just because something is 'retired' doesn't mean it is not owned by someone. Copyright infringement is taken VERY seriously. I know people who have collected MAJOR damages over unauthorized use. You WILL lose if someone catches wind of it and decides to act. There are many who would not be so easygoing and say....just stop. They will turn your hair grey, make you lose sleep and lots of money if they want to, and they have the right to.
So I am not bashing you or mad at you, I think you have good intentions, but you're in shark infested waters with this one. Just ask is all, I'd bet they might be flattered and say go ahead...just get it in WRITING!!
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by irisnevins
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
Iris is 100% right. Just because something is out of print doesn't mean that the copyright has expired.
Copyright used to last for 35 years and then could be renewed by the author/artist for another 35, after which the work lapsed into the public domain and could be used by anyone (hence all those cheap reprints of Dickens, Jane Austin etc.)
Under current international copyright law, it lasts for the life of the artist plus 50 years. This means that some of Irving Berlin's later songs will still be under copyright well into this century, even though he started writing in the late 1800's (a bonus of a long life in music!).
Copyright law does allow very limited (let me repeat that, VERY LIMITED) copying for personal and educational use, reviews etc. under the concept of "fair use." This is the clause that lets you make a copy of a cd or record you own to play in your car, photocopy an article out of an academic journal in a library so that you can study it in greater depth, or sing a Beatles song in the privacy of your home, etc. However, "fair use" does not generally allow for ANY distribution except in classrooms -- and even that's a gray area.
Once you start copying for public distribution (or performing in public for that matter), it doesn't matter what the financial arrangements are; you are infringing on the author's copyright (and potentially their livilhood) and permissions and rights come into play. Non-profit organizations/publishers owe royalties just like for-profit ones. The system of permissions and payments varies from medium to medium (performance vs publication vs recording etc.), and different aspects of a work are often copyrighted seperately (eg display vs reproduction rights for visual art) which is why copyright law is a field unto its own. But the principal is the consistent; works under copyright are the intellectual property of the creator, and that person is entitled to control the terms under which it is used.
That said, Iris is correct in saying that it's worth asking. Under current US tax laws publishers pay taxes on items in stock, so unless something is a perennial best seller they don't want to hang onto large back inventories. Sell out quickly and move onto the next hot item is the standard business model. If they feel that the market is too limited to justify their reprinting an old recording, they may be quite happy to pass the rights on to you. Or you might be able to help them work out a deal with an existing publisher of out-of-print recordings like the Smithsonian/Folkways project.
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by KateG
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
Good info Kate. No one is using my artwork esp. for profit without a big fight.
I have heard loads, of "But I didn't know it was yours" over the years. True enough, a case where it was on a bookcover, the publisher did not know. The outside designer they hired, BTW at more than my fee would have been, did buy my work from an art store and did a paste up board of the cover to be shot. She glued some stupid clip art on it and some lettering.
Still...too darn bad. I was sympathetic with Bantam Books' art director, she absolutley truly didn't know that the art work was not the outside designer's. Even though technically the goof was not their fault, they were still liable, and someone had to pay me, and they did. I guarantee you they never used that designer again, she also may have been badmouthed enough in the industry that other publishers kept away from her. I doubt they collected from her, but maybe they did deal with her after, I don't know. They recognized a fight on their hands, and you know what happened.....they were in no way angry with me, and in fact commissioned me to do the remaining books in that series.
If you did reissues these on CD for example and sold them or even distributed them free you'd have a real mess when found out, and for sure you would be. In a way I'd be angrier if someone was passing out my stuff for FREE.... it proves there IS in fact interest out there and I or the musicians COULD have revived it and sold it. In a way it would be proof they could have sold it...and they may well sue you for what the going rate is now for each one downloaded or whatever means, plus damages, plus legal fees.
They could make a real case for damages in that they could say you made them look like inept people who couldn't push their own stuff, even if they are making it up, it is a valid point. I know someone in my field of work whose design was bought at a store as a "second". It had a minor blotch on it, truly only recognizable by someone in my very tiny weird field of work, which is Paper Marbling. The design was printed as a background in a Bloomingdale's catalog. She made a case that there was not only unauthorized use, but they used the little blotch, tiny inperfection, which she would never have allowed into print, thereby making her look like a bad artist, and possibly having people not hire her in the future for imperfect work. This mistake was barely noticeable to the point where I had to look hard for it and I am in the field.
She collected $20,000. No kidding. Beware!!
What if the musicians didn't like your recording or remastering or simply how it sounded as a download to an old computer with crappy little speakers....the fact that it could potentially sound tinny and awful....and people would say, ugh, lousy recording....that's grounds for bigtime damages.
The copyright laws are very very very pro artist/musician/writer. I have even collected on pieces of art where a store decided, after they bought them for store stock, to cut them in halves, to sell people a smaller and cheaper piece if they didn't need the whole thing. My stamp is just on one back corner. Guess what, doesn't matter. I did have to prove it was mine, which was easy enough, I have my style. The unsuspecting person was still liable. They should have gone to the store for contact info, that was their responsibility. In these cases the person was making money off them, so I deserved my one time use fee for sure.
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by irisnevins
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
Great to hear from people clarifying the position on intellectual property rights.
I'm interested because I've done a couple of videos on YouTube (http://youtube.com) and when you upload those you agree that all the contents are totally your own. In the case of my band's performance and our video recordings, they are all our own property or have been done with permission. But it's amazing how many people have uploaded (say) recordings of TV broadcasts, since almost certainly, the TV company only has the rights to broadcast, not the rights to publish in the sense of making multiple copies for distribution and onward use. I guess YouTube's disclaimer means that lawyers will come after the people who post videos, not the site itself.
I'd say beware, and never copy anything for any sort of public release, unless you're absolutely certain you've totally created it yourself (and that includes the rights of the technical crew, or adapted it from something you know, for sure, is public domain.
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by Mark Harmer
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
PS I think it's now 70 years after the composer's death, isn't it? Didn't that change in the mid-1990s? I'm sure there were even some cases where things which had been out of copyright, came back in.
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by Mark Harmer
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
I have come across tracks from our recordings being used as things like theme music for an Irish folk music show, or background music for someone's website, and I have no problem with that and would never consider taking any action. If I heard something we did used in a TV ad or something like that I would be telling a different story. I think the trouble starts when there's considerable profit being made by persons other than the artist. In the case sited in this thread there's no money to be made, so I doubt anyone would be seeking compensation. But if the material is going to be offered to the general public it would be best to at least attempt to contact the artists or their representatives first. If that fails, I can't imagine any lawsuits resulting from something that no money was made on. The most that would happen is that you would be asked to cease and desist distribution. Now I'm no a lawer, and lawers can be paranoid about this sort of thing and tell you quite a different story. This is just my hunch about the issue raised in the first post.
# Posted on June 30th 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
It's not ethical either.
I don't know if there was an earlier instance of breach of the law of copyright, but there was a famous one in Ireland in the 6th century. The High King's ruling: Do gach bo a boin, 's do gach leabhar a choip (To every cow her calf and to every book its copy) led to a war with great slaughter (Cul Dreimhne) and Colmcille's banishment to Iona.
Mairtin
# Posted on July 1st 2006 by frozenstiff
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
If there is no money involved, it would generally be a cease and desist, unless the artist got real mad and could make some case for damages. Collecting might be hard if there is no money.
I know another person in my field who collected mighty damages because her artwork was used without permission as a background for one the the Letters To Penthouse books. She claimed it made it seem like she was condoning the content of the book. Considering the five figures she got, I kind of wish they had used mine instead, LOL!
I once made a company trash a whole run of brochures with my work as a background. I had just licensed the same design to someone else's company, they happened upon this one and gave me hell, because they thought they were getting a unique look. I had no idea, and tried to tell them...they finally listened. Once I got the other place to trash the brochure that was the end of it.
Why not just check with the company or artist? Shouldn't be so hard to find them in this day and age of online everything.
# Posted on July 1st 2006 by irisnevins
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
Thanks everyone for clarifying the issues. My rediscovery of some old 'Le Cheile' LPs released in 1979 by Inchecronin in the UK prompted the original query. I'd just like to give more people the opportunity to hear their playing if possible. I guess I should try contacting Inchecronin to find out the copyright owners and ask for their permission. Does anyone have Inchecronin's contact details?
Maybe in a future world TheSession will have links to [copyright cleared] recordings of tunes, including the variants that we currently see in abc in the comments. Abc is a handy notation tool but we're really not using the multimedia capabilities of the web yet. Actually listening to a recorded tune would give a whole new dimension to TheSession experience (midi is a pretty poor substitute).
Shouldn't be so hard to achieve in this day and age of online everything. [blatant plagiarisation with just a keystroke or two...]
# Posted on July 1st 2006 by dogbox
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
I think you'll find "Online everything" is a copyright of the Tamagochi-Sony-Coca-Cola-Starbucks corporation. A team of lawyers is being fed raw meat as we speak....
# Posted on July 1st 2006 by Mark Harmer
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
I fully agree with Iris. At the same time I have to clarify why this issue got me so angry. I would normally NOT get upset, because I know that people don't always know, and that it is sometimes difficult to know what belongs to whom. But it was the disrespectful "if it's not important enough for them" comment that got me angry. Who are you to decide what is or isn't important to me? It is not your call.
Someone could be putting many years of blood sweat and tears into a project that relies on specific works of art, music, writing or whatever. They may have gone to great lengths and expense to obtain the rights to use this work. To the rest of the world it might look like it is not being used, but you can destroy that person's project by carelessly using the material.
If that brochure company had contacted Iris before the time, she would have said "Sorry, I already promised that piece to someone else, how about this one instead?" It would have saved everybody a lot of heartache, time and money.
I have to emphasise again: it is not about money. This keeps coming up, people keep saying "But I'm not making money out of it". That does not matter. It is not about money. The brochure company who used the art work legally had paid money for a unique look. The company who used it illegally destroyed that uniqueness, whether they were making money out of it or not. Iris could have lost a valuable client through this, but luckily she was able to convince them that it wasn't her fault. Just because you are not making money from it, does not mean you are not costing the copyright owners money.
# Posted on July 1st 2006 by Shrog
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
Oh boy Shrog...what happened was awful, they called threatening to sue ME! I had to prove I didn't sell it to the other people, who were also being obnoxious and uncooperative. When I license a design, it is usually for a specific amount of time and out of respect to them I will not use that pattern in that color scheme and license it to someone else for say a year...I knock it out of use for the specified time, for reproduction purposes anyway. I can still create that paper and sell it to bookbinders or framers or others as original sheets. We're just talking reproduction rights here.
I don't have to do this, because i own the copyright even when licensed and can techincally do what I want...selling out a copyright is an exorbitantly high fee, whereas licensing for a project is not terrible. I agree not to use it on another project for a given period, usually a year, out of respect for the client's desire for a unique look. I put it in writing, though I do not have to, and that's why a lot of people used me over the years, others do not do this.
So.....legally they could have sued me for breach of contract, but the thing is I didn't do it. We did straighten it out, and yes, the other party should have come to me, even if they couldn't pay me and we could have worked something out like a very prominent credit line, but they just figure you'll never find out.
Also another point, by having the music available for download on a website, others may presume it is free and clear and take it here there and everywhere. Say it ends up on some pornsite....ha ha...Irish traditional Strippers dot com for example....just kidding, but making a point, and the original artist finds out and is totally mortified, they could sue for major bigtime damages, suing not only that site, but the first person who made it available (you), and everyone all along the way.
All of this unlikely, but they could own your house next year!
We're not really mad at you, don't take it that way. I for one am just worried about the fate you may meet at the hands of an irate musician, record company etc. I know it from the other end, and know many artists who have dealt with this. On the surface we are nice, sort of low key, gentle artsy types, but mess with us and you'd wish you hadn't. We can turn into total tough guys, much to the surprise of many people. We just don't quit til we win and it can get pretty ugly.
The worst case I ever had, I had this poor woman AND her publisher (though it was HER fault) trembling in fear ultimately. I did stay on the "shady side of legal" but real close to the line. They got no rest for 14 months dealing with me. And I ultimately did it alone because I couldn't afford a copyright attorney, and my own attorney only could take it so far....which I don't understand, because I took it on myself after him and won. It was more work than he could deal with....but for me it was a vendetta, and I could not quit even if I wanted to.....esp. since this stupid woman made it seem that my work was HERS!!!
oh well.....I could go on with this one forever. I have worked with a record label too and used to handle the copyright registrations, and believe me you don't want to be messing with even a small indie label such as Topic. They are pros at this stuff because they have to deal with it all the time, and they do win.
# Posted on July 1st 2006 by irisnevins
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
Mark: I think you're right that copyright is now life plus 70 rather than life plus 50. And if I'm not mistaken, one of the parties lobbying for the extension was none other than Disney...poor Mickey Mouse (at least his early incarnation) was approaching the end of his copyright life.
Iris - I was just in Shopright (as opposed to copyright) and they had that belgian framboise beer you like so much!
# Posted on July 1st 2006 by KateG
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
Some years ago various interested parties tried to get a bill though the British Parliament to grant perpetual copyright to the Gilbert & Sullivan light operettas (Mikado, Gondoliers etc), but common sense prevailed and it was thrown out. The G&S copyrights have now expired.
However, there is an unexpected exception to temporal limitations on copyright. In one of the last sections of the UK 1988 Patents Act it was enacted that J M Barrie's "Peter Pan" would enjoy perpetual copyright, AND that the royalties would go to the Great Ormond Street Hospital for Sick Children in London. At the time I was working in the patent profession and I felt that was the only section of the 1988 Act I came anywhere near to understanding
# Posted on July 1st 2006 by lazyhound
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
Kate...I made a real close approximation of it by making "hard cider" with raspberry juice! I also found it right next to the Maplewood session. A bit pricey for me though! Shall brew my own...
thanks though.... you know who really likes it, shall let her know!
# Posted on July 1st 2006 by irisnevins
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
I look forward to the day that someone uses our mp3 as background music for an Irish porn site.
# Posted on July 1st 2006 by Phantom Button
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
Yeah..Phantom.....hopefully they'll use something off my CD, LOL!!
# Posted on July 2nd 2006 by irisnevins
Re: Legally copying and distributing old LPs
I apoligize if this is not the right question for this forum. I am new to this and exploring old CDs of outdated records to make into MP3 recordings for my music loving, but computer illiterate elderly father.
I have a dickens of a time finding the obscure stuff he likes on CD. I am stunned by this lack in the market. However, I think (at least in much of the world) having the record provides license for a personal copy. So, is that the way the license works? If I have the record, I can make a single CD and convert that to an MP3 just for my Dad's Zen Micro?
Thanks for any help...
# Posted on August 12th 2006 by madkin