Ethics in archiving?

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Alan Day
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 05:49 PM

It is the private archives of collectors that are becoming very valuable to the Folk Scene.Many artists have been taken for granted that they will be around forever.Old cassettes in peoples lofts contain archive recordings of players that have never recorded and are deteriorating daily. A couple of artists work would have been lost forever had they had not been used and computer cleaned for the recent collection I have been working on.I understand that the recent Tony Rose CD is made up of old live recordings many from private sources..If there is an important recording to the Folk World or any other musical World,that all efforts are made to source the family or the artist,then in my opinion it should be used.There is very little money to be made but the value to the listeners is worth much more.
Al

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Deckman
Date: 15 Jan 09 - 02:50 PM

refresh

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Jan 09 - 01:36 PM

Bob - the same rules would apply.    An assumption is made that if you send out recordings that you have ownership and rights approval - and that is something that would have been discussed before airplay. Should I have played something and received a complaint, it could get sticky - but the reality is the best that could be accomplished would be to cease airplay.

Just to give you an example, I recently received a CD from the State of Florida which contained recordings made at a Florida Folk Festival over the years.    I assume that the rights were cleared and by submission I have permission to play them.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Lighter
Date: 14 Jan 09 - 10:53 AM

I'm not a lawyer but I'd like to play one on TV.

It seems to me that only a consultation with an attorney familiar with intellectual property law will put your mind at ease. There may well be a legally recognized difference between, say, placing your recordings in a university archive, making a handful of copies to be given free to your friends, and stamping out thousands of CDs for aggressive sale on the Internet.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Deckman
Date: 14 Jan 09 - 10:49 AM

Ron ... Back on September 14, 2001, you asked me by PM if I would send you some of these "hoot" tapes so you might play them on radio show. I didn't then as I was still working and had little time for my archiving. If I had sent them, and if you had broadcast them, I'm wondering how that use might have conflicted with issues that have been raised on this thread? Bob Nelson

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 14 Jan 09 - 10:01 AM

I don't think "ethics" are a nuisance, it is just that everyone has a different standard of what ethics should be - and an application that doesn't always relate to the circumstance.

Our friends on the other side of the ocean have different laws.   I'm also a bit surprised by what seems to be a philosophy that "the ends justify the means" - an effort to preserve overlooking the rights and common courtesy that should be extended.   Alan's mention of a concertina recording is a good example - if it becomes a "hit" (probably when pigs learn to fly!), then the same "O Brother Where Art Thou" scenario takes effect. (I stand corrected on the Library of Congress efforts to pay royalties. There are other examples of these efforts as well.)

I do believe if there is concern, a copyright lawyer should be consulted, not a bunch of us altercockers here on Mudcat. It is all opinion,loosely based on personal experiences, and it is obvious that each of us have different experiences.   Going back to the original post, I don't think that in the U.S. a "hobby" type archiving is going to ruffle any feathers or land anyone in jail for infringement on rights issues.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Deckman
Date: 14 Jan 09 - 07:58 AM

"Ethics" certainly are a nuisance aren't they! bob

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 14 Jan 09 - 07:54 AM

Ethics I think have gone the way of Israel and Iran!!

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Jan 09 - 04:32 AM

Sorry - ignore my last posting - too early in the morning!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Alan Day
Date: 14 Jan 09 - 04:05 AM

Thanks for the advice EBarnacle, but it is slightly more complicated,these are not my recordings, but the player's.It forms part of a collection of his playing assembled by his Father and then two cassette copies left to two people in his will.There is very little money involved here, if any,there are so many artists and the costs of assembly so high that the collections just about cover the costs.If however they took off, or one of these recordings became a hit (which I doubt) then it would involve more serious investigation.
My decision is to go for it,the recordings to the Concertina World are too important not to include them.
Al

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 14 Jan 09 - 03:24 AM

"I'll post my decision."
Opinion, surely? - unless you happen to be one of the fingers of the cold, dead hand of commercialism or musical bureaucracy - god help us all!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Nerd
Date: 14 Jan 09 - 02:23 AM

Just to clarify some things:

It was not the Smithsonian, but the Library of Congress, that dealt with the fellow whose recording was used in O Brother Where Art Thou. In almost all cases where we are dealing with old field recordings, it's the Library. The Smithsonian's folk music archives are primarily derived from Folkways and the other Moe Asch labels on the one hand, and their great festivals on the other. Because of that, most of their stuff came with explicit or implicit releases allowing them commercial use of the material; obviously Asch had such agreements with his artists, as Folkways was at least nominally a commercial enterprise, and the festival offers a pretty good gig in exchange for a signed release. But keep in mind also that every single year they have stellar, grammy-level talent like Beausoleil, and don't often release that stuff on CDs, so I suspect they are not getting artists to sign releases for every performance, and consequently cannot release many of the festival performances on CD.

The Library's a different story. We have collectors going back to the 1890s, when really no one was thinking about these issues. We have the first ethnographic field recordings in the world, in fact. Lomax and the other collectors of the 30s and 40s didn't usually obtain signed releases either. Many of our other collections came from amateurs on the one hand, and academics on the other--people who didn't even think about commercial issues when amassing their collections.

Even so, the Library does have to seek permission for every item we publish online or release on a CD, unless a signed release was obtained at the time of collection. The typical formula is to send a letter to the last known address requesting permission; if it comes back "unknown," you have made a good-faith attempt, and you file that returned letter as proof of the good-faith attempt. (If a researcher from outside the Library wants to publish any of our materials, then it falls to them to make the same kind of attempt.)

After the attempt is made, if there is no objection from an informant or descendant, the Library usually goes ahead with the publication. If it's an online presentation, material can always be removed if heirs turn up with objections. If it's a CD release, they're usually small batches and as a practical matter I don't think there's ever been a complaint to the Folklife Center after an item was published. (There have been objections from survivors of deceased performers that have prevented certain items from being played on the radio, on at least one occasion that I remember.)   

Keep in mind that the Library never makes any kind of profit, and is by nature educational and public. Any money we earn goes toward furthering our educational and archival missions, which are undertaken on behalf of the American people. Moreover, as several people have commented, the sums involved are tiny. The amount the singer would have made for mechanical royalties on a track of typical LC CD release wouldn't pay for the trouble of collecting it. So it would be hard to imagine people claiming any kind of "damages" unless (1) they are professional performers and the Library release might compete with one of their own CDs or (2) something was published that was downright embarrassing. Since the Library doesn't want to publish anything downright embarrassing, and knows how to avoid the other situation, the chances of a real conflict are slim. Nevertheless, the legal niceties are scrupulously observed.

All that said, Bob, I don't see anything wrong with what you're doing, either ethically or legally. (I'm not a lawyer, though!) Until you start publishing or selling the material, no one could reasonably object. I agree that if you're going to give copies away, you should check with the performers if possible...especially with anyone who is a pro performer and has "official" CDs on the market. I think they'd be foolish to imagine your giveaways were competing, but it would be honorable for you to check with them.

Finally, I agree that a university library or other archive might be interested in your collection.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 11:37 PM

Alan, Your statement says a lot: "I have made every effort to trace him and I suspect he is no longer alive."

Even so, it would be worth your while to check with the copyright administering authority in the country where you recorded this person. They will probably advise you to put some money in escrow in case a member of the family asks for compensation.

You will have made fair provision and covered your own butt in case there is someone in the woodwork.

Codger, why not assume that Bob is honest and feels that he has something which should be disseminated in a limited manner. He is asking how to do so with no harm to anyone including himself. The advice immediately above applies to him, too.

Bob's situation is a bit murkier, though. The culture where he is/was permitted recording for private use. As such, there was no permit to disseminate. As such, he has to make an effort to contact the performers or their heirs. He can disseminate the recordings he gets permission to disseminate.

Beyond that, there MAY be reefs.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Deckman
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 11:36 PM

I'm getting a lot of serious information and opinions here and that pleases me. Soon, within the next couple of days, I'm going to attempt a "summary" of the postings and reach a decision. I'll post my decision. Thanks everyone. Bob Nelson

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Artful Codger
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 11:00 PM

Had they not tampered with the copyright laws in the U.S. (particularly with the infamous Bono act), many things would have slipped freely into the public domain after a reasonable period for the writers and performers to profit as they chose. But cold commercialism, widespread copyright abuse, greedy litigators (it only takes one to ruin you) and copyright laws unfavorable to "folk evolution" are facts of modern life--ignore them at your own risk. If the laws bother you, why not raise a stink with your congressfolks instead of shooting the messenger?

As for why the Smithsonian and Library of Congress can make their recordings available, (1) they or the collectors mostly obtained signed releases at the time of recording and (2) they enjoy special legal status.

Re the ethics of recording "for yourself": first, the decision whether to be recorded rests with the performer. Granted, as others have pointed out, in some environments permission is implicit by convention. This still does not automatically confer permission to use the recordings however you will. If you record without permission, or if you later decide to start copying those recordings for others, you've crossed into muddy ethical territory, and a possible legal morass as well.

Furthermore, why only after collecting thousands of such recordings for decades are these questions coming up? The thought of archiving them or trying to profit from them can't only now be arising--no one is that naive or stupid, and copyright is hardly a new or obscure issue. So it mostly sounds to me like someone trying to evade the restrictions which other serious collectors abide by, simply because he was too lazy to get releases then or in any of the years he's been recording since. If there is any "tragic loss" due to this negligence, the fault is solely his own.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 09:00 PM

Bob, if some or only one family member is opposed to the publication, then I think you would need to determine if they are entitled to object. Someone who is an executor of an estate would be in a position to say "yes." If the estate is completed, then perhaps simply finding a family member who is amenable. Not all estates last in perpetuity like Elvis'. If there are royalties, then you might have to go back to the original administrator.

SRS

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Alan Day
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 05:56 PM

I have an interesting situation,I have obtained very rare recordings of a player who is/was ,in my opinion, one of the best Duet Concertina players ever and only a lad when he did the recordings,shortly afterwards he stopped playing,after he was seriously ill with polio.I have made every effort to trace him and I suspect he is no longer alive.The recordings are so important they will probably be used, but with a bit of regret that unless he comes forward I shall never know if I made the right decision.
Al

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Mark Ross
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 04:34 PM

Ron,

Utah used to say, "You want to make a million dollars in Folk Music? Start with TWO Million!"

Mark Ross

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Deckman
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 04:30 PM

"amplified memory" ... I like that. Could be an album title! Bob

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 02:21 PM

...even if you are recording for yourself, you are ethically obligated to obtain explicit permission first.


I can't see where "ethics" comes into it. Surely ethics is about morality, and there is nothing immoral in recording something for yourself. It's just a kind of amplified memory, after all.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 01:43 PM

I think the Smithsonian reference may have referred to the fact that I allowed their National Museum Of American History to archive, at their request, the slides/photos I took on the folk scene and environs over the years.

Those, plus a few hundred more that weren't slides, are at Bruce Kallick's website, mainly in the album titled "People" at:
http://rudegnu.com/art_thieme.html

Art

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: EBarnacle
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 12:56 PM

Even so, distribution is publication. If you distribute, the owner of the performance is entitled to fair notice.

For example, Gordon Bok allows me to record his material at performances. He has stipulated that the material is his copyright and will not be distributed without his permission. This includes traditional material or other author material which he sings. He makes sure that those people get compensated for their efforts.

When "The Lion King" came out, the family of the person who wrote the original song eventually won a battle over The Lion Sleeps Tonight, even though there had been substantial changes which had invalidated the original copyright. The person who wrote the original song had, in the intervening time, died in poverty.

Bob, your intent is laudable. The knowledge should be preserved. The performers should, at least, be able to authorize the use of their material.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 12:30 PM

In re-reading Deckman's original post, I don't think there is anything at all wrong with what you are doing. You are not "publishing" these recordings or making them available for all in a library or online site. What you are doing is preserving a personal collection that you made decades ago. Your purpose is the same as it was originally, based on what you posted, and you received permission at the time when the individuals allowed you to record them.   There is no "ethical" question here.

This is very similar to what Virginia noted about her "home" movies and tapes.

Also, I agree with M.Ted concerning the ownership of the tape - but the performer does have a say in how it is used, unless it is expressed before hand. Otherwise, every single bootleg recording would be legal.

Deckman asked about Smithsonian. They do have "rights" issues that they deal with.   Probably the most famous example was the use of an Alan Lomax recording for "Brother Where Art Thou". They tracked down the singer who was recorded on field recording of a chain gang back in the 1950's to present him with a royalty check - a rather substantial one because of how the song was used.   Frankly, many royalites on their recordings are worth pennies and not worth anyones time to collect.   There are tens of dollars to be made in folk music.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Alan Day
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 10:38 AM

No Bob, I have followed the correct procedure and I have only received gratitude from family members.(Who get a copy FOC of the finished collection).
For current players most like to hear their recordings to approve them and of course get the necessary agreement on royalties etc Only a few have not answered my Emails, which I really cannot understand, as to be included in amongst the Worlds best and archive greats, is a bit of a short sighted attitude.
Some of the relations have become personal friends who I keep in touch with.
Bob a little tip, a full explanation of what you are trying to achieve and why you wish to include the recording,normally helps to dispel any fears of close relations to the artist.
Al

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Deckman
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 10:04 AM

Alan Day ... Have you ever had a request DENIED by a family member. If so, could you maybe elaborate on the circumstances. This question is getting close to home. Thanks, Bob

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Alan Day
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 09:17 AM

I have been involved with compiling Anglo, English & Duet Concertina Internationals (Duet due late this Year) and they consist of archive and current concertina players Worldwide.Some of the archives have been recorded privately and if the artist is alive then his or her permission to use the recording is requested.If the person is no longer alive then the relations of the artist are asked.If no information can be found they are used.These archives form a very important part of the collection,without these old tape recordings the artist,their music and style of playing would be lost forever.Most relations welcome and are very emotional that their relation is included in a collection featuring most of the Worlds top players past and present.
Al

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 07:40 AM

Ethically speaking, was it wrong as a mom to videotape these events, without getting permission from a parent of every child participating?

What about the fact that the schools had to buy permissions to perform some of the songs as they were taking in money at concerts and recitals. What does that mean to the home videographer, simply wishing to save the event and potentially share within a tight circle of family and friends?

Seeing all the YouTube videos, I should think there would not be a problem. It cannot benefit big publishing companies to hunt down and level actions against not-for-profit use of copyright material. I also don't see how any subject or relative of a subject can hope to profit if the person who made the recordings is not profitting from making and copying the recordings.

Gods! I wish we could shut down the publishing companies and go back to the guild system. WANTED: 1 Patron or a consortium of patrons for talented folk singer. Will accept room, board and cast away clothes/shoes in lieu of pay.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 02:57 AM

"Sharing those performances - with or without pay, is illegal"
Can anybody clear up this statement; I'm pretty sure it doesn't apply to the UK.
If it is the case in relation to folk music it goes to show how the (what did the man say about keeping his gun?) "cold, dead hand" of commercialism gets it grubby paws on everything.
If it had been the case in the past we wouldn't have 'folk' music.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 02:54 AM

So the home videos I have of my daughters singing with school choirs and in university recitals that I am currently putting on to DVD and plan to send copies out to my family and some of their friends.

What happens if some of those kids are now professional paid singers/musicians one of them approaching famous. Could I be sued for doing this? I am just thinking about the lame shows that have clips of actors before they were famous. Where did those clips come from? Did someone have to get permission to release them/ Did they sell them?

It is all very worrying.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Deckman
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 12:12 AM

Interesting comments ... all over the map. Another question: How is it that recognized organizations, such as the Smithsonian Museum, and other recognised repositores get away with not just archiving, but also distributing and selling recordings on a large scale? bob

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: M.Ted
Date: 13 Jan 09 - 12:00 AM

It's a subtle point, but, in fact, the owner of the tapes is the one who decides how the tapes are used. If they are used for commercial purposes, there are circumstances under which performers and others may have rights to compensation. It is also possible that, due to the circumstances of recording, the time and location of the original recording, and other circumstances, that none of the other rights are enforceable. The claimant has to be able to prove that their claims are valid.

Beyond that, not all reproduction and distribution is for profit--so there is plenty to argue about, and plenty for a judge to decide on, if anyone decides to make an issue of it.

Even beyond that, there is no money to be made here. If anything, it's going to take a big investment in time and money to make this project happen.

Artful Codger, and those who take this opportunity to make forceful statements about punitive damages and such things, unwittingly discourage the few people who have these wonderful documents from sharing them. Why risk expensive legal hassles? Better just to leave the stuff to rot.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Gurney
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 11:16 PM

If I was the singer, (I'm not) I'd like a courtesy call before you made any money out of it.

If I was doing what you are, -and I am, but in a very small way,- I'd supply a copy to the artist as a matter of courtesy. An offer to his family, if he/she's gone, particularly for someone who achieved fame.

I'd separate the songs into individual files. This is a LOT more trouble to do than just digitising a session, but then you can cut out (or add in) whatever you want. Easier to do tape-to-computer than later, I think.

If I was doing what you are, in the big way, I'd keep a diary record of my hours and costs. Any moans, I'd ask for a pro-rata contribution.

Good for you, anyway, Bob.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 11:02 PM

"I think it is important to note that these were not public performances."

Not really any difference. You are recording an individual whether it is at the kitchen table or Carnegie Hall. Granted there are probabably fewer union regs to deal with in the kitchen.

"The recordings, and the rights to the recordings, belong to the person who made the recordings"

Not exactly. The person who made the recording only owns the physical tape and not the content. The voice that is recorded on it has rights, just as the composer and any musician on the recording. Unless you have a signed release, you cannot do with it as you see fit.

The "ethical" and "legal" way around this is to ATTEMPT to get permission from those who are on the recording, or their families. IF you do not have contact and cannot find them on the internet, you take your chance. In all probability there will be no issues, and the worst would be a request to remove the recording.   There is no cost involved, no money is exchanging hands, and no one needs to be "paid" for their release.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: M.Ted
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 10:44 PM

The recordings, and the rights to the recordings, belong to the person who made the recordings--lyricist/composer have rights as well, but that's it. The recordings are your property to do with as you see fit--

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 09:50 PM

I'll mark and read this entire thread later, but I'll drop in here with two cents worth.

Bob, I've received royalties for some of Dad's songs, modest amounts from performers who contacted me about it. I wouldn't have known, otherwise, because I haven't done a search. It was nice to get the recognition.

I have boxes and boxes and reels and reels of the same stuff you do. And I would never ask for compensation for any of Dad's performances on those tapes of yours, and would hope the courtesy would be mutual all around with the core group of folks who are likely on those tapes. No one is going to get rich with any of those performances, but they might help fund a scholarship or endowment some day, to support the collection or a family member, and I would like to see anyone who can master such a performance put the funds to that use.

Deciding to go public with this music is a complicated thing, and is a reason why groups like the revived site you and Stew are doing is so important--it helps keep some of those contacts viable for times like this, when you feel the need to track down performers, or their estates.

SRS

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 09:37 PM

It's a reality of life, but I think it's a shame all these concepts like "rights" and "ethical considerations" have to come into play here. I have never had any wish to make any money making music - I just love to sing, and to share songs with people. For the most part, I think that was the attitude of the singers Bob recorded. Although we may think otherwise nowadays, I think that was the attitude of most of the singers who were recorded by the collectors like Lomax and Kennedy, who are now condemned for not compensating the singers they recorded.

If I were to take a remarkably beautiful picture of an eagle in the sky, would anybody think I should track down the eagle and pay him royalties before sharing my photograph?

We need more beauty in this world, and beauty should be shared - freely. I know that's not how our corporate world works, but I certainly wish it would work that way in our world of folk music.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Deckman
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 08:24 PM

ART ... so far I think you, and Don Firth, have captured best the circumstances under which these recordings were made. And as I have NO intent to make ANY money off these recordings, I feel free to continue on my path. And I also feel you are quite right ... yet again ... that this question of legality is just another reflection of the crazy times we live in. Bob Nelson

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Art Thieme
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 07:50 PM

Bob,
Over the years, I have done what I've done. Ethically, all the times had different sensitivities. We sang anybody's song we damn well wanted to. We wrote songs to any tune we wished to utilize. We taped others all through the mesmerizing years of the folk revival in the USA. I had thousands of tapes of everything. Over the last dozen years I've been unable to play my instruments, but I had tons of too much time on my hands. I went through ALL of the tapes I had of myself and of others doing our music. Computers came along and I saved what I thought of as my favorite songs just for listening onto about 100 full CDs.

The rest went onto at least a couple thousand other CDs.

In the 1970s, all the reels got put onto cassettes--to make it easier to take and play music in the car. During the 1980s and 1990s I put those onto CDs----at least the things I figured I would possibly / probably want to listen to during the years I've got left on this planet.

When I finished the project, ALL those cassettes went to friends who are collectors---or to friends I thought would just find them good listening---and, even, maybe, important listening because some of it were "field recordings" I had made of huge flames of life whose music informed the romance of the treasure hunt I was engaged in all those years.

I sang the songs -- and I recorded them too. As I said, we did what we did. And now some try to say say I was illegal all along. --- I do suspect that goes along with the insanity of our times.

Art

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Artful Codger
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 07:40 PM

Furthermore, the fact that most people are pleased to give their permission to having someone archive old recordings of themselves or their deceased spouse or parents HARDLY means that you don't need to bother. The attitude that "it's easier to get forgiveness than permission" is reprehensible. Making a practice of it is a setup for hefty punitive damages, should a case be taken to court.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Artful Codger
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 07:32 PM

Actually, even if you are recording for yourself, you are ethically obligated to obtain explicit permission first. For legal protection, you should get permission in writing. And if you're going to do that, with the idea of future posterity, why not just get a signed release?

Note that getting permission for personal use means just that; it doesn't grant you the right disseminate those recordings later, when you change your original intentions. Your "feelings" about the matter, or even the feelings of those who'd like to get their hands on those recordings, are immaterial. There's a simple term for what you're proposing: bootlegging.

Now I won't pretend that I haven't encouraged a little bootlegging in my time, when it benefitted me, or that I myself wouldn't love to hear (or even copy) those recordings of yours. But the "greater good" ethical argument just doesn't hold much water, especially when the whole situation could have been so easily avoided in the first place by a little forethought--and common courtesy.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 06:48 PM

There are a couple of other factors here that go into the mix.

I know that most of the tapes that Bob has are of "hoots" or song fests—parties where people sat around and swapped songs. I was there, and I'm on many of these tapes. Most of the time early on, there was an open-reel tape recorder or two in evidence, and later, there might be a half-dozen battery operated cassette recorders whirring away. Everybody knew they were there, and that they were being recorded.

I think it is important to note that these were not public performances. It was not like someone sneaking a tape recorder into a Gordon Bok or Joan Baez concert.

I believe Bob's intent here (correct me if I'm wrong, Bob) is to get the material off the old tape medium and digitize it for the purposes of his own archives and perhaps for the archives of the Pacific Northwest Folklore Society, and to put some of it on CDs to give to the people who were there at these "hoots."

I don't really see how there can be any rational objection to this.

As I say, I'm on many, perhaps most, of these tapes, I trust what Bob is doing, feel that it is a valuable and worthwhile thing to do (a great nostalgia trip for some of us!), and I truly appreciate the fact that he is willing to take on a monumental task. As far as I, personally, am concerned, Bob has carte blanche.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Deckman
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 06:09 PM

When I made these recordings, we ALL had recorders around. We all knew we were being recorded. We were friends singing with friends. No commenrcial intent anywhere. On some tapes I can hear some people "teaching" me the chords as we go ... like a "teaching tape." bob

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 05:12 PM

There's ethical considerations and there's legal considerations, and they aren't quite the same thing.

Nothing unethical about preserving and passing on music and songs that were performed in public. Legally it might be more complicated in some situations, theoretically at least, but hardly that likely.

I think michaelr hits the nail on the head: "It's easier to get forgiveness than permission." (In the improbable situation where someone finds a way of making money out of, it fair shares for the originators.)

Of course if Deckman;s "150 years ago" had been actually the case...

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 05:03 PM

Bob - there are a couple of issues. The song may be in public domain, but the arrangement might be copyright. Even if both are public domain, you still have the biggeest issue - above all else, the PERFORMANCE rights still belong to the performer, unless you have evidence that you gave it away. If I recorded you 40 years ago singing "Mary Had A Little Lamb", LEGALLY I could not release or distribute that recording without your permission, or the permission of your heirs.

We've recorded artists for the radio station and received signed agreements. The agreements spell our our rights and the rights of the performer.

You can always go back and contact the surving members and their heirs.   If you cannot find them, keep records on your attempts to do so. You can probably make your archives accessible if you make the proper steps and try to obtain rights.

When you recorded the music, I assume it was done in the open and everyone knew that they were being recorded. What was the stated intent at the time?

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Deckman
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 04:53 PM

SINS ... Yes, I do feel I am very privileged to have this material, but I also have spent a lifetime collecting it. If I just keep it for myself, there are NO ethical issues involved. Ethical problems only occur if I decide to share it with someone. ETHICS ... sheeuh. bob

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Steve Gardham
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 04:43 PM

If it's any help at all. My recordings from the 60s and 70s of East Riding people singing traditional songs is now held in the British Library. I have just signed a form to agree that they can place all of the recordings online for non-commercial use. There are many others who have done the same thing. The BLSA have not asked me to provide permission slips from any of the families of all the people recorded. However when I published some of the songs in a book in the 80s I had to obtain this permission from all the singers or their relatives.
We have just completed the first phase of the Yorkshire Garland Project and because we were working with a Heritage Lottery grant we thought we'd better do everything by the book so we went through a solicitor who more or less worded our permission slips signed by the singers recorded. It actually states on the slip that the singer signs over to us the complete rights to that particular recording. Not one person objected to signing. Of course this did not affect their rights to any other recordings made of the same songs.
I can't say what the law is in America, but the main rights issue this side of the pond seems to reside in the particular recording or performance rather than the singer or the song. Having said that obviously if it's a song written by someone within copyright then they have the rights to that song in any form.

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: SINSULL
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 04:41 PM

Bob,
Another point to consider is the possibility that you have some original material there. A song or two with no provenance.
All in all i would say that you are in an enviable position.
Mary

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: GUEST,Russ
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 04:38 PM

Legal issues aside,
Don't ask questions if you don't want to hear and abide by the answer.
If you're going to ask for permission, take a denial seriously and don't do it.

Russ (Permanent GUEST)

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Deckman
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 04:31 PM

What if there is NO copyright and estate? bob

Subject: RE: Ethics in archiving?
From: Howard Jones
Date: 12 Jan 09 - 04:11 PM

If a person is dead, wouldn't any copyright belong to their estate?