"Fact. Under the royalty agreements which Kennedy drew up, 50% was split between "our informants, collectors, authors and arrangers", and the remaining 50% was claimed by Kennedy. Source. Folk Review. March 1974.

Fact. When Geoff Wallis asked Kennedy for permission to use some recordings for a non-profit making CD, Kennedy asked him for 75% of the retail price ! Source. This thread. NB., I have seen the correspondence Geoff refers to. I have also seen Kennedy's grovelling response when Geoff pointed out that the recordings were almost out of copyright and would shortly be available at a much less extortionate rate elsewhere."

To me, that sounds like a businessman - and I do not fault anyone from trying to earn an HONEST dollar.   Was he cheating anyone? In the above examples, I don't see any problem.

Were the "informants, collectors,authors and arrangers" forced to enter into an agreement? Was Geoff Wallis forced to accept the terms? Was any artist forced to sign a paper that gave exclusivity to Peter Kennedy?"   I don't know the answers, but I am guessing it would be "no" to all.

"Fact. The collector, Tom Munnelly once sent a tape of the singer, John Reilly to Kennedy for interest purposes only. Without consulting Munnelly or Reilly, and without paying a red cent in royalties, Kennedy published the tape in Folktrax. Source. The IRTRAD_L discussion board."

If this is indeed a fact, then Peter Kennedy was seriously wrong. Did Tom Munnelly take it to court? Is there more to this story?

"We should take a serious look at the impact of blameworthy practices on the individuals and traditions involved."

That is very true. I think part of the "problem" is that the field of collecting and independent productions have very little control or peer judgement.   In other fields, there are usually trade groups and other concerns that set standards and prices. Can we point to any one group or groups that are doing that for this field?