Fair enough GeorgeH,

Your opening statement in this thread is as follows:

"Mr Bulmer is clearly an exception to the rule that "no-one ever makes a fortune from Folk Music in the UK".

What evidence have you presented here that Mr. Bulmer is a wealthy man, and that he made a fortune from folk music in the UK?

Sentence #2 of your post says:

"He is also known for being rather litigatious (he can afford to be, unlike most if not all of those with whom he is in dispute). "

What evidence have you presented here that Mr. Bulmer is litigous? What evidence do you offer to support your "fact" that Mr. Bulmer has more money than those parties with whom he is in litigation?

GeorgeH, it seems to me that you are the most guilty sycophant here. You are clearly using the hearsay referred to in the Living Tradition editorial, and claiming that hearsay as fact.

I initially tried to point out, very politely, that the "facts" you were presenting were nothing of the sort--just hearsay and your personal beliefs about a man you clearly have nothing but contempt for, if your remarks about him here are anything to judge by.

The response to my suggestion from both you and Ralphie were both swift, and negative. Methinks you both doth protest too much.

You also claimed, without providing any evidence, that:

"Over the years, he has purchased the rights to an enormous quantity of the "back catalogue" of the British Folk Revival,"

You aren't distinguishing between what he bought and didn't buy, as a liquidator. That is a crucial piece of information. DG has said:

The sum of my knowledge regarding the actual content of the purchase was that it comprised the entire Leader and Trailer catalogues which John Zollman had bought, either directly from Bill or from the company Bill had sold it to. (The latter, I suspect.)

Now, I'm no solicitor, but if I understand the law correctly, Bulmer MAY NOT own rights to the Leader catalogue. If Bill Leader sold the masters, contracts and copyrights to John Zollman or another company previous to him, then those rights may well be no longer in the hands of the entity which owns and possesses the masters.

Capiche? Just because Dave Bulmer has the Leader, et al catalogue masters, doesn't mean he "owns the rights" to recording and performance of them.

It could just be that Dave Bulmer knows these laws better than most musicians, music journalists, and punters who, based upon hearsay (and even what DG is saying is hearsay, I might add), have decided that he has rights and masters he actually doesn't have, and possibly never did.

I could go on like this line by line with your message, but I really don't think any of us needs to go there.