Having read the threads about David Bulmer, I'm still confused over the situation. Perhaps being on this side of the Atlantic I'm not aware of the whole story.

Please correct me if my summation is inaccurate. I'm not trying to flame this issue, but I'm honestly trying to understand the situation.

From what I gathered from the threads, David Bulmer PURCHASED the rights to catalogs from several now defunct record labels. He is holding the rights to several Nic Jones recordings and recently has released a few titles. Bulmer had refused in the past to relinquish the rights to these recordings or sell them to Nic Jones.

As a humanitarian and patron of the arts, this David Bulmer will probably not win an award. As a businessman, I don't really see that he has done anything wrong. This whole issue points out a sad fact that artists would sign over rights to their work for a variety of reasons. At the time it seemed like a good career move - maybe selling albums, maybe gaining recognition, or maybe just to make a living. Now in retrospect the deal didn't work out in the artists favor. In this country I know of many artists who signed away the rights to their recordings.

Still, if it weren't for these original "deals", would we have had any of these "national treasures" in the first place? If Jones didn't sign that contract, would we EVER have had the opportunity to hear "Ballads and Songs".

Personally I would opt to buy the "legal" releases - In Search of Nic Jones and Unearthed. However, I do understand our guests interest in wanting to hear these classics. While he may not be helping Nic Jones by purchasing them, he certainly isn't doing anything illegal or immoral for that matter.

This whole situation really points out the fact that an artist needs to be careful before signing their name to the dotted line.

Ron