Ralph Peer and Copyright

Subject: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 10:25 AM

For anyone able to receive British terrestrial television, there's a programme next week which looks as though it has implications somewhat beyond its remit. The Programme is called This World: The Fight for Cuba's Music. It tells how Cuban musicans who took part in the film, The Buena Vista Social Club found themselves chased for copyright royalties on their own material from Peer Music inc.

Fir me the significance is that Ralph Peer, who was a roving A&R man for Victor and Okeh Records, used to copyright everything that wasn't nailed down, including a large number of American folksongs. I for one will be interested to see whether the Cuban musicians were succesful in fighting off Peer Music and how they did it.

BBC 2 Tuesday May 1st. 21'50 hours. BST.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 10:52 AM

Fred,
I think that you will find that Peer had an arrangement with Victor that they didn't pay him a salary but that he was allowed publishing rights on any material he recorded for them. This explains why so much material was collected and "re-arranged" by performers before being recorded.
The borrowing of tunes and verses with slight differences, adding something here forgettting something there has always been part of the folk process as you are already very much aware. I guess therefore that many performers didn't find it an unusual request and if it meant extra money ???
Should be an interesting programme anyway, I look forward to seeing it.

Hoot

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: GUEST,Hi Lo
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 11:02 AM

I believe he held coprright on much of the Carter Family Material as well as that of Jimmie Rodgers. Much in the way that the Lomases claimed ownership of things that really were traditional.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 01:27 PM

I think that he paid AP Carter to obtain and (wink, wink) arrange and copyright tons of traditional mountain music. I think that perhaps Jimmie Rogers was more original in his songwriting. The same could be said for Henry Whitter. In any case the Bristol recording sessions brought these pioneers together, and I suppose Peer deserves some credit for that. If he exploited the Cubans that would be considered fair play in those days of run away Capitalism. Lttle wonder that Castro was seen as their solution.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 01:34 PM

BBC (on the net) has a sound clip about the case (News, America, search 'Cuban music'), made over a year ago and revived since the case has been re-opened. A British judge has moved to Cuba and is hearing witnesses.

The fight with Peermusic (an international company based in U. S. and very strong in Latin American as well as North American music) is over UK rights which are held through a Cuban-based music company, and which are claimed by Peermusic Inc.
Before the Cuban revolution, Ralph Peer and his developing company had signed up some 600 Cuban musicians. Do these rights prevail, or subsequent handing over to a Cuban group after the revolution? Peer's contracts long predate the Social Club.

I don't believe the case will affect copyrights in the U. S., held by Peermusic. Peermusic is a large and active company; recently they have acquired through purchase the rights of Caribbean Waves and Crossing Waves, which include Celia Cruz and Tito Puente among others.

The A. P. Carter and Carter Family rights held by Peermusic are extremely lucrative and have paid well to the Family and their assigns.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 02:02 PM

Hootenany,

It wasn't quite the way you describe it. Peer approached Victor, who had little experience or interest in the country music market, with an offer to work for them for nothing, provided he could keep the copyrights. Peer was nothing if not a good businessman, and he obviously realised that the publishing rights were far more lucrative than any salary Victor would pay him.

Having said that, my interest lies less in the issue of who owns the Cuban copyrights than in the possible ramifications of this case, and in its possible effects on various copyright claims over folk songs. (For further details see recent threads on Peter Kennedy and copyright).

Some of the material Peer copyrighted was clearly above board; the self composed Jimmie Rodgers material for instance. In a lot of cases however, he claimed the rights to public domain material without any moral justification.

I don't know where the Cuban material stands along this continuum. Presumably somebody must have signed something somewhere along the way, but the Cuban musicians clearly believe they have a case.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 02:38 PM

I thought this had been decided in the court of appeal, last year (UK). I read a case report and it was rather complicated

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 02:46 PM

Would you give examples of rights claimed to public domain material?
OK, this is a question where personal opinion comes in, since one is really talking about an arrangement.

An artist records an old song that is in public domain, arranging it to suit himself. He and the recording company are entitled to copyright the arrangement and to benefit from sales.
This does not stop another artist from making his own arrangement of the old song, and obtaining copyright on his version. An argument may develop if the first with copyright judges that the newcomer is too close to his own in his version.

I have been playing "Songs of the Cowboys," public domain material from Jack Thorp's books but arranged and sung by Mark Gardner and Rex Rideout. The cd is clearly marked Copyright 2005 Palace of the Governors, Museum of New Mexico (copyright holders).
Do you dispute their right to copyright?

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 04:26 PM

Total documents found in BAILII databases: 3

Peer International Corporation & Ors v Termidor Music Publishers Ltd. & Ors [2003] EWCA Civ 1156 (30 July 2003) (View plain HTML) [100%]
([2003] EWCA Civ 1156; From England and Wales Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Decisions; 72 KB)http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2003/1156.html&query=title+(+Peer+)+and+title+(+Music+)&method=b


Peer International Corp & Ors v Termidor Music Publishers Ltd & Anor [2005] EWHC 1048 (Ch) (25 May 2005) (View plain HTML) [100%]
([2005] EWHC 1048 (Ch); From England and Wales High Court (Chancery Division) Decisions; 38 KB)http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2005/1048.html&query=title+(+Peer+)+and+title+(+Music+)&method=bo


Peer International Corporation & Ors v Termidor Music Publishers Ltd & Ors [2006] EWHC 2883 (Ch) (16 November 2006) (View plain HTML) [100%]
([2006] EWHC 2883 (Ch); From England and Wales High Court (Chancery Division) Decisions; 238 KB)http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2006/2883.html&query=title+(+Peer+)+and+title+(+Music+)&method=bo

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 04:54 PM

Thanks for the links to the decisions. Would you kindly encapsulate the decisions for us ignoramuses? - I think I understand the conclusions, but it looked to me as if further action is possible.

Peermusic release 4/25/2007
"At the dawn of a new millennium, peermusic is as committed to representing new and developing talent as it was during that sweltering summer back in Bristol. Yet history seems to repeat itself in the Peermusic family. "O Brother, Where Art Thou?" marked a crossroads, for the songs from the album were culled from early copyrights of the firm, which hadn't received deserved exposure in many decades. An incredible amount of long deserved recognition also came with the success of the Buena Vista Social Club. The movie and most importantly the traditional Cuban music were widely embraced by audiences. The success of both the "Buena Vista Social Club" and "O Brother Where Art Thou?" has brought Peermusic full-circle. They honor the tradition of its founder, Ralph S. Peer, bringing timeless classics of the country and Latin genres to millions of people."

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: GUEST
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 06:14 PM

Fred
I agree with what you say about Peer entirely he was an astute business man. His legacy lives on in the pop so called "music" industry where every recording has to be original or new so that the publishing rights can be exploited. Do you ever hear cover versions in this day and age?
The point is that Peer would get royalties as publisher,the singers who "wrote" their own material would also earn as writers which is a different set of royalties. As I implied above in the field of "folk", blues, cajun etc tunes and phrases and floating verses were often borrowed and rehashed by performers and claimed as theirs even by people who never expected to be recorded commercially.
I am not condoning the copyrighting of pd material by publishers but can understand why people such as A P Carter went along with Peer and put their own name to their "arrangement" of the material.
The whole field of copyright is a minefield and a farce, don't forget some classical guy even copyrighted a period of silence.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: GUEST,Greycap
Date: 25 Apr 07 - 07:17 PM

What happened to the good old times when a friend taught you his appealing song and you learned it and played it the next week at your folk club?
Later, if you were lucky, you performed it on an LP and then gave the person who taught you it the credit.
It was simpler.....

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 05:29 AM

"Would you give examples of rights claimed to public domain material?
OK, this is a question where personal opinion comes in, since one is really talking about an arrangement."

No, I'm not talking about arrangements, which are a horse of another colour, but about spurious claims to authorship. Here's a few off the cuff and from memory.

The Horn Book by Gershon Legman, cites numerous examples, including a song which was collected by Legman, and which is coyorighted not to him or the person who sang it, but to one of the Lomaxes (Alan, I think). Why? Because it appeared in Lomax edited book, and the editor claimed copyright on the entire contents

In 1961, the British jazz trumpeter Kenny Ball recorded a Russian tune called Podmoskovnye Vechera, under the title Midnight In Moscow. Ok., it's probably not a folk tune but what the hell. The point is that when it was first issued on LP, it was ascribed as Trad/arr Ball. When it was released as a single - and incidentally became a massive hit - the accreditation had been changed to claim Ball as the composer.

In 1957, the skifflers Chas McDevitt and Nancy Whiskey recorded an American song called Freight Train. It was sung, and probably composed, by Elizabeth Cotten, and introuduced into this country by Peggy Seeger. Guess who claimed authorship ? Chas and Nance.

In the late 1950s, the agent of Lonnie Donegan turned up at the office of Folkways Records, announcing that a "Folkways Recording artist", Leadbelly, had recorded several Donegan compositions, including - wait for it - Rock island Line. The agent was looking for royalties. Moe Asch's reply was succinct and to the point. "Come back this afternoon", he said. "I'll have the records ready for you, and I'll break them over your head one by one."

An extremely rare song, The Well below The Valley was sung by John Reilly of Boyle, Co. Roscommon, and collected by Tom Munnelly. It is copyright neither to Reilly or Munnelly but to Christy Moore who recorded it and put it on an LP.

My concern though lies less with Peer and A.P. Carter than with people who have copyrighted public domain material since. Peer and Carter lived in an age when concern for intellectual property was not as finely honed as it is now. Moreover, they were not revivalists and they probably saw nothing wrong in taking something they felt was there for the taking.

However, we now live in age where different standards and ethics apply. And we are part of a movement that systematically tried to revive a heritage of music which - by its very definition - belongs to the populace en masse. People who try to copyright any part of that heritage would do well to consider their responsibilites towards it.

Incidentally, Legman used to tell a story about a US serviceman he met in Paris who wouldn't let Legman record his songs. He, wrongly, suspected that Legman would put them on an LP and that he wouldn't see a bean of the proceeds. Copyrighting of folksongs can sometimes have unfortunate consequences.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: greg stephens
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 06:32 AM

Fred M: your tale of Lonnie Donegan's agent has the whiff of an urban legend told in a bar. Would you care to give the story any provenance?

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 06:52 AM

It's in Peter Goldsmith. Making People's Music; Moe Asch and Folkways Records.Smithsonian Instuitution Press. 1988. The incident was reported, presumably direct to Goldsmith, by John Cohen of the New Lost City Ramblers. Since Cohen knew Asch (and his temper) very well, I am prepared to take it at face value.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 26 Apr 07 - 02:58 PM

The Lonnie Donegan story is exaggerated.
The first recordings were issued by the Library of Congress in 1934-1937. "Sing Out!" printed lyrics in 1952.
Donnegan recorded on Decca in 1956 and the record was an influential hit in the UK and North America.
Leadbelly had recorded "Rock Island Line" in 1937 (unissued at the time), but by 1944, four recordings were released. It had been collected by Lomax in 1934. Leadbelly, as a driver for Lomax, heard the song at Cummins State Farm, sung by Kelly Pace and other convicts.
Along with Donegan, the worksong was sung by the Weavers, Odetta, Grandpa Jones, the Tarriers, etc., etc.

Donegan, like the other performers who sang "Rock Island Line," was entitled to profit from his copyright recording. It is still available on UK imports, "King of Skiffle," and "Rock Island Line."
True or not, the tale of Asch and the agent is a common one; agents are always looking for more income- that's their job; but this is not the same as saying that Lonnie Donegan claimed original authorship. Recording companies, moreover, sometimes cited the performer as composer when they should have said 'arranger and performer.' Certainly Donnegan's take was original in its form. Claims by agents or recording companies are only that, and are ignored by anyone who knows the history of the music.

See "The Rock Island Line," pp. 472-477, Norm Cohen, "Long Steel Rail." on which these comments are based.

Others of the examples given by Fred McCormick need amplification and should not be taken at 'face value; I am sure that others will provide critical details as they have time.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: M.Ted
Date: 27 Apr 07 - 09:45 PM

The song was written by two well-established authors, composer Vasily Solovyov-Sedoy and poet Mikhail Matusovsky in 1955--according to ASCAP, who collect and pay out the royalties.
English lyrics have been written and copyrighted by Al (Hokey Pokey) Stillman and Milton Okun. Mr. Ball is not involved at all.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: M.Ted
Date: 27 Apr 07 - 09:46 PM

The song being Moscow Nights--

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 27 Apr 07 - 11:25 PM

Donegan, like the other performers who sang "Rock Island Line," was entitled to profit from his copyright recording. ??? WHY

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Jim Lad
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 03:11 AM

I am growing increasingly impatient with "Collectors" claiming copyrights to everything that they can get their hands on. I am and always will be a huge fan of "The Clancy Brothers & Tommy Makem" (Just one example) but well remember, as a very young man, discovering that they had laid claim to every Irish & even Scottish song that they could get their hands on with the old "Arranged and Adapted by ..." angle.
Thirty years later and I'm still tripping over this stuff. Not just with the aforementioned artists either.
Translate a song from Gaelic. Play with it to make it rhyme and you now own it? Please!! That's not songwriting.
Music is for sharing!

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 04:24 AM

Q. Then what was Lonnie Donegan's agent doing in Moe Asch's office trying to claim composer rights on a song which had been collected, and incidentally copyrighted by John Lomax, 20 odd years earlier. Donegan was entitled to make another arrangement of Rock Island Line. Nobody is disputing that. But arranging a piece is one thing. Claiming authorship is another. And before anyone asks, I'm not trying to justify John Lomax's own copyrighting activities.

M. Ted. You are perfectly correct. Moscow Nights was written by Vasily Solovyov-Sedoy Mikhail Matusovsky, not as I think I previously said by trad. Nevertheless that didn't stop Ball from claiming the authorship. I wonder if the fact that Russia was not then a signatory to the Berne convention had anything to do with that.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 02:01 PM

You seem to be saying that no one should profit from their version and recording of an old song, which is nonsense. If that was the case, no one would record it. The song might be preserved in dusty archives and the memory of a few itinerant wandering singers begging for change, but it would disappear from public view.

Do you have a referenced statement by Donegan saying he composed the song? Support your claims by quotes from Donegan and copyright holders, not claims by agents (by the way, this 'claim' is anecdotal- was it submitted in writing? Where is the record? Was the agent freelance? ).

Yes, the Lomax copyright (with the Library of Congress) holds on that version (two, I believe), just as Donegan (and his recording company) holds copyright on his version, Leadbelly (and his recording company) holds copyrights on his versions, and bakers-dozen others who have recorded the song hold copyrights on their takes on the song.   They all deserve their pay.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 02:30 PM

Nobody is arguing that a person is entitled to royalties as a performer of traditional music or song. However when someone has the gall to attach their own name with a copyright mark to something that they did not create it equates to at least moral theft even if the work was public domain and free for the taking. If someone by finding an unmarked grave, felt that would entitle them to pilfer it, we would have little sympathy with their claim. To steal from an unknown or long dead creater of the work is no different, in my opinion.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 04:26 PM

Obviously misunderstanding of copyright and its purpose.

Incidentally, copyrights are listed for the following
Lonnie Donegan, Skiffle Group. Three entries, marked copyright Leadbelly.
Lonnie Donegan- About 20 recordings as pressings on different labels, at different times, in compilations, etc.- Composer listed as Leadbelly
Donegan, many more pressings- no composer listed.
Donegan, 3-4 pressings, listed as tradition.
Donegan- no pressings listed with Donegan as composer.
The above from Allmusic AMG search.
About 200 more copyright covers listed.

Following the Library of Congress recordings made at the Cummins Prison in Arkansas, Leadbelly recorded for RCA Victor in 1940 and Capitol in 1944, among others.
Donegan recorded his skiffle version in 1956.
Johnnie Cash (who also had a copyright version of the song) sang it at the Cummins Prison in 1969, where it was first recorded.
From the online Encyclopedia of Arkansas entry on Rock Island Line.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 28 Apr 07 - 05:32 PM

Very true Q. Copyright by definition is the right of the creater to be the only one allowed to copy a work. This derives from English common law. Over the years this has been greatly corrupted by greed so that it now means something quite different.
Morally speaking stealing is stealing, and being legal changes nothing!

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 29 Apr 07 - 04:24 AM

"You seem to be saying that no one should profit from their version and recording of an old song, which is nonsense. If that was the case, no one would record it."

Why ? Have you never heard of performance royalties? Does nobody ever play Beethoven nowadays because they can't claim the composer copyright, or even the arranger copyright.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 29 Apr 07 - 08:20 AM

Hoping to clarify something here with regard to the UK.

Performance royalties administered by PRS are collected on behalf of the composer/writer of a work whenever that work is performed. No composer(pd), no royalties.

Public Performance Royalties administered by PPL are collected whenever a piece of recorded work gets played in public i.e; radio, TV, Club, Pub, Disco, Lift etc. Therefore if you record a pd piece and it gets played in any of the aforementioned places you collect royalties. Every different take or remix is copyrighted individually. The people who benefit from this are every person who performed on the recorded track or made a contribution which these days is ludicrous as it includes so called producers who butcher things with computer clicks etc or played two notes an a triangle in the final chords.

And isn't "sampling" stealing?

My apologies if I am wandering off thread.

Hoot

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: M.Ted
Date: 29 Apr 07 - 01:40 PM

The publisher for "Moscow Nights" is G Schirmer, Inc. in New York, and royalties are collected through ASCAP and in the UK by that PRS/PPL mechanism (which I am not really familar with)--if Mr. Ball collected, or tried to collect, composer royalties that he was not entitled to, it would have been worked out through them.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 29 Apr 07 - 01:54 PM

Yes but the USSR was not a signatory to the Berne Convention in those days. Therefore USSR copyrights were not recognised in the west and western copyrights were not recognised in the USSSR. Therefore, Kenny Ball would have been legally entitled to claim composer royalties on Moscow Nights and the legitimate composers would have had no redress.
I imagine that, since the collapse of the USSR, Russia has now signed up to the convention. If so, that may explain why the piece is now copyright to its authors.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: M.Ted
Date: 29 Apr 07 - 02:18 PM

I'm telling you that it was published in the US, Fred, credited to the original authors--for that reason--the earliest recording on this side of the Iron Curtain was Van Cliburn, not Kenny Ball--

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 29 Apr 07 - 02:26 PM

I can't speak for what happened in the US. But Kenny Ball is English, he is based in England, and he made the record in England. I can only tell you that he claimed copyright on it in England.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 29 Apr 07 - 03:59 PM

Charles McDevitt and Nancy Whiskey.
Their recording, Oriole CB 1352, 1957, "Freight Train," credits Cotten and McDevitt as near as I can find out from later pressings of the track. In 1957, he performed it in the States.
In view of McDevitt Skiffle approach, the joint citation seems reasonable.
Elizabeth Cotten and Sanga Music secured copyright for Freight Train in 1957, following court action. She was singing the song in 1952 according to the Traditional Ballad Index. Many covers credit her.

Frankly, how the UK handled copyright and citations by UK record companies received little attention here. I can find no verification that McDevitt and Whiskey ever claimed original copyright.

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: M.Ted
Date: 29 Apr 07 - 05:38 PM

I know Kenny Ball made the record in England, etc. I am also aware that he is credited with the work on some recordings. The Russian authors and a US publisher hold the rights to that song, and those rights are enforced in the UK. Authorship claims would have certainly come up at the time that the recording was originally popular--

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 30 Apr 07 - 04:32 AM

In the case of Freight Train I beleieve that McDevitt added a verse of his own " He lost his reason, lost his life......etc" and is therefore able to claim a piece of the royalties when someone sings a version of the song which includes that verse. For anyone performing the song the way that Elizabeth Cotten performed it therefore songwriting royalties should only be paid to Cotten's estate.

To clarify one point with which M Ted claims not to be familiar, as I pointed out above PPL collects royalties on behalf of the performers on a piece of recorded work whoever the writer/composer might be.Kenny Ball would therefore definitely be due PPL royalties.

Hoot

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: M.Ted
Date: 30 Apr 07 - 02:20 PM

Thank you for clearing up the point, Hoot--incidentally, Mr. Ball's recording was very popular in the US, as well. Here, unfortunately, the record companies pay royalties to the performers, the result being that many performers have never received their fair share--

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 01 May 07 - 09:12 AM

M Ted
When you say "Here, unfortunately, the record companies pay royalties to the performers, the result being that many performers have never received their fair share--" you are obviously referring to royalties on SALES of the recordings. This of course is nothing to do with the copyright owners/publishers such as Peer..

Hoot

Subject: RE: Ralph Peer and Copyright
From: M.Ted
Date: 01 May 07 - 12:11 PM

Those composer/lyricist/publishing royalties are collected and distributed by ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC. Of course, one of the main sources of royalties, both performer, and publisher/composer/llyricist come from sales of the recordings, but the mechanism for payment is different.