 sj |
||
|
||
Making folk club recordings available
|
|
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 04 Aug 21 - 04:03 PM As per the Nic Jones 1975 recording recently made available by myself, here is another from my archives for your enjoyment, which I have posted to youtube with Chris' permission: Chris Foster at the Gypsy Davey Folk Club, Oxford, March 1975 Audience tapes of Chris from this era seem to be virtually non existent (I have never heard another, although maybe Chris might have some) and so, seeing he is definitely in my "top three" of English traditional-style singer guitarists of the era (along with Martin Carthy and Nic Jones) this tape is pure gold. In fact I am not sure why it has lain unheard by others in my drawer for 46 years, but there you go. For those who may not be aware, Chris has resided in Iceland since 2004, but continues to make fine music and tour outside of that country on occasion. To keep up with his activity and purchase more recent music, visit www.chrisfoster-iceland.com/. Enjoy! - Tony |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Sandra in Sydney Date: 04 Aug 21 - 08:57 PM another good one, Tony, what else do you have in the drawer? |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 05 Aug 21 - 02:37 AM the odd thing, Sandra ... have to decide what to work on next! |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: GUEST Date: 06 Aug 21 - 11:42 AM Great job Tony Rees - The Chris Foster recording is fabulous and great to hear Chris all those years ago - the wonderful rural tones are still there in his voice and the guitar is there too....well done both. Tim Radford |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 06 Aug 21 - 02:45 PM To answer Sandra's question a bit more seriously, i.e. what's in the drawer - probably at least 50-100 different club/concert recordings, I do not have a count, on cassette/analogue video tape/a few CDR (DAT quality) and a few of the more recent ones as digital video (but not many of the latter), mostly trad and contemporary folk with a little jazz and country. Quality to posterity is variable - some local performers only of no general interest, others are professionals or semi-professional, either in UK or (since 1986) Australians, and Americans/UK on tour in Oz; some of the tape quality is variable too, especially the earlier ones. If I work up 2-3 per year for release there is probably 20+ years' work there, by which time I will be approaching ninety! So perhaps I should get my skates on. As discussed earlier, one stumbling block is getting performers' permission to release - but perhaps I should try harder - a few feelers put out in the past but no concerted effort. However (for example) both Nic Jones and Chris Foster have come to the party this year, so to speak... others just put put out there for "historic interest" without asking permission thus far. |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 06 Aug 21 - 03:40 PM And then there are off-air recordings too (radio and occasionally TV) - some not apparently available elsewhere (but that is a fish of a different colour...), plus a few traded tapes/things given to me by friends (not first generation, but who know if better copies survive...) - ho hum... |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 06 Aug 21 - 06:23 PM Some follow-up discussion on the Chris Foster recording on his Facebook page - not sure if you have to be his friend to read it - see Chris Foster comment + more - Tony |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: The Sandman Date: 09 Aug 21 - 02:36 PM re |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 25 Aug 21 - 04:12 AM Hi all, just chipping away at the archive further: Monsieur Camembert (band) - Hobart, March 2000 My live digital recording from the PA, with a little subsequent sweetening/remastering... FYI Monsieur Camembert is a 5-7(+) piece band from Sydney, Australia, who play their own blend of gypsy, swing, chanson and klezmer music, fronted by one Yaron Hallis. Their own page is at https://thehotclub.tripod.com/camembert.html. And yes, I did obtain permission from Yaron (just recently) to upload this concert recording, otherwise previously uncirculated. Enjoy... Regards - Tony |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Sandra in Sydney Date: 25 Aug 21 - 07:37 PM another good one, Tony, only (insert very large number here) more tapes to be processed! sandra ps. copying your link leads to a page with a link to their new website which gives a 404 error & a suggestion to update my browser (hmmmm, I updated my browser yesterday) & hovering over this suggestion shows browsehappy.com a site maintained by Wordpress according to Wikipedia. |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 26 Aug 21 - 02:49 AM Hi Sandra, Yes, it appears Monsieur Camembert's new web site is not online/operational yet. We will await further developments! Meanwhile you might be amused to know that the group is named after the nickname of Baro Ferret, one of Django's accompanists and an excellent (but little recorded) guitar player in his own right, so named because of his great love of that particular cheese... Cheers - Tony |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Sandra in Sydney Date: 26 Aug 21 - 05:00 AM once upon a time I had a lot of jazz CDs, including a couple of boxed set o Django's music but then I got more involved in folks & eventually the dust-collecting jazz when to a charity. being named after a classic cheese is an excellent idea. |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 11 Sep 21 - 04:23 PM Next recording from the archive (video this time): The Wrigley Sisters (Jennifer & Hazel Wrigley) live in concert, Tasmania, 2002 With thanks to Hazel and Jennifer for permission to upload! Cheers - Tony |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 12 Sep 21 - 04:20 PM Since this thread is becoming a bit long, and has also maybe served its purpose, at least for discussing the ethics of / available mechanisms for making folk club recordings available, I thought I would create a separate thread for consolidation of "my" small contributions to the greater good of making this stuff available for the enjoyment of others: so see new thread at Live recordings - Tony Rees archive. I will also use that place to announce future material that I put on line as I have enthusiasm and time available. Cheers - Tony |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 12 Sep 21 - 04:23 PM Sorry, error with the link posted above: try this one: Live recordings - Tony Rees archive. |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 14 Sep 21 - 04:05 PM Just a follow-up to some discussion earlier in this thread - regarding the ethics of putting out material with/without permission of the original performers... I have taken the suggestions on board and since this year, attempted to contact performers (in this case, pro- and semi-pro musicians in the main) before putting material up, following the principle that they deserve to be the "gatekeepers" of such material recorded by audience members - whether this is ultimately for good or bad (for posterity) is a different question of course. Of around 10 acts contacted this far, about 7 said OK (some with a little hesitation in case they thought that the performance might not be good enough, or no-one would be interested in seeing/hearing it, or they may have said something politically incorrect on the night...), so those shows have gone up... One has said no, they prefer to keep control of "performance quality" of what is available to go out to their audience, and this *might* not be good enbough (that is without seiing the footage, I have sent it privately to see if I can change their mind). One I sent to the artist who (it turns out) is doing their own series of live recording releases, and *may* want some of it for inclusion in that; what happens to the rest, or all of it if nothing is used, is not clear... Another tape is a bit bogged down... one member of the group concerned is fine with it, but needs to contact 2 others who may or may not be contactable 25+ years later to get their OK as well... Hmm. I am still hoping that one can go out at some stage. In several cases I sent the material to the artists involved several years back and received a vague "thanks" but no bites as to my suggestion to release it further, however on re-contacting them recently they said fine, why not? So it seems persistence can be required, and produce a useful result in some cases... Just my experiences so far, potentially of interest RE this thread, more to come no doubt. Cheers - Tony |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: punkfolkrocker Date: 14 Sep 21 - 04:24 PM Brilliant effort and commitment to preserve our niche musical culture for music enthusiasts .. |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 14 Sep 21 - 06:09 PM Thanks PFR for your kind comment... Just mulling over this further - I am certain that, in some cases, "original artists" can have a different viewpoint on this sort of material than "fans" or serious devotees of the music ... for the original artist, what they did 40, 20 years ago, or less, can be of little interest to them (apparently) since either they have moved on since, or may view early appearances with a certain "cringe factor" - I know I do! As per, "did I really look/play/sing like that back in those days". Hard to reconcile the two viewpoints, plus that of history to come... As you may sense from previous views expressed here, I am on the side of history, but agree that present views of of artists should be respected. What happens when some or all of us are later deceased is a different matter again, maybe... Regards - Tony |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Sandra in Sydney Date: 14 Sep 21 - 08:48 PM Since 2008 we've been recording all our concerts, but almost nothing is on our Loaded Dog Folk Club youtube channel - 16 videos in 13 years, & 2 of them came from other events! Our recordings are an archival record of a local folk club with a very famous singing audience. If the artists want a copy of their set they can get a copy. Maybe one day in years to come, maybe when we are all ash or dust, someone will go thru our archives ... |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 15 Sep 21 - 01:14 AM RE my previous post about contacting artists for permission to make their performances available, I wrote: "Of around 10 acts contacted this far, about 7 said OK" Actually I was forgetting, several other emails I sent just never got an answer. Maybe the persons involved just don't care about their old work getting out there (but their followers do!)... - Tony |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: punkfolkrocker Date: 15 Sep 21 - 01:52 AM errrmmm.. well us lot should know better than most other music fans just how difficult, unreliable, unhelpful, stubborn, petty, contrary, spiteful, etc, etc, etc, music artists can be.. Particularly as they become older and more misanthropic... Yes.. WE musicians and singers don't always have the best judgement and intentions regarding our musical legacy... Then there's obstructive greedy relatives inheriting our estates who can make matters even worse for music fans... Music enthusiast folks like you Tony deserve full praise for volunteering to put up with and negotiate all the problems to keep our long forgotten music alive and accessible... Cheers... On the other hand, us musicians don't have to become such dicks at the end of our lives; and in reality most us us hopefully aint...!!! |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 26 Sep 21 - 04:00 PM My audio and video "releases from the archives" is continuing quite well, see other thread "Live recordings - Tony Rees archive", https://mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=170354. Meanwhile an interesting dilemma... as sometimes happens, a touring act plays more than one show in one's home town and I happened to tape or video more than one of them (in this case, two on consecutive nights). What to do? Put up both (probably overkill); try to select the overall better of the 2 as a historical document; or fillet the best numbers/performances out of each and join them together in a form that no longer represents an intact concert? Hmm... Graham Nash did the third of these options for the 40-date tour of Crosby/Stills/Nash/Young in 1974, for a live compilation released many years later. However there are still those (myself included) who also enjoy watching a complete show at a single venue, only possible because a bootleg exists in this case (the dreaded "b" word again...) |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: punkfolkrocker Date: 27 Sep 21 - 09:57 AM Tony - you know hardcore fans would want both concerts.. .. even if casual listeners couldn't detect a single note of difference... You might find this kinda tangential related article interesting...??? https://www.soundonsound.com/people/steven-wilson-remixing-classic-albums Extracts: "Wilson's first crack at remixing for another artist was also his first experience of finding alternative takes and unheard versions among the multitracks, which can form part of the draw for fans who always want to hear that little bit extra from the archive. Wilson's personal preference is to find new songs or completely alternative treatments of songs, rather than simply alternative takes. On Crimson King he found a haunting version of 'I Talk To The Wind' with just Fripp on guitar and Ian McDonald on flute. "That was a beautiful instrumental," he says, "and a completely different piece, really, not just another take of what we already know. To me, alternate takes are not so interesting, though I understand there are people out there who would happily listen to a whole disc of studio run-throughs of '21st Century Schizoid Man'. What I'm excited by is when you find a performance that actually adds something new to the canon." "The artist can be an important contributor to the process. "They have the prerogative, of course, to change their own work," Wilson says. "You don't want to mess with someone else's vision, but all the same I think often it's better that the artist isn't too closely involved in the project, at least during the main mixing process. One artist refused to include a version of a classic track with seven or so minutes of the band improvising beyond the original fade; another vetoed an out-take because he hadn't written it. Wilson has to be a diplomat in addition to his technical duties." "Many of the Tull records that Wilson has remixed provided an unusually rich seam of unreleased or little-heard songs. In his estimation, the Tull tapes generally reveal at least twice as many songs as were selected for the final album. With Aqualung, for example, there was enough for an entire disc of such material, most of which was in an almost-finished state. "The Tull series has been a lot of fun," he says, "finding all these completely unreleased songs that even Ian can't remember recording. Apparently they quite often went into the studio, recorded a song, and then literally forgot all about it — didn't even mix it!." "There have even been instances where the artist has asked Wilson to change things and he has been resistant. "One said to me 'Oh, when we played that in the studio, we played it too slow. Can you speed it up?' I said 'No! I'm not going to do that. This is a classic album, and whether you're happy with it or not, this is like a sacred text. I'm not going to change it." |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 27 Sep 21 - 03:32 PM Thanks PFR... you write: > Tony - you know hardcore fans would want both concerts.. > .. even if casual listeners couldn't detect a single note of > difference... Correct - but there are varying levels of "hardcore" and "fans"... I think my dilemma described here arises because I am trying to do 2 functions with a single tool (youtube) which is better for the second than the first, in practice at least. The first is to archive materials for posterity (for which I too think both concerts should be preserved) and the second is to make material available (and sufficiently interesting) to potential listeners/viewers, which may require judicious subsetting, editing and splicing, or simply avoiding posting "almost" the same material twice to avoid boredom/overkill. Meanwhile in this case I have decided to hedge my bets for the moment, as follows - (1) digitise both concerts at best quality for my own holdings before the tape deteriorates any further; and (2) send a (slightly reduced quality, suitable for easier emailing and youtube) copy of both concerts to the original artist, who has expressed the desire to do the upload themselves to their own youtube channel, and let them decide which is the better one for public viewing (in other words, outsource the "hard" decision/s). Obviously this does not quite fulfil the "permanent archive" function, but also does not close off any future options, at least so long as COVID (or a passing truck) does not carry me off... Cheers - Tony |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 27 Sep 21 - 06:18 PM The above small exchange prompts some further thoughts, for those that have the patience to read further... Up to now with this thread, I have been (mainly) addressing the stated topic which is "Making folk club recordings available", however in my mind I have been conflating it with a related but different issue, namely, creating a long term repository (archive) of this material, something I had already addressed (sort of) with my parallel archive of photographs, see other mudcat thread, "A repository for your music pictures...". For pictures, I figured that I could use Wikimedia Commons as both an archive and as the means to make the material available; as a repository, it allows you to upload material of as high resolution exists (more or less) and you are happy to release for public re-use, also it is maintained "in perpetuity" (hopefully) by the Wikimedia Foundation, which is a non-commercial, public-good operation. However for audio and/or video recordings, the vehicle I have settled on - YouTube - at least for now, is not really archival quality: video and, in particular audio are not stored at their original highest quality settings (although the HD video capacity is pretty good, and probably exceeds the low-to-medium resolution of most of my original videos), with the result that the question of a long term archive (preferably maintained in perpetuity by someone else, at no cost to the depositer) is not really answered at this time: when I pass on, my original materials will still most likely go to the tip. Thoughts, anyone? |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: GUEST Date: 27 Sep 21 - 08:29 PM Whilst you may try and take no responsibility - some recordings will contain copyright songs. These songs may be owned by publishers and copyright collection societies. Fine if its outright trad. stuff. but the original performers may not hold the rights to songs even if they gave you permission to put them on youtube, When you sign a rights collection agreement, it gives the organisation the rights to license the work. I note on one outright bootleg recording you put on youtube of Albert Lee, that an auto recognition software match was made on a couple of songs. It really is a step too far to start distributing copyright material without considering that you have to check each individual song's status. Make that material available on some kind of external site, and someone else is likely to take even free material and sell it, ripping off songwriters, artists, publishers, and rights organisations. |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 28 Sep 21 - 12:26 AM Hi Guest once more (I'm sure we could get better acquainted if you had a name, but there you go)... Look, I do take your comments on board and you will note that, from Nic Jones onwards with my uploads, except for a couple, I have not only refrained from putting anything up that includes "cover versions" where the copyright interests to which you allude may well apply, but also cleared the uploads with the artsts themselves, to ensure that they are happy for these audience recordings (bootlegs if you will) to be put up with their approval. RE "Make that material available on some kind of external site, and someone else is likely to take even free material and sell it, ripping off songwriters, artists, publishers, and rights organisations." - well that is what I actually call bootlegging (or piracy), taking someone else's property withut authorization and trying to make money out of it. Of course educated potential purchasers will (or should) avoid paying for such products since they can get them without charge if they look. The same bootleggers can (and do) take commercially available product and bootleg that - I cannot see why they should find old audience recordings of a niche listening area a likely target in reality, compared with (say) Michael Jackson, Sting, etc. etc. The Albert Lee/Vince Gill show to which you refer is actually an interesting case: it turns out that "the guys" did 2 shows there on consecutive days, day 1 was taped by the sound guy from the PA (better quality) and day 2 by myself from the audience (worse quality), and the "better quality" recording has just received an official release, selected tracks available here via youtube: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Albert+Lee+Vince+Gill+LIVE+at+the+Prince+of+Wales+Hotel+1988. 2 of these are the ones picked up by the YouTube "automatic listener" as potential copyright violations... however the "official" release is a lot clearer and I cannot see in practice that my "unofficial" one is in any way a threat to any revenues that the "official" one might generate. In any case, in these situations, YouTube does not remove the material, it merely issues a caution that myself as the uploader cannot make any money from it via advertising revenue, which is fair enough in my book. The bottom line (for me) is that if either Albert or Vince, or their management, so advise, I can always take my "rival" version down (in fact I have been told that they are aware it exists, and have chosen not to do so, thus far at least). So I sleep (reasonably) happy at night in this particular case, but can always alter my position should the situation change. Ultimately again this is just revisiting territory covered earlier in this thread, for which there are a range of viewpoints, for which the olders are unlikely to change their positions any time soon... |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: GUEST Date: 28 Sep 21 - 02:15 AM Auto recognition only works in certain cases, and is never failsafe on any side. But what it does do is allow the publishers and some copyright societies to monetize the track if they should choose. There are so many millions of videos out there, that a lot gets ignored and never found. However, any copyright holder can order youtube to remove material but they have to know that they are being pirated in the first place. Youtube will remove it when a complaint is made. There are separate copyrights involved in the performance and the songs being performed. Just cause nobody has seen it doesn't make it legal. You are still a bootlegger and acting against the copyright act, it's just that those involved don't know. But it was your intention to freely distribute modern copyright recordings which is totally immoral. There is a fine line difference between putting up a niche recording on the quiet and the creation of a specific free exchange system of copyright material. Also it does people out of artistic credit for songs, and people thinking there is no copyright in a work. As I say though a different matter for old trad. material, but even then there may be published arrangements involved. |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: punkfolkrocker Date: 28 Sep 21 - 03:10 AM "totally immoral.. GUEST - .. and with that you have blown any chance of being taken seriously, or being accorded further respect for your position. Tony wasted too much time and energy being reasonable and polite to you, when 2 short sharp words would have been far more apropriate... .. totally immoral FFS.. get a grip... Tell us you aren't one of those music biz legal/accounting parasites screwing your big fat percentage out of the meagre earnings of music artists...??? Why not talk about the scandal of major music corporations getting away with plaguing youtube musicians with dishonest false rights claims on their hard work videos, to ruthlessly extort advertising revenue.. That's real piracy with menace.. That's what's bloody immoral...!!! |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 28 Sep 21 - 04:03 AM "Totally immoral" - no, since putting up the Nic Jones show, the copyright for all the material that I have uploaded is either trad (no copyright) or resides with the performers who have given me approval to put up the shows (own compositions), namely: Jez Lowe, Tasmania 1997 - own compositions, permission given Mark Robson (musician), Tasmania 1995 - own compositions, permission given Kristina Olsen, Tasmania 1997 - own compositions, permission given Kavisha Mazzella, Australian singer-songwriter, Tasmania 1996 (main hall set) - own compositions, permission given Neil Adam (Australian Singer-Songwriter), Tasmania 1997 - own compositions, permission given The Wrigley Sisters (Jennifer & Hazel Wrigley) live in concert, Tasmania, March 2002 - own compositions plus trad., permission given Monsieur Camembert (band) - Hobart, March 2000 (audio) - own compositions + trad., permission given Chris Foster in concert 1975 / in session 1977 (audio only) - traditional, permission given Chris Foster at the Gypsy Davey Folk Club, Oxford, March 1975 (audio only) - traditional, permission given Nic Jones at Oxford Polytechnic Folk Club, March 1975 (audio only) - traditional, permission given If regarding other shows my actions are "totally immoral", I am in good (bad?) company, e.g. see Dime, Sugarmegs as well as Youtube - many, many, many, many more shows put up there than mine. I suggest you address your complaints there in the first instance and see how far it gets you... There are indeed a small number of older shows that I uploaded for which I did not seek permission, but the weight of views on this forum (other than yours) seems to be that there is minimal harm done, and they can be removed if requested by relevant parties. Honestly, I am not trying to pick a fight here, just trying to find a way to save culturally significant material that would otherwise disappear when I do... - Tony |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Dave the Gnome Date: 28 Sep 21 - 08:24 AM If anyone is in the slightest bit interested, Swinton Folk Club had a YouTube page All recording from around 2010 and all done with permission. |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: GUEST Date: 28 Sep 21 - 10:55 AM Performers giving permission is not a guarantee, or get out clause. You would have to check every single song, and its ownership status. An artist doesn't necessarily own a song, it depends whether it is public domain, whether it has a publisher, whether it is signed to a collection society. There are two rights, the performer's rights (which they may have wavered), and the material they are performing, which they may own or not own. It might be fully trad. To forgo some of these rights is not for the artist to do, if it is assigned to a publisher or copyright society. You are still acting illegally with the Albert Lee/Vince Gill recording and other modern copyright material. It's just that you may not ever get noticed, and they have untold amounts of bigger issues to deal with. |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Dave the Gnome Date: 28 Sep 21 - 11:00 AM Interesting, above Guest. Thank you. Do these things still apply if no money is changing hands? |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: punkfolkrocker Date: 28 Sep 21 - 11:29 AM "illegal" - that's a big powerful threatening word to be bandying about...??? GUEST - So.. sharing free niche genre amateur recordings with fellow music enthusiasts and archivists.. This evil immoral crime is TOP of international law enforcement's list of most important urgent investigations.. is it ??? Tony Rees - Public Enemy Number One.. If seen, do not approach this arch criminal. He may be armed with an old cassette recorder... .. get a grip...!!! |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: GUEST Date: 28 Sep 21 - 11:50 AM Yes Dave the Gnome. Though it is seldom a problem, as the Internet is so vast. But you can have any copyright material pulled, whether money is changing hands or not. Also even youtube have started placing adverts on channels. The big guns use auto recognition software to pick up on song use, but it is seldom effective and often wrong. As in the case of Albert Lee and Vince Gill. It only picked out two songs, and not the actual recordings being used. So it will not at the moment pick up on Joe Bloggs performing a cover of some obscure folk song. The copyright notice you receive is not permission, it just means that two songs were picked up on, and that the owner can place adverts on the songs, usually instead of having them removed. But they can still ask for removal. All rights holders can have anything removed, but many are happy to see old recordings appear. But as said, the artist may not have the right to give permission on the song they are singing, unless it is truly traditional or they own their own rights. |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Dave the Gnome Date: 28 Sep 21 - 12:02 PM Thanks again, Guest. Much appreciated. Is the word "illegal" right though? Surely, if it is illegal, it is a criminal offence and can result in criminal prosecution and punishment? Or is that what unlawful means? I always get the terms confused! Anyhow, whatever the case, posting or performing copyrighted music would not incur criminal proceedings but civil ones would it not? And, as long as the party performing or posting complied with any ruling on the civil case, they would not be prosecuted. Or is that too simplistic? |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: GUEST Date: 28 Sep 21 - 01:24 PM Just technically illegal, but on a small scale - intellectual copyright theft in the UK. Almost always civil means are used. The federation against copyright theft, and BPI take down websites on a larger scale - like they used to do with pirate factories, but mostly copyright owners are left to get on with it using civil means, as there are always plagiarism claims and duplicate claims. The costs are prohibitive. So criminally usually used to take down 'factories' and illegal download websites that kind of larger stuff. But it is not a lie to say recording material from a concert and making it available, without all permissions in place, is usually technically illegal. Then I bet even the odd police man whips their mobile phone out records a concert and shoves excerpts on social media. When do we cross a line between low key sharing odd videos and recordings for fun, and something that is obviously dodgy and deliberately going to a different level? It is a difficult call to make. |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: punkfolkrocker Date: 28 Sep 21 - 01:35 PM Despite the power and greed of American / International music industry lobbyists, these laws are effectively way outdated, and near impossible to enforce. Beyond occasional showcase trials and draconion punishments intended to intimidate sharing music fans. The Music biz has had 30 years to adjust to the internet, and is now gleefully ripping off music artists with legal streaming sites.. .. and bullying youtube channels to hand over their pittance of advertising revenue.. So who are the real villains...??? |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: Tony Rees Date: 28 Sep 21 - 03:18 PM Actually I do believe that YouTube and similar sites operate in a bit of a grey area of "technical illegality" at the present, however the existence of audience and similar non-professional recordings (in particular) is tolerated by the copyright holders, where infringed, on the basis that (1) most publicity is good publicity, and helps also drive new users to "official product" from which money can be made, and (2) the artists themselves (and by extension their lawyers and publishing companies) maybe do not want the bad press that would accompany prosecutions of fans for sharing such material, since without fans, they would have no existence in the "music business", also they prefer to look more like good guys than bad guys... I do foresee 2 alternatives down the track (a bit like home video taping TV shows, technically illegal in many countries for a long period in the past - you could technically buy the machine, but it was illegal to use it) - one, come down in a draconian fashion on all unauthorized content on YouTube etc. (force them to take it down), or two, accept it is there, make it legal, and monetize it with ad revenue back to the copyright owners (which is almost the situation today). I would be interested to know whether those shouting loudest about the technical illegality of these actions can place their hand on their heart and say that if visited tomorrow by the copyright police, said police would not find in their possession a single home-burned CD/digital copy of a commercially released item, or a cassette copy of a vinyl record made in years gone by, or even a video recording made off the TV for purposes other than time shifting - all other cases where the law if applied to the letter would look stupid. - Tony |
|
Subject: RE: Making folk club recordings available From: punkfolkrocker Date: 28 Sep 21 - 07:44 PM "Grey area"...??? Youtube business model depends on turning a blind eye... Millions of folk work hard on uploading videos to provide youtube with free content, which they then monetize with advertising rake-offs. Feeding a little revenue back down the chain to individual video makers. Major corporation rights holders, and other criminals, then exploit any petty accusations of infringements to mug the small fry videographers, forcing them to hand over their ad money under various threats to their channels.. Easy scam money off the backs of powerless ordinary folks, simply by employing AI and minions to log petty, or downright false, complaints on an industrial scale. Youtube automatically sides with the dispute fabricators to maintain a charade of stringent legality. Meanwhile, youtube is also making a nice little earner charging subscription fees to stream and download all this 'no questions asked / grey area' content on Youtube Premiun, and Youtube music... The main premium selling point is the facility to DOWNLOAD...!!! Youtube could't survive if they only provided 100% technically legal content... We know it.. they know it... |
| Share Thread: |