Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: The Sandman
Date: 27 Sep 06 - 04:18 PM

Is this not the time for the efdss , to stand up and demand the missing tapes back .

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Sep 06 - 05:08 PM

Cap'n
The EFDSS has a full set of the songs, now digitised. The question is what use can be made of them.
In the past this has been restricted by that fact that Kennedy assumed ownership and demanded money and conditions (dubbed accompaniments) for their use.
The actual field recordings would be useful academically, but the first job is to establish rightful ownership.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: GUEST,Hootenanny
Date: 27 Sep 06 - 05:28 PM

Jim, I didn't realise that the EFDSS had digitised copies of all the recordings. If they all originate from recording trips funded by the BBC then surely there is no question that they are the property of the BBC.

I know that commercially issued recordings i.e; records that were available via normal commercial outlets go out of copyright after 50 years which is why Cliff Richard has apparently headed a campaign to get this extended to 75 years as he is obviously short of a few bob. I'm talking here of the actual issued recorded version of a piece of work, re-mixes and later issues start from scratch. This does not apply of course to writers and composers. PD material would therefore not be affected by this. However, I digress.
If the recordings owned originally by the BBC have never been issued commercially then it would seem logical that the BBC are the rightful owners.

Hope that makes sense ?

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 02:48 AM

Hootenany,
It does - but.............
Once 'As I Roved Out' finished the BBC appeared to lose interest in what happened to the project.
As I understand it, originally they kept a multiple supply of each song on acetate discs. after a couple of plays each disc was smashed until the supply dwindled. I have no idea if they were ever replaced and what the state of play is now.
The EFDSS set was at first kept on disc but has recently been digitised.
As the project was a joint BBC/EFDSS one it would seem that the material belonged equally to both organisations.
Kennedy claimed ownership of the collection and was never challenged.
It would be a dodgy situation if the collection was reclaimed by the BBC as they would charge the going rate for their use; they don't discriminate between an old traditional singer and the latest pop superstar (the rate for use stood one time at (I think) £3 per second).
As far as I can see, the responsibility lies with EFDSS to see that the collection is reclaimed for us.
Anybody interested can look at the BBC's excellent index to the collection at Cecil Sharp Housse
Jim Carroll
PS Your posting seems to be far more articulate than mine - late night!

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 03:17 AM

I realise everyone must behaving a laugh at my expense, having tried to defend PETER KENNEDY and then finding he had recorded Bald headed end of the Broom, without my written permission [It was arranged by Dick AND Sue Miles].the song was originally heard by myself from the playing of Alan Ashwell.I then found the melody and words in Kennedys book.
THE ARRANGEMENT features bass clarinet and guitar, and was way beyond Peter Kennedys musical accomplishments.However as a commercial rival, one track on a cassette[ recorded illegally from the BBC off OUR l p]is a non starter. If however the track was sold on to somebody [lets say an advertising firm who used it as a jingle on t v,] the situation would be different.THIS is concrete evidence of kennedys wrong doing.I havent talked to Sue yet , She may feel differently about it.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Folkiedave
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 03:44 AM

It seems Dick that you have some of the concrete evidence that Mustrad is looking for. As did Jim of course. Thanks you both for putting your name to what you have written.

Still seems a strange way for a magazine to go about things to me, making anonymous allegations and then asking for concrete evidence.


Dave Eyre

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 03:45 AM

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 03:51 AM

I apologise to Fred MCORMICK he was right and I was wrong. however I am indebted to Kennedy, I have had great pleasure from his recordings and books,It is very sad that he had to spoil his work with his attitude, as regards dubbing and illegal ownership.
Dick Miles.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 05:30 AM

RE., Jim Carroll's questions about ultimate ownership of the "Kennedy" collection.

I think it's vital that we find out what happens to it and where it will eventually end up. My understanding of British copyright law is not good, and my knowledge of U.S. copyright is far worse. Therefore, please bear with me if there any errors in the following. I am concerned with the overall scenario, and how it could affect the ultimate destiny of the collection, rather than with exploring the legal minutiae.

However, at the present moment (this may change once the Gowers Committee reports and its findings are drafted into legislation), mechanical copyright expires fifty years from the date of first issue, or from the date of recording in the case of unissued material. What's more, I gather that around 60% of the collection has never seen publication in any form. Thus, it looks as though a very large part of the "Kennedy" collection is now out of copyright and the rest will follow in due course.

The situation in the U.S. is rather different. There, mechanical copyright runs for 95 years for published recordings and 120 years for unissued recordings. That might be a significant inducement for someone to buy the collection and re-house it in America.

What I don't know, and what we perhaps need to find out, is whether U.S. copyright law can be applied to a collection bought overseas, when it consists almost entirely of non-US recordings. Also, if the copyright of the "Kennedy" collection could be renewed by its transfer to the U.S., how does that affect the situation over here. Does the status quo, as it existed before sale, still apply ?

Let me point out that, since the National Sound Archive and EFDSS hold digitised copies (plus, I believe that Taisce Cheoil Duchas Éireann hold digitised copies of the Irish recordings), the issue is not where the collection ends up. The issue we need to address is how any change of ownership of the collection will affect public access.

If those scenarios are realistic, then there could be severe ramifications, vis-a-vis the "American academics bearing blank cheques", of which Jim speaks. That is problem No 1.

Problem No 2 is that "American academics bearing blank cheques" may not be all that familiar with what they are trying to buy. They may not know that a large part of the collection was not gathered by Kennedy, that large parts of it have been pirated from other sources, and that his claims to copyright are largely spurious.

I don't want to turn this into a debate on the legal niceties of copyright, and I'd appreciate it if people wouldn't swamp this thread with corrections, unless they know something which undermines the scenario I've just offered.

But it seems to me that the best way to protect this vital part of our national heritage, and one which was garnered with public money and ought to belong to the public, is to clarify Kennedy's fraudulent behaviour once and for all.

BTW. Dick, the cassette of which you speak. If you mean the one entitled, The Bald Headed End of The Broom; Songs of Uneasy Wedlock, that has been in the Folktracks catalogue (as it was then) for at least twenty years. I cannot be sure whether we're talking about the same one because the catalogue in front of me doesn't specify the performer(s) on that cassette. No disrespect to you, or your performing abilities, but I wonder if anyone bought it expecting to hear an anthology of field recorded traditional singers.........

"Just a thought while we sit around arguing the toss.
Whatever PKs strengths and weaknesses, in the not too distant future the fate of the collection will have to be decided.
When it was suggested some time ago that the VWML was sold there were at least two American academics bearing blank cheques waiting in the wings.
As far as I'm concerned one of the most important collection of field recordings ever to be made in the UK and Ireland should (does) belong to the nation.
I wonder who will end up owning it?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 06:45 AM

To fred,
Rod asked for concrete evidence, its there, click under performers go to m. Miles Dick and Sue england duo 1984, the Bald headed end of the Broom radio, FOLK ON TWO CASSETTE 0453.The whole point is that it was recorded illegally without our permission, without the permission of Sweet folk all recordings[as far as i know]. it states quite clearly who the performers are, it doesnt say its a field recording.DickMiles

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: nutty
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 08:17 AM

Peter Kennedy has not just one Graeme Miles Song but 11 TAPES worth of Graeme Miles material that is offered for sale by Folktrax.
Surely this material should be returned to Graeme rather than put up for sale with the rest of Kennedy's recorded material (if indeed it is put up for sale).

Come to that, have Fred or Rod Stradling ever contacted Graeme about the use of his material by Kennedy? If not - I suggest that they should do so.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 09:12 AM

likewise I noticed the old hat party. Im sure John Howson wouldnt have given permission.
The reason its taken me twenty two years to realise, is that until I acquired a computer, [which was recent] .I had no reason to look at folktrax,s catalogue.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 09:33 AM

Bald Headed End of The Broom. It looks as though we're talking about two different cassettes. Sorry. It's just that the one in the old Folktracks catalogue didn't say who it was by.

Regarding Kennedy's expropriation of other people's material, I'm not suggesting this should be reclaimed for the nation. It should of course be restored to its rightful owners, plus any money owing to them.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Folkiedave
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 09:53 AM

Let me point out that, since the National Sound Archive and EFDSS hold digitised copies

Fred, you state that with a clarity and certainty.

Tell me how you know. Have you checked with the EFDSS or NSA? If not why not? Seems important not to make statements that mislead people.

But it seems to me that the best way to protect this vital part of our national heritage, and one which was garnered with public money and ought to belong to the public, is to clarify Kennedy's fraudulent behaviour once and for all.

I agree with the first part of that in its entirety, as far as ".......ought to belong to the public...." I am not sure how the second half follows. In fact I can envisage circumstances where any such exposure could be a hindrance.

Now following from that fine piece of rhetoric Fred on how this all ought to belong to the nation and how access to all and sundry ought to be guaranteed where do you suggest this happens? And who will fund it?

To dispel any possible doubt in all this let me say I believe that the collection should have been be kept in its entirety, all of it.

Find me a place who will guarantee to store all of it, tapes, films and photographs etc. under the expensive conditions that it ought to be stored, with proper archiving and cataloguing. Tell me an organisation that has the space, time and staff. And who will then allow reasonably priced access to the general public in the terms you suggest.

When you have thought of some names Fred, write, telephone and/or email them and see if they are busy enough with the materials they have already got, see if they are prepared to supply the conditions necessary for the delicate storage particularly of the tapes, copy them to make sure the originals are preserved, see how much staff time they are prepared to invest in all this and see how they will give access to the general public.

And then come back on here and name some names. I´d be delighted to hear them.

You see Fred it is alright making grand statements about what ought to happen - making them happen is not so easy. And believe me Fred, copyright is the least of your worries.

And whilst you are at it Fred, tell us all how Mustrad publishing anonymous allegations built up over a period of time and then published with a request for evidence to support them, helps all this.

And finally Fred when you have a moment, why not use it to think how the family feels? Imagine how you might feel to read such wranglings over any heritage you left behind.

Dave Eyre

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Folkiedave
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 10:07 AM

I thought to myself why leave someone else to do the work so I got in touch with Malcolm Taylor at the EFDSS.

Here is his reply prompt reply - reproduced with permission as you can see.

....please pass on the fact that we don't have any digitised material from the PK collection. We do of course have the BBC discs, which might or might not amount to the same thing. But nothing from Peter. We bought a number of Folktrax cassettes in the 70s (before my time) but that is all we have direct from him.

Now Fred, get in touch with the NSA and see what they say.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 10:27 AM

Dave,

I don't whether you are deliberately trying to get up my nose, but you are damned well succeeding. Indeed, I am fast coming to the conclusion that your contribution to this thread is entirely scurrilous.

My email said nothing about retaining the collection in this country. I merely pointed out that if it is sold abroad it MIGHT run into copyright problems which could rebound on public use in this country.

Dave, do you think I am sufficiently out of touch not to know whether the National Sound Archive has digitised copies ? Do you think I would be stupid enough to make such a statemnt without checking first ?

If you had bothered to check, you would have found that the collection is listed on the NSA's on-line database. Perhaps I could introduce you to a friend of mine. His name is Andrew King. He was paid by the NSA to catalogue the damned things.

Please don't talk drivel about writing grand statements when you are plainly incapabale of reading and understanding what I wrote.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 10:39 AM

Re. Dave Eyre's bit of "research". There was talk some time ago of the EFDSS obtaining a set of the digitised NSA copies. Someone else referred to them having a set and I assumed that work on obtaining them was in progress or complete.

However, from the point of view of my original statement, it doesn't matter a twopenny damn whether the EFDSS has a digitised set or the original 78s. The fact is that they are in the NSA, and they are available for public use. My concern is not with where the materials of the collection end up, but with who finishes up owning Kennedy's entirely spurious copyrights.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Folkiedave
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 11:45 AM

Well Fred, you wrote that the EFDSS had digitised copies of the Kennedy Collection and it turned out you were wrong. I couldn´t imagine you would be stupid enough to make such a statement without checking it first - but you did. Of course that gets up your nose.

I am also pretty sure that the material that Andrew King catalogued was in fact the complete Folktrax catalogue not the original tapes. And I am happy to be wrong about that. But I am damned if I am going to do all your checking for you.

And no need to introduce me Fred, I met him a couple of times and when his contract was coming to an end at NSA I wrote a letter of support for his further employment. I had a nice reply thanking me.

But it seems to me that the best way to protect this vital part of our national heritage, and one which was garnered with public money and ought to belong to the public,

then in the next email you wrote:

My email said nothing about retaining the collection in this country

Do you not see those as mutually exclusive? Semantically maybe not, I would think any normal person would read that as a plea for the collection to be kept in this country. But in fact it makes little difference to my point which as usual you fail to address.

Where will it go? Make a list Fred, anywhere in the world contact them and ask them if they want it. It may seem strange to people reading how important that this collection is, consisting as it does of a whole melange of folk-related material that many of us would properly regard as priceless, cannot be found a home.

Suppose I was in a position to offer it to Fred. He would need somewhere to house it with high quality storage conditions, someone to catalogue and at the same time digitise it and the equipment that goes with that, someone to copy the original tapes and photographs, copy the films, and then look after it and make sure it is accessible to the general public. On top of all that it would need someone to start tracing the original copyright holders and their successors and check that what is there is so legitimately. And start paying people royalties.

And that I might respectfully suggest is the serious problem. Compared to that copyright is a minor issue.

Any comment on my other points yet Fred? The one about Mustrad publishing anonymous allegations and the other about how the family might feel?

Scurrilous Fred? No, just anxious to ensure that the facts don´t spoil a good story.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Folkiedave
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 11:54 AM

Re. Dave Eyre's bit of "research".

Well Fred it may have been a bit of "research" to you. I wouldn´t have called it that and didn´t. It was checking facts to me.

Now Fred go and check if what Andrew King catalogued was the original tapes or the complete Folktrax catalogue. I suspect you will find it was the Folktrax catalogue and I hope I am wrong.

Any news on the anonymous allegations and family questions yet Fred?

And found anywhere to house the collection?

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 12:11 PM

Dave Eyre is right, whoever gets the kennedy collection, they must be able to preserve them and keep them in good condition,.
from my point of view, if either EFDSS OR COMHALTAS or any museum, library in the british isles or ireland ,with appropriate storage facilities gets them ,great.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Folkiedave
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 12:59 PM

As I have said at length Dick, it is finding someone who wants them and can make them available to people, not just a matter of preservation.

Dave Eyre

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 01:33 PM

How many times do I have to say this ? I was not raising the problems of archiving and preservation. I was wondering what is likely to happen to happen to the copyright situation if the colection ends up in America.

Got that Dick ? Got that Dave ?

Not archiving and preservation. Not making great statements or worrying about storage space or archiving costs or any of the myriad problems which surround archiving a collection that size.

Copyright pure and simple.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Folkiedave
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 01:57 PM

Got it Fred. Got it loud and clear. You don´t care where the collection ends up because the EFDSS and the NSA have digitised copies.

Will it matter then if they don´t? Will you be happy to let the original Kennedy tapes go abroad?

For despite your bluster Fred, you were wrong about one of them.

What you wrote was:

There was talk some time ago of the EFDSS obtaining a set of the digitised NSA copies. Someone else referred to them having a set and I assumed that work on obtaining them was in progress or complete.

See that Fred ....based on gossip and assumptions. Let´s hope you are right about the NSA. I am not so sure and unlike you who bases his assertions on gossip and assumptions I intend to find out.

I take it you are not bothered about the films and the photographs then, and you don´t see these as part of the national heritage.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 02:08 PM

O.K. Dave. You go and find storage space to house this archive and the money to maintain it, since it has suddenly got to be so easy. This afternoon you were sniggering at me for allegedly ignoring the problems. Now you're sniggering at me for recognising that the problems exist.

I don't know what your game is, or what you hope to get out of it, but ever since this thread started you have sought to belittle those of us who have known what the rest of the world did not; that Kennedy swindled people.

Throughout this entire thread you have not contributed one positive comment. All you have done is to twist my words and the words of those who expressed concern at Kennedy's culpability. And I am beginning to wonder why.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: The Sandman
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 02:17 PM

Fred, you seem very uptight,
If I want to talk about their preservation ,I am entitled too.The subject is reflections and critcism of Peter Kennedy. in the tone of Just A Minute, we have all deviated somewhat. I am going to deviate and have a beer ,why dont you give it a try.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 02:27 PM

The recordings held by EFDSS and NSA are by and large the same ones that are being sold on the Folktrax label.
I worked extensively on the collection at Cecil Sharp House; I know it inside out and have compared it to the Folktrax cassettes I have come across.
Why has storage facilities now become an issue - it sounds somewhat of a red-herring. Does anybody know how they are stored at present? The last thing I heard was that they were kept on open shelves in a centrally heated room.
Certainly NSA has ideal facilites for storing them, and adequately knowledgeable staff for looking after them.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 02:42 PM

Dick,

I'm sorry. I wasn't having a go at you, but I would have expected everybody on this thread to have read my original message and to have discerned precisely what I meant.

I have come to the conclusion that Dave Eyre appears to have no interest whatsoever in the matter of Peter Kennedy, or in getting to the truth of the accusations which have been levelled against Kennedy. Rather, and for reasons I can only guess at, I suspect that he is being deliberately mischevious and malicious towards me. If you disagree with that hypothesis, then study his postings on this thread and watch the way he has continually tried to twist my words around and to decontextualise whatever it was I was trying to say.

His present posturing over the problems of archiving and copyright are absolutely typical. Does he seriously think that I have no idea of the problems involved in trying to preserve an archive of that size in the elitist climate which pervades this country and everything we try do in terms of preserving its folklore ? Does he seriously think that I would rather see it go to the USA than be kept in this country where it belongs ? And is he such a berk that he doesn't realise photographs and films can be digitised ?

Bear in mind that I have been on the receiving end of two weeks of crap from this so and so and from several other people, yourself included.

You at least seem to have realised that there is something in what Jim Carroll and I and several others have been saying. And BTW., thanks for pointing out the eleven Graeme Miles cassettes. I had no idea that it had climbed to that number and I'm wondering whether GM even knows. I have only met him once, at a conference last year, and he struck me as a very pleasant inoffensive old man. Not the sort of person I would want to see ripped off.

Dave Eyre however persists in trying to obscure the main issue, and I am seriously beginning to wonder if there is something which he personally is frightened of coming out.

And yes, I'm off out for a pint and a listen to some bloody good New Orleans jazz, and the company of some sensible, convival people. It's nice to know that a few of us exist.


Fred, you seem very uptight,
If I want to talk about their preservation ,I am entitled too.The subject is reflections and critcism of Peter Kennedy. in the tone of Just A Minute, we have all deviated somewhat. I am going to deviate and have a beer ,why dont you give it a try.

Subject: the Leaving of Liverpool
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 02:54 PM

Greg,

Seamus sang "thee." The Chicago show from 1964 is hilarious - he tells the story of the piper who won the competition with the other gentelman's piper, by composing a tune on the spot. "I don't what the prize was, these days it'd probably be in LSD..."
Kevin Rietmann

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: oggie
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 04:27 PM

Is this a fair summation of the situation so far;-

Most of us accept that PK did valuable work on collecting folksong and music and was employed by the BBC and EFDSS whilst this was happening.

It is possible (or highly probable) that a lot of that material ended up in his possession and he has exploited it for commercial ends.

There are questions as to whether a) he had the rights to this material, b) whether those from whom he got the material received (or were due) recompense.

On Folktrax there is seems to be some copyrighted material which he had no right to sell. There is also an issue with the quality of the 'offer'.

How much of the archive is duplicated by the EFDSS (at least some) is not really known but the BBC almost certainly don't hold any.

The future of the archive is a matter for debate.

A lot of people have had quite bad experiences either at the hands of PK or other collectors.

I am not making any value judgements here. I am trying to pull some parts of this together to get it clear in my own mind.

All the best

oggie

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Folkiedave
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 06:26 PM

Well what a spat from Fred.

Let us go through my agenda Fred because it is very simple and there is no hidden motive. Don´t bother guessing there is nothing to guess at. I have already said it a number of times on this thread and you have ignored it so far and no doubt you will ignore it again. But at least I personally feel I have tried.

The magazine of which you are a co-editor said it had kept a file over a number of years on Peter Kennedy. We know this because your co-editor Rod Stradling said so.

This file consists of anonymous allegations. Some of these are positive towards Peter Kennedy and the majority are not. The positive contributions have no comment from the publisher and the negative ones are listed under "It is alleged that:".

This published file is edited.

The piece then goes on to ask for concrete evidence of these allegations. (Emphasis in the original).

Now Fred, tell me honestly, is keeping a file of anonymous allegations, editing it, and then publishing the allegations, asking for concrete evidence to support them, the sort of standard you expect others to adhere to? For you seem happy to avoid the question however often is asked as to why Mustrad does this.

So there it is Fred, in black and white and said, I would hope, plainly enough. If you are not sure what it all means, Fred feel free to ask. For I can do patronising as well.

To ask why I have no interest in the accusations against Peter Kennedy is to ignore what I have written in this thread. But then Fred I get used to that from you. But I am happy to state it here again and it is no different from what I have written before.

I do not know enough about the collecting, copyright, and royalties aspect of Peter Kennedy´s practices to form a judgement about the man. I understand from what people tell me that they are not exactly honourable. Some of those people are people whose judgement I trust and are happy to put their name to what they write. Mustrad is not included in this because under "Peter Kennedy:An Appraisal" it publishes anonymous allegations.

I do not accept the word of someone who relies on gossip and assumptions, as you did when the question of the EFDSS and digitisation came up. Can you blame me?

I know there are other collectors and record companies whose practices are questionable and I fail to understand why Peter Kennedy has been singled out in this way. I can only imagine that the file at Mustrad is not large enough on them yet.

As for twisting your words, I doubt if you realise what you have written sometimes. But quote me an example where your words have been twisted and I will gladly retract them. I may have put words from one email in conjunction with the words in another email in a way which you did not intend but that is the way of the discussion list Fred. And it does succesfully point out the contradictions in what you write.

I have only ever quoted your own words and just because they contradict each other or show double standards does not mean they have been twisted.

But continue to ignore the awkward questions Fred.

Any views on how you think the family might feel yet?

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: The Sandman
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 03:10 AM

If mustrad had contacted people like myself, and informed them that they were on the folktrax catalogue, and checked with them about permission, a lot of unnecessary argument could have been avoided,.      
mustrad could also have presented a stronger case. Fred I suggest you try and contact Graeme Miles and find out first whether he has or has not given permission Before we jump to conclusions, Iknow its likely, but best to be sure first. Meanwhile this inoffensive middle aged man has given you some evidence, but I am not sure whether your very concerned.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Folkiedave
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 03:20 AM

Oggie,

I think you have summed it up rather well. One minor thing, I doubt if he was employed by the BBC and the EFDSS at the same time. I imagine that he was employed by the BBC seconded at that time from the EFDSS.

Dave Eyre

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Folkiedave
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 03:24 AM

Hi Dick,

Yes, I agree, Mustrad should have found out the evidence for its anonymous allegations and then published them as statements made with first-hand knowledge.

Unfortunately they didn´t, they chose to do it the other way around. Clearly it was easier to publish anonymus allegations and then ask for the evidence to back them up.

Dave Eyre

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 03:35 AM

As far as I'm concerned Oggie's summation of the situation is spot on - this has been the situation since Kennedy decided to adopt the collection as his own and remains the situation now. The only thing that has changed is that Kennedy's death has made it possible to discuss the collection openly. It is to the credit of Musical Traditions that they have instigated this discussion
If the bodies that allowed him to act the way he did had lived up to their responsiblities none of this would have been necessary and the future of the collection would not now be in doubt.
If we address Oggie's points rather than nit-picking and mud-slinging we might (just) reach a consensus - though personally, I really think it is down to EFDSS to sort out the mess they have been partially responsible for.
Dave, you really do present us with a Catch 22 situation - we couldn't discuss the collection while he was alive because of his threats, now we can't discuss it because he is dead. We've all said what we think of his behaviour; perhaps if we now concentrated on the collection and its future we might get somewhere.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: The Sandman
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 04:10 AM

To fred, if youhave difficulty contacting Graeme, a good friend of his Robin Dale goes to the Darlington folk workshop,at the brittannia pub DARLINGTON. Graeme can sometimes be hard to get hold of.jim your correct, every efdss member should now be asking questions at the efdss annual meeting in relation to the future of this collection.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Folkiedave
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 04:27 AM

Jim I have to disagree with you here.

I feel there should have been a discussion before Peter Kennedy´s death about his practices and his archive. I believe it would have been honourable to do it when he was alive and to wait until his death to do so is a bit cowardly. But, I can go along with a discussion after his death. Personally I think it is a bit early to start "grave-dancing" since he only died on June 10th, but if people want to do that I can hardly stop them and I have no intention of trying to do so.

I understand from Fred McCormick that you and others have discussed his practices openly before he died. Since I feel sure I would have heard if Peter Kennedy had sued then I think it is safe to assume he didn´t.

I believe the idea that Peter Kennedy would have sued is nonsense anyway. He may have huffed and puffed a little but that is all. Anyone who felt they had right on their side would have challenged him successfully and at little if any cost.

My point is that I feel it is a wrong to save a file of anonymous allegations, publish those allegations about someone shortly after their death and then ask for concrete evidence to back them up and I am sorry you feel that that is the right thing to do Jim.

With you, I also think we ought to be concentrating on making sure his legacy in the form of the original tapes, photographs and films etc. is preserved. That way scholars would be able to sort the rights and wrongs of this issue much easier. We would also be able to sort out copyright royalties etc.

And yes Jim, there are a couple of institutions that bear some blame in this. The problem is that one has little money to spare and the other prefers to spend it on other things.

Oh, and like you Jim I don´t own any Folktrax material either!

Dave Eyre

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 04:50 AM

Dick,

I'm sorry if this response seems a bit off hand, but I'm extremely busy right now. However, I should explain that Musical Traditions is concerned with the tradition, not with the revival. What's more, the revival is something which I have very little interest in or contact with. To make things worse, I live on Merseyside, and very seldom get as far as the North East. Also, I have only met GM once, and I doubt he would remember me from Adam. I wonder how he would take it if a complete stranger rang him up to ask whether Peter Kennedy ripped him off ?

I have to say though, that if Kennedy really did publish eleven casettes of Graeme Miles, without seeking his permission, that would beggar belief.

Therefore, while I'm naturally concerned at any form of intellectual property theft, and I'd certainly like to get to the bottom of this one, I don't feel that I am best placed to take it on. Is there anyone else out there who could look into it ?

Having said all that, we don't of course know whether Kennedy did publish anything of GM's illegally. The facts that he did so in your case and in those of other people are no grounds for assuming that he did the same thing here.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Scrump
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 05:37 AM

Thanks to Oggie for providing that summary of the position - I was beginning to lose track of it with all the personal messages in between.

In Oggie's summary, the most important point now is this one, IMO:

The future of the archive is a matter for debate

What PK did and whether it was right or wrong may be relevant, but it's in the past now and it's what happens from now on that matters.

Presumably these matters need to be decided:

1. What happens to the archive - will it be made available commercially or otherwise?

2. What recompense can be made to anyone who feels they were "ripped off" in terms of unpaid royalties, and who can make such recompense?

3. Should PK's estate pay anything if allegations of him "ripping off" others is proven?

And probably other things I haven't thought of?

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 05:55 AM

Captain Birdseye
Date: 28 Sep 06 - 03:17 AM

I realise everyone must behaving a laugh at my expense, having tried to defend PETER KENNEDY and then finding he had recorded Bald headed end of the Broom


I don't think anybody should laugh at somebody that's big enough to admit they were wrong.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: The Sandman
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 07:55 AM

Thankyou, to fred, I find you a little inconsistent, You ask for concrete evidence, when you could have found it for yourself.
mustrads point no6, mentions Isabel Sutherland and Robin hall, BOTH REVIVAL PERFORMERS, Yet when I am mentioned[ You claim to have no interest in the revival].
I knew Isabel Sutherland quite well, sang many times in her club at Groombridge, benefited from her singing advice, and considered her a fine singer, but she was a revival singer.
Please can mustrad be more specific about exactly what kind of concrete evidence they want, and why did they go about in this half cocked way. ,instead of going through the Folktrax catalogue, and contacting likely candidates who may have been exploited, a letter or email tactfully explaining the situation would have been possible., [ no need to ring someone up and start off about rip offs].
Finally in my opinion your attitude to the revival is flawed,the revival is only a continuity of what has gone on before. Fred Jordan is an example of a traditional singer who learnt songs from his parents
but who later became part of the revival ,likewise Willy Scott. you remind me of a person many years ago who when asked how did he define a traditional song replied thats easy ,anything before 1900, anything after that is not.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 08:22 AM

Whether Kennedy would have sued anybody is a moot point - he kept the threat of legal action as a weapon in his armoury and nobody ever mounted a serious challenge to him. Apart from occasions over the last year or so, my own comments have always been extremely guarded and aimed at people who knew the facts - Kennedy was a windmill I had no interest in tilting, particularly as I realised that any efforts on my part would meet with little success without the support of those who could have made a difference.
If you want a concrete example of the effect of his behaviour, Karl Dallas launched a proposed 10 volume set of themed songbooks. By volume two the publishers had become so tired of persistant demands for royalties that they abandoned the series.
Why is it necessary to bring all this up now? Because the future of the collection will be decided in the near future and - as with the contents of the VWML - there will be plenty of takers for the collection.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Fred McCormick
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 08:22 AM

Dick,

I was speaking from a personal point of view. Rod may want to take this up. I certainly don't. Isabel Sutherland was a revival singer but she sang traditional songs in a traditional manner and she learned both songs and singing style from traditional singers. That is why she comes under Musical Traditions' editorial coverage.

I know nothing about Graeme Miles, but there is a world of difference between Isabel Sutherland and somebody who writes and sings their own material, as I believe he does.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: The Sandman
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 08:27 AM

here from Vagrant songs of Scotland a description of Isabel Sutherland on topic records 12T151, Isabel is a traditonal style singer, she was among the pioneers of unaccompanied traditional singing in London from the earliest days of the revival.
    clearly a REVIVAL SINGER, yet you[ or Rod] choose to bring her up in your allegations against Kennedy, and then choose to dismiss me because I am a revival singer. Dick Miles

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: The Sandman
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 09:55 AM

Yes, fred, but I sing traditional songs in a traditonal style and learnt songs and style from listening to traditional singers, so why dismiss me- if your prepared to use Isabel Sutherland.there is not a world of difference between Isabel Sutherland and myself.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Folkiedave
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 10:13 AM

there will be plenty of takers for the collection.

Who Jim?

Gimme a for instance?

Dave Eyre

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 10:31 AM

"Does he seriously think that I have no idea of the problems involved in trying to preserve an archive of that size in the elitist climate which pervades this country and everything we try do in terms of preserving its folklore ? Does he seriously think that I would rather see it go to the USA than be kept in this country where it belongs ?"

If you read through the forums here on Mudcat, there seems to be an attitude that those of us in the United States have an elitist attitude, but when I read statements like that, I begin to wonder.

I surely understand, respect and support the idea of a nation (any nation) wishing to preserve their heritage. It is vital and more attention should be paid.

However, in 2006, is it really that important where the physical collection is stored?   As long as everyone has access to the material it could be stored anywhere on the globe.   Electronic databases and servers can allow ANYONE to research, study and download material from this or any other collection.

Here in the United States, the Smithsonian Institute has become OUR repository for many collections including Alan Lomax, Joe Glazer, Fast Folk, and others. There are numerous universities that have done the same for other collections.   Everyday, access to this material is improving. I think it is fair to say that around the globe we have greater access to these collections then ever before.

Pride should not stand in the way of preservation.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Folkiedave
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 10:40 AM

Hi Ron,

I think it is great that the Smithsonian should take such a collection were it to be offered to them. And I agree that where it is housed is of little consequence these days and that accessibility is important.

I also think we ought to have an institution capable of housing such a collection in the UK since it is largely UK recordings and the collecting was funded publicly. However it seems not. To take such a collection and digitise it etc. is a monumental task and I doubt if there any UK institutions who wish to do so. It might be that there are one or two in Ireland. I believe a lot of the material is Irish.

The British Standard for archiving such material is BS 5454 and to just get hold of the details is over 100 pounds!!

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 10:40 AM

Gotta agree with Dave on that last point. Archives OUGHT to be keenly sought after and protected as part of our national heritage, but try and get someone - anyone - other than a private collector to take a custodial role.

I was asked to find a home for an important and fascinating (non-folkie) archive a few years ago. The university I worked for wouldn't touch it with a barge pole, and nor would any other "appropriate organisation", including the Museum of the Moving Image and several other similar worthy bodies. Too expensive, too time-consuming, too much of a headache. Most museums, for instance, can only ever make available to the public about a TENTH of the stuff in their collections. The rest gathers dust in basements.

So the archive I was offered is still mouldering in some containers in London - what hasn't already gone to America to be sold off privately, that is.

The Kennedy stuff OUGHT to stay in the UK. It OUGHT to be valued and appropriately curated.

Whether it can/will be is another matter.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: WFDU - Ron Olesko
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 10:54 AM

I know that $$ is always a concern.   The Lomax collection was operating on a shoestring budget. As part of my "day job", I did some work for the Paul Robeson Archives by digitizing older films and videotape. I know that private organizations like these are seeking grant money, and that money can be found - but it is a slow process. Even the Smithsonian cannot afford to digitize everything at once, they are doing it in steps.   The important thing is that steps are being taken to preserve. Steps are also improving on allowing more access.

Joaniecrumpet's mention of the Museum of Moving Images reminds me about how many silent films have simply been lost to the ravages of time.   At one point in my career I worked for CBS and one day I was in their massive library and saw the librarians pulling old tape to be thrown out or reused.   Our heritage is rapidly being lost.

Whether the collection winds up in private hands or in another country, lets just hope that it is preserved and others will have access.

Subject: RE: Reflections/Criticism of Peter Kennedy
From: GUEST,Spider Monkey
Date: 29 Sep 06 - 02:22 PM

Admit it, Folkie Dave,

Having bought Kennedy's library, you're trying to broker a deal to sell all his sound recordings to the US (and shame on you for doing so).