Post by Dan Popp January 16, 2008 (41 of 60)
|
|
raffells wrote:
Thanks Dan for a much more considered and less evasive reply. Yours response to (1) may have some merit but I shall take the above response "I dont have to pay(even indirectly)I have a choice?.. as unrealistic.
...
....Of course we are free to to choose to buy or not..Eventually people might wise up and stop buying direct from USA..
Raffels, the evasion was only in your mind, as you and the rest of the forum well know that I don't have a habit of evading difficult questions.
It's curious that you believe you have no choice (you are forced by your government?) to purchase music from a certain shop; but you _do_ have the choice not to buy American products.
If wishing my country well without wishing other countries ill is "short sighted," all I can say is that once again you propose no credible alternative. If your answer is that we should all transcend nationalism, then you will have to stop bashing America - and I would be pleasantly surprised if you could do that.
God bless.
|
|
|
Post by Peter January 16, 2008 (42 of 60)
|
|
Dan Popp said:
Raffels, the evasion was only in your mind, as you and the rest of the forum well know that I don't have a habit of evading difficult questions.
It's curious that you believe you have no choice (you are forced by your government?) to purchase music from a certain shop; but you _do_ have the choice not to buy American products.
If wishing my country well without wishing other countries ill is "short sighted," all I can say is that once again you propose no credible alternative. If your answer is that we should all transcend nationalism, then you will have to stop bashing America - and I would be pleasantly surprised if you could do that.
God bless.
It's still Raffells.
|
|
|
Post by Peter January 16, 2008 (43 of 60)
|
|
raffells said:
Substitute My Armani shop for the CD shop.OK I mention to the owner that I dont want the Italian music bellowing out and he replies.Neither do I and I dont want to pay for the licence and royalties either.He then says the music is played for the staff as well,plus, its their disc. Now the situation become pretty complex.The owners of the disc wouldnt be paying these costs if they were at home listening?.
There is even an argument that the shop is doing the artsts etc a service in public advertising..
So if they wanted to take the issue further it would come back to the point I made in my first post Legal dispute,Biggest solictor/legal team usually wins.
Dave, I've never understood the logic behind some of these rules and regs.
What about playing "background" music at a school fete? Showing a film to a class at school?
It seems extraordinary to me that a record shop owner pays to play excerpts of CDs to the customer - actually it's no more than advertising, isn't it? Many is the time I've been tempted to buy on hearing, so the licence part is in effect paid twice.
Peter
|
|
|
Post by Peter January 16, 2008 (44 of 60)
|
|
raffells said:
....Of course we are free to to choose to buy or not..
Dave, this is part of an enormous problem. The customer is also free to decide whether he is being ripped orf or not. For example, I can understand why downloads are cheaper than the physical CD, but not when the download is actually more expensive.
And to mention something I haven't quoted above - litigation. I've been trying to look up a recent case involving a customer's pair of trousers and a cleaner, and the amount sought in damages due to unsatisfactory work done. Do you know the case I refer to?
I know it seems irrelevant to SACD production cost, but frivolous law suits can impinge on any business, not just that of cleaning trousers.
BTW, are you related to the famous Raffells, or was he Raffles? Also, I know you're a fan of some US music - you might like Kenneth Fuchs's Canticle to the Sun, a horn concerto. New recording on Naxos, not SACD regrettably, but it does have the LSO under JoAnn Falletta. Perhaps paying three lots of royalties puts them off SACD, too?
Peter
Pee'a
|
|
|
Post by raffells January 16, 2008 (45 of 60)
|
|
Peter said:
And to mention something I haven't quoted above - litigation. I've been trying to look up a recent case involving a customer's pair of trousers and a cleaner, and the amount sought in damages due to unsatisfactory work done. Do you know the case I refer to?
BTW, are you related to the famous Raffells, or was he Raffles? Also, I know you're a fan of some US music - you might like Kenneth Fuchs's Canticle to the Sun, a horn concerto. New recording on Naxos, not SACD regrettably, but it does have the LSO under JoAnn Falletta. Perhaps paying three lots of royalties puts them off SACD, too?
Peter
Pee'a
Yes that case was brought by a Judge.Wanted millons in compensation.Could only happen in the free world.
Answer to other question,depends on whether someones after some money or not.
A good clue is that my Grandfather was called Stamford and he did not live in England much.
So ,Kenneth Fuchs?
hope he does it to Naxos. To me thats what they did to their sacds.The DVDAs sounded better.
The only cds ive ever bought from a CD shop are Marco Polos.Rip off prices.
|
|
|
Post by Sam January 17, 2008 (46 of 60)
|
|
Dan Popp said:
No; as I wrote above, mechanicals are the fees charged to make copies of music already recorded.
I can't tell whether we agree or disagree because you are so vague. Of course the music has to be recorded before royalties are owed. That goes without saying.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Popp January 17, 2008 (47 of 60)
|
|
Sam wrote:
I can't tell whether we agree or disagree because you are so vague. Of course the music has to be recorded before royalties are owed. That goes without saying.
Sam, I am trying to be as clear as I can be. There are apparently more types of royalties than you know about (or you are unclear as to which are attached to which activity). There are publishing rights, broadcast rights, performance rights, etc.
A record company wishing to record a songwriter's composition would not owe any mechanical licensing fees, contrary to your earlier post. Mechanicals would only come into play when/if someone wanted to make _copies_ of the _recording_, say for a third-party "greatest hits" compilation, or to be incorporated into an audio program distributed on CD.
So when you point us to the mechanicals page and tell us that you are talking about _composition_, you and I certainly "disagree." Your statement above that, "Of course the music has to be recorded before royalties are owed" is also incorrect - royalties for the performance rights could be owed without any recording. Any High School wishing to put on a "musical" pays to do so, and this has nothing to do with the fact that there may be recordings of the same.
Perhaps this will be helpful: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royalties#Music_Royalties
All the best.
|
|
|
Post by Sam January 17, 2008 (48 of 60)
|
|
Dan Popp said:
A record company wishing to record a songwriter's composition would not owe any mechanical licensing fees, contrary to your earlier post. Mechanicals would only come into play when/if someone wanted to make _copies_ of the _recording_, say for a third-party "greatest hits" compilation, or to be incorporated into an audio program distributed on CD.
Well, I'm simply baffled that you could have imagined I was talking about anything but CDs/SACDs. That is what is relevant to this forum and this thread, and I wouldn't raise an irrelevant issue.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Popp January 18, 2008 (49 of 60)
|
|
Sam wrote: Well, I'm simply baffled that you could have imagined I was talking about anything but CDs/SACDs. That is what is relevant to this forum and this thread, and I wouldn't raise an irrelevant issue.
Sam, you wrote in your post #34: "Again - I'm repeating myself - this is about music compositions, not recordings" while pointing us in that same post to licensing fees for neither recordings _per se_ nor compositions, but COPIES.
Apparently, my fault was believing that you were talking about what you claimed to be talking about.
|
|
|
Post by Sam January 20, 2008 (50 of 60)
|
|
Dan Popp said:
Sam, you wrote in your post #34: "Again - I'm repeating myself - this is about music compositions, not recordings" while pointing us in that same post to licensing fees for neither recordings _per se_ nor compositions, but COPIES.
Do you know some way of distributing SACDs without making copies? Why does that need to be stated? I focused on the subtle points, not on the obvious.
|
|
