Guest Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 if you own the rights, have the studio tape, permission etc and cut to a carver then it isn't a boot. I'll ask again permission from who,the wife;the person with the proper acetate;the song writer;Mike;the artist ?
Wiggyflat Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 (edited) As an original acetate exists, and assuming one of you two owns it, the other shouldn't be playing a carver, it's just a bootleg of the acetate. Well I hope you get out to venues where that acetate is being played as you won't be hearing it for long.We are talking about original acetates where there is no legitimate vinyl release.Common sense says you can carver it.You are not pressing hundreds and you are giving good exposure to the artist.What is wrong is coming up with some fictitious name.There could be a "buzz" created about Deon Jackson and if he gets work over here a "buzz" has been created about that record and there would be loads of people wanting to go see him to hear it.Deon Jackson would be grateful. What he wouldn't like is you pressing up 900 copies and filling your pockets.Re bootlegs the turnover of sounds was that fast the bootleggers were pressing in anticipation of a sound going big as well as after.Here's a few that your no brainer bootleg player wouldn't even think of playing even though he could get them for under a tenner. Contacts-You Gonna Pay-Quadrant Edie Walker-Good Guys-Rising Sons United 4-She's Putting You On-Harthon Sunlovers-You'll Never Make The Grade-Aliza What we need is another split in the scene."I play big sound oldie bootlegs"."Not me mate I'm on the underplayed and rare bootleg scene" .If you play ovo stick it on your publicity so anyone with sense and believes in the ethos can stay well clear of "the divs". Edited October 11, 2011 by wiggyflat
Chalky Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 I'll ask again permission from who,the wife;the person with the proper acetate;the song writer;Mike;the artist ? you know full well what I'm talking about and I'm not wasting my time having petty squabble with you
Guest Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 you know full well what I'm talking about and I'm not wasting my time having petty squabble with you What's to squabble about ? i asked a simple question that no-one as answered,anybody ? and i don't know full well but have a idea but not sure.
Val (Chunky) Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 just a quick point....I think people who own original acetates really ought to get a dub cut and play that.....Acetates deteriorate every time they are played. 1
Guest Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 just a quick point....I think people who own original acetates really ought to get a dub cut and play that.....Acetates deteriorate every time they are played. Me too!!
Ian Dewhirst Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 What's to squabble about ? i asked a simple question that no-one as answered,anybody ? and i don't know full well but have a idea but not sure. The answer is: the person/company who financed and paid for the original recording session owns the rights. Easy. Ian D
Ian Dewhirst Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 just a quick point....I think people who own original acetates really ought to get a dub cut and play that.....Acetates deteriorate every time they are played. Totally. I think most acetates are only good for about 30 plays aren't they? Also, as I've said a zillion times before, anyone with a major league rarity can only ruin the record by playing it on a variety of different decks, many of which will be shockingly maintained. I learnt the hard way. Ian D
Chalky Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 The answer is: the person/company who financed and paid for the original recording session owns the rights. Easy. Ian D not necessarily, rights can change hands. But if you own the studio tapes, as long as not stolen to your knowledge I can't see anyone coming after you for making a cut of an unissued track. I personally think anything from a studio track as long as the owner of the tapes gives you permission then it is fine, why deny the scene a bloody good record?
Guest Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 The answer is: the person/company who financed and paid for the original recording session owns the rights. Easy. Ian D I would have thought that myself Ian but some of these acetate/carver things that get played out i'm not sure !! thank's for clearing that up.ta Ken
Simsy Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 We create these situations for ourselves (me included), go round in circles and go mad. My own fault for using Deon Jackson SDTSWS carver as an example and I'm heartened by Chalky & Dave jumping on me (in an internet sense). I'd be all miffed if they hadn't. I still say it's relatively simple, if you're charging door tax, you're playing original vinyl. If you want to take a chance with carvers, that's up to you but you best understand the guidelines and if in doubt - ovo. There, subject closed (?)
Guest Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 The answer is: the person/company who financed and paid for the original recording session owns the rights. Easy. Ian D not necessarily, rights can change hands. But if you own the studio tapes, as long as not stolen to your knowledge I can't see anyone coming after you for making a cut of an unissued track. I personally think anything from a studio track as long as the owner of the tapes gives you permission then it is fine, why deny the scene a bloody good record?
Chalky Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 I would have thought that myself Ian but some of these acetate/carver things that get played out i'm not sure !! thank's for clearing that up.ta Ken Ace/Kent own the rights to plenty, they didn't finance or pay for the original recording session so not strictly true is it?
Chalky Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 what is so funny? I know some who have bought studio tapes from producers in the states, some via the internet. What is wrong with doing a cut of a track on them? Possesion 9/10ths of the law. If you've bought something in good faith them you can't really be held accountable.
Chalky Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 some of the biggest and most expensive records on this scene came about via dodgy means, Frank Wilson being the biggest, I didn't see Motown going after Kenny or Tim. The exposure probably made them more money.
jocko Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 As in all debates usually this is the way to get your accurate answer , but you must take into account its a SS poll and could be different to the general public , sorry if it offends you personally Jocko but this is the only way to get the answer to the question asked and it also avoids any indifferences personal comments against any individuals , as it is such an emotive subject. It only offends my sensibility and my sense of decorum that anyone suggesting it is required associates themself with my beloved, or once beloved, cool as cucumber scene. It is like people watching a Gok Wan (k) programme and thinking they understand Fashion rather than they watching genocide by stretch pants, its another way of ritual humiliation. I repeat, if you were on my scene a poll isn't going to tell you anything you need to know, or even want to know, and that is proven by the ridiculous LP not LP, carver not carver not bootleg, which Al Williams label, 2011 modern scene vs Northern scene values, or any of the other ridiculous comparisons. Debate quality of music, why music played in 90% of venues is staler than Londoners bread at moment (so I am told), or the quality of some much praised dj's are playing records that have been played more than any played oldie just because they are rare, why very few people that were movers and shakers from 1980 to 1995 rate todays scenes, anything other than this peurile poo poo (trying hard not to swear Mods) Its a non question other than for people who want to say its alright now, my early days I thought it was important on here, but years have told me there is no one size fits all answer so what would a poll say other than there are 33 versions of a scene that was once united (at least in musical direction) and beautiful. These days are mostly gone with some brave soldiers fighting their cause, but they just get on with it dont they. Anyone thought of asking Andy D, or Butch, (the 2 top DJ's out there despite what some deluded duds think), what they think? Its a bit like asking some soldier in Lybia, would they not prefer chocolate bullets. Stop it now, before I lapse back into drinking gin 24 hours of the day rather than 22. Please. Its certainly not emotive now, the recent deaths of Nick Ashford and Gil Scott Heron were genuinely emotive in musical terms, this question is just people trying to re-write history to suit themselves. its like an annoying fly that needs swatted. Do what you believe in, or want to do. It wont change my perception, ever. lol why do I feel like i have ventured into the forbidden zone they are only questions , nobody is going to ask you to change your own private preference ? Don't you want to hear other peoples opinions , or is this more about declaring your own interest/view ? No because it doesn't matter. People who care, and interestingly you seem to have been having a sly dig at some people who I consider care lately, don't care about the answer of any poll. They just carry on doing what they have always done. Why people like you think there is some need to merge the two beasts, I don't know. Its almost bordering on genetic modification, producing a hybrid of a rutting Stag and a Hyena. Its just wrong! Oh **** it, pass the Hendricks nurse. 1
Epic Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 Why do some people find it acceptable to play a carver but would not play a track off a Kent CD of previously unissued material. Is it just a format thing ?
Russ Vickers Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 Why do some people find it acceptable to play a carver but would not play a track off a Kent CD of previously unissued material. Is it just a format thing ? If the venue has a CD player thats the best option, but alas many dont. Best Russ
Geeselad Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 (edited) Totally. I think most acetates are only good for about 30 plays aren't they? Also, as I've said a zillion times before, anyone with a major league rarity can only ruin the record by playing it on a variety of different decks, many of which will be shockingly maintained. I learnt the hard way. Ian D I was told that James Trouble used to take his own cart around with him for this reason. Edited October 11, 2011 by geeselad
Ian Dewhirst Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 Ace/Kent own the rights to plenty, they didn't finance or pay for the original recording session so not strictly true is it? Yeah but that's 'cos they either bought or licensed the rights surely? My point is basically whoever legally owns or has legally licensed the masters is the only entity that can authorise carvers. I take Simsy and Wiggyflat's views that the scene could be deprived of some great sounds if carvers were outlawed though BUT (and it's a big but), the owner may have their own valid reasons for not wishing the recordings to be heard or exploited. Both myself and Ralph Tee have recently had situations where we both wanted to license certain material and were happy to pay the advances and royalties but the owners did not wish for the recordings to ever be available in any way. They also don't have to give a reason why. I've just had exactly the same situation for some 70's and 80's recordings which we wanted to license for the Disco Discharge series and we were given a straight 'no, not interested under any circumstances' answer. Quite often the exploitation of unreleased recordings can trigger certain clauses in the original contracts and creat legal problems for the copyright owners. I currently have one situation where there is a wealth of incredible unissued stuff but the owners are rich enough that they're not bothered about opening a potential can of worms legally. It's not worth their time, money or stress levels. So those recordings will probably always remain unheard. Sad but true. For instance (and I don't know the ins and outs of the Deon Jackson/Carla situation), but if Deon Jackson's estate (assuming he has one) decided to appoint a red hot lawyer to investigate this record 'that's huge in the UK', it could trigger $1000's of dollars in legal and accountant fees to investigate the situation. Which will probably be more than any earnings from the legal re-release of the record! Bummer ay? So, in a worst case scenario, Simsy could have U.S. lawyers on his ass enquiring as to how he got hold of the acetate and where from. Can 'o worms I tell thee....... Ian D
Ian Dewhirst Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 some of the biggest and most expensive records on this scene came about via dodgy means, Frank Wilson being the biggest, I didn't see Motown going after Kenny or Tim. The exposure probably made them more money. Times have changed Chalky. Universal will not license tracks anymore unless they have access to the original contracts. That's why you won't see Rubin on any Northern compilations anymore even though it was on a UK cat food ad in the 90's! They've obviously junked the original contracts of all flops from the 60's and so they're scared stiff of getting embroiled in old contract disputes. The artist or managers and/or their estates could well have access to the original paperwork and could easily get 'em on a clause! So it's just easier to say no. I wonder how much of the synch fee for the Felix ad went to Rubin..........? In fact does anyone even know who Rubin is anyway I ask myself? Ian D
Chalky Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 For instance (and I don't know the ins and outs of the Deon Jackson/Carla situation), but if Deon Jackson's estate (assuming he has one) decided to appoint a red hot lawyer to investigate this record 'that's huge in the UK', it could trigger $1000's of dollars in legal and accountant fees to investigate the situation. Which will probably be more than any earnings from the legal re-release of the record! Bummer ay? So, in a worst case scenario, Simsy could have U.S. lawyers on his ass enquiring as to how he got hold of the acetate and where from. Can 'o worms I tell thee....... Ian D But any expenses incurred harassing Simsy would far far outweigh any recompense that could come their way. I doubt they would get past first base? He has only done one cut for dj purposes and not as a money making scheme. If he'd booted it then I could fully understand the Jackson Estate seeking recompense. It is on a Collectables CD isn't it....maybe DJ's should play the cd instead, bout time promoters put cd decks in anyway The original acetate was bought in good faith, it was in a poor state so cuts taken. These were then traded on. Others had further cuts done in more recent times. Look at the amount of acetates on ebay, if the record companies were bothered then they could begin their actions there, Bell Sound acetates for instance appear often on ebay now and then. The label owned by Sony isn't it? They aren't bothered until someone starts making money out of their material.
Guest Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 From what i can make out everyone is making up the rule's that suit them, there is no soul police thank god. Beware the fundamentalsoulists next they'll be for stoning non conformists.
Ian Dewhirst Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 They aren't bothered until someone starts making money out of their material. Nail hit precisely on head Chalky. The problem usually turns up when someone decides to use the track on an ad which could trigger a £60K synch payment, which is happening a lot lately. Where there's a hit, there's a writ. Ian D
Ian Dewhirst Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 But any expenses incurred harassing Simsy would far far outweigh any recompense that could come their way. I doubt they would get past first base? He has only done one cut for dj purposes and not as a money making scheme. If he'd booted it then I could fully understand the Jackson Estate seeking recompense. It is on a Collectables CD isn't it....maybe DJ's should play the cd instead, bout time promoters put cd decks in anyway I just checked my Deon Jackson CD and it's a bloody bootleg! How ironic. I'm pretty sure I bought it from a reputable dealer too. Who owns these tapes anyway? I'm not sure what the deal is Carla, or Karen, for that matter since the stuff seems to be all over the place. Maybe Ady or Rouncy know....? Ian D
Anais nin Carms Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 I would just like to make a point of order here , I have not had a dig at anyone on this topic , all I SUGGESTED was a vote /poll
Marc Forrest Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 (edited) Times have changed Chalky. Universal will not license tracks anymore unless they have access to the original contracts. That's why you won't see Rubin on any Northern compilations anymore even though it was on a UK cat food ad in the 90's! They've obviously junked the original contracts of all flops from the 60's and so they're scared stiff of getting embroiled in old contract disputes. Ian D Furthermore I had to learn when I wanted to negotiate the rights for our 2009 release on Hip City Soul Club Records that they even wont negotiate when they have no soundmaster left in their archives...I wanted to put out Eddie Hollands "Daydreamer" as I have the orig Jobete acetate. Their answer was they have no master nor note of said track in their Motown archive so they cant let me re-release it. They offered me Frank Wilson`s DILY instead..after two seconds of laughter I decided on JJ Barnes unrel. "Everytime I See You I Go Wild!" gem instead then.. Edited October 11, 2011 by Marc Forrest
boba Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 Furthermore I had to learn when I wanted to negotiate the rights for our 2009 release on Hip City Soul Club Records that they even wont negotiate when they have no soundmaster left in their archives...I wanted to put out Eddie Hollands "Daydreamer" as I have the orig Jobete acetate. Their answer was they have no master nor note of said track in their Motown archive so they cant let me re-release it. They offered me Frank Wilson`s DILY instead..after two seconds of laughter I decided on JJ Barnes unrel. "Everytime I See You I Go Wild!" gem instead then.. I think this is to protect themselves, not out of some arbitrary rule to prevent people from using their tracks. If they don't have a master in their official catalog it might not actually belong to them, it might belong to someone else.
Guest Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 Why not have a poll on the subject , it would be interesting to see the paying customer ( dancer ) point of view on this, because as a collector your view is going to point to originals only. Be good to see the numbers that take an interest too responding to a very important question , perhaps times are a changing and its not as important to the mass attenndance as it used to be ? Personally I can understand wanting to protect an over £1000 investment , we could look at it another way inorder to play these records with safety maybe it would be better to stop people coming to the decks and also to make sure a good standard of equipment is enforced/checked before such records are played ? Have you ever spun with a needle that has a coin on it for example ? What causes needle burn , is that down to bad equipment ? Just remembered when Dave Rimmer was waiting to go on , he had pulled a numbe rof records to play on the slant and another dj came on stage leaned on the table and all Daves records fell backwards .... it was a cringing moment I can tell you. that would be interesting. myself personally, i started buying records about 35 years ago for my own personal use, some are re-issues & boots and a lot are orig. I replace the boots and re-issues with orig as and when i can because i prefer to own the orig. as a punter: at one point i would be at a nighter every other weekend at least and went to every local soul do going. i rarely go out nowadays. either way, as a punter i never even gave it any consideration to whether the DJ was playing orig or not .....i was there as a dancer. that is still true today. I mentioned in another post somewhere that i had the privilage to be asked to DJ at a fairly big event a couple of years ago. I played orig only. One of the other DJ's played some boots and even announced one of them as such .... it made no difference to me as a punter, i still danced to it
Chalky Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 Poll for those of you who are interested.... https://www.soul-source.co.uk/forums/topic/211824-poll-your-night-out/
Anais nin Carms Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 Thanks for being honest Mike I was starting to feel like I had broken one of the ten comandments for just questioning the general sence of opinion within this thread by asking if it would be useful to put it to a public vote and avoid all this going round in circles.
Guest Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 what is so funny? I know some who have bought studio tapes from producers in the states, some via the internet. What is wrong with doing a cut of a track on them? Possesion 9/10ths of the law. If you've bought something in good faith them you can't really be held accountable. I was laughing at Ians post "easy" then the contradicting reply by you,is that ok ? i have a Glenn Hoddle master if anyone wants a copy your welcome
Ian Dewhirst Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 Furthermore I had to learn when I wanted to negotiate the rights for our 2009 release on Hip City Soul Club Records that they even wont negotiate when they have no soundmaster left in their archives...I wanted to put out Eddie Hollands "Daydreamer" as I have the orig Jobete acetate. Their answer was they have no master nor note of said track in their Motown archive so they cant let me re-release it. They offered me Frank Wilson`s DILY instead..after two seconds of laughter I decided on JJ Barnes unrel. "Everytime I See You I Go Wild!" gem instead then.. Yep. Same elsewhere Marc. I've been having these arguments with the majors for the last 20 odd years. Quite often the company isn't even aware of the catalogues they own or the paperwork isn't there anymore. I have these conversations with Ralph Tee all the time. Just last week he was tearing his hair out about an album that a major owns that he wants to license but that the major refuses to believe that they own it, even though they do. This company simply won't clear anything unless it's 'on their system'. It doesn't go on their system at all unless they have the original paperwork and have checked all the legals. If it's not there, then it doesn't exist in their eyes! Ian D
Guest sharmo 1 Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 I would just like to make a point of order here , I have not had a dig at anyone on this topic , all I SUGGESTED was a vote /poll Hi Carman are you o.k mate just relax sweet cakes and let life unfold regards Simon.
Winnie :-) Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 Poll for those of you who are interested.... https://www.soul-sour...your-night-out/ Is the link working Chalks?
Pete Eccles Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 Is the link working Chalks? No it's gone Win, chalks made a bit of a pigs ear of it, bless, still I wouldn't know where to start
Chalky Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 No it's gone Win, chalks made a bit of a pigs ear of it, bless, still I wouldn't know where to start I'd forgotten to uncheck the the make poll public box or summat like. So deleted and done another. Left out the two questions for promoters and DJ's as you had to vote on all to have vote cast.
Winnie :-) Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 I'd forgotten to uncheck the the make poll public box or summat like. So deleted and done another. Left out the two questions for promoters and DJ's as you had to vote on all to have vote cast. Is there another link then?
Winnie :-) Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 bloody hell, here sorry mate, just didn't know where it was, you know I'm not good with technology
Guest ruffsounds Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 I know of a certain big ticket record that when the writers/producers/label owners and all involved in it found out the price it was fetching actually had another amount pressed on a different label, this was done to make it available to more than just the collectors who could afford the original cut of it and it was pressed in its original mono format from original plates, and put on sale for around the $5 mark not the 4 figure amount it has gone for before. So as it's been done by the people who wrote, produced, sang on it and own the label and the rights to it would i be allowed to play it, as its sh--t rare or is it classed as a boot or re-issue ??????.
Dave Rimmer Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 I know of a certain big ticket record that when the writers/producers/label owners and all involved in it found out the price it was fetching actually had another amount pressed on a different label, this was done to make it available to more than just the collectors who could afford the original cut of it and it was pressed in its original mono format from original plates, and put on sale for around the $5 mark not the 4 figure amount it has gone for before. So as it's been done by the people who wrote, produced, sang on it and own the label and the rights to it would i be allowed to play it, as its sh--t rare or is it classed as a boot or re-issue ??????. If they own it. it's clearly not a boot, but as it's not on the original label that the first release was, it's a reissue. Legitimate yes, would I personally play it ? No. If you want to, that's up to you because I have no intention of telling anyone what they should DJ with. I'll leave that to their conscience. 1
Guest Bearsy Posted October 11, 2011 Posted October 11, 2011 I know of a certain big ticket record that when the writers/producers/label owners and all involved in it found out the price it was fetching actually had another amount pressed on a different label, this was done to make it available to more than just the collectors who could afford the original cut of it and it was pressed in its original mono format from original plates, and put on sale for around the $5 mark not the 4 figure amount it has gone for before. So as it's been done by the people who wrote, produced, sang on it and own the label and the rights to it would i be allowed to play it, as its sh--t rare or is it classed as a boot or re-issue ??????. the Trannells is a fine example of that and Des Parker has an Original and helped get the re-issiues out there as i got my re-issue from him, now would Des mind if anyone played their re-issue knowing that he had an Original, i certainly wouldnt and ive never played My re-issue out either, somehow i just dont think its right, dont ask why i think that i just do even though i know money went to the right places
Jem Britttin Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 At a recent reunion night I played Earl Wright . Thumb a ride on uk capitol ..........I choose death by firing squad if thats ok
trog Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 (edited) gogopro, on 12 October 2011 - 03:42 AM, said: At a recent reunion night I played Earl Wright . Thumb a ride on uk capitol ..........I choose death by firing squad if thats ok Charlatan! Edited October 12, 2011 by trog
Ian Parker Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 At a recent reunion night I played Earl Wright . Thumb a ride on uk capitol ..........I choose death by firing squad if thats ok careful mate, the baying mob with flaming torches will be at your door
KevH Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 (edited) I was told that James Trouble used to take his own cart around with him for this reason. Quality cartridge maybe,but surely still end up with deteriation of the acetate.Only 30 plays for an acetate..? Where do we stand on....for instance.. Al Gardner - Sweet Baby - ,,Gooda Mooga (Sepia) Ann Sexton - Gone to long - Seventy 7 (Impel). Local against national.Minor release,major release? Edited October 12, 2011 by KevH
Geeselad Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 (edited) Quality cartridge maybe,but surely still end up with deteriation of the acetate.Only 30 plays for an acetate..? Where do we stand on....for instance.. Al Gardner - Sweet Baby - ,,Gooda Mooga (Sepia) Ann Sexton - Gone to long - Seventy 7 (Impel). Local against national.Minor release,major release? Its been said before mate, but its just pedantry to confuse this issue, national, local, it dont matter it was an origianl issue. Edited October 12, 2011 by geeselad
Jez Jones Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 Its been said beofe mate, but its just pedantry to confuse this issue, national, local, it dont matter it was an origianl issue. pedantry lol---thats confused me---whatsit mean ?
Guest MrC Posted October 12, 2011 Posted October 12, 2011 (edited) pedantry lol---thats confused me---whatsit mean ? He lost me at "beofe" Edited October 12, 2011 by MrC
Recommended Posts
Get involved with Soul Source
Add your comments now
Join Soul Source
A free & easy soul music affair!
Join Soul Source now!Log in to Soul Source
Jump right back in!
Log in now!