Harrogatesoul Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 This has probably been discussed at severe length before so apologies in advance but... Piling thru the 9000 45s on ebay the % of repro lookalikes ( Jimmy Horne Just Cant DADE to name one ) Are these legit re-issues with money going to artist / songwriters etc? Or for example a 45 like Hamilton Movement on repro ... boots or legal re-issues. Cheers Rich Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Supercorsa Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 I think the same amount of money goes to the Artists of these records, as that of originals that are sold on Ebay. In other words nothing! Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Jason S Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 This has probably been discussed at severe length before so apologies in advance but... Piling thru the 9000 45s on ebay the % of repro lookalikes ( Jimmy Horne Just Cant DADE to name one ) Are these legit re-issues with money going to artist / songwriters etc? Or for example a 45 like Hamilton Movement on repro ... boots or legal re-issues. Cheers Rich As far as I know (having been told by a guy close to the Hamilton Movt guys some time ago) neither 'reissues' of the Hamilton Movement were actually agreed by the guy who owns the music...or anyone connected with them. So that'd make them boots. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Harrogatesoul Posted January 17, 2006 Author Share Posted January 17, 2006 As far as I know (having been told by a guy close to the Hamilton Movt guys some time ago) neither 'reissues' of the Hamilton Movement were actually agreed by the guy who owns the music...or anyone connected with them. So that'd make them boots. Kinda what I thought J to be honest... just wondering aloud really due to the fact that most people have an opinion on repros / boots. I know they have always been a part of the scene since the year dot due to supply & demand etc , just thought in my naivety that things MAY have changed for the better..... Rich Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Pete S Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 The Hamilton Movement ones were done by Expansion Records I think so they are likely to be legit. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Harrogatesoul Posted January 17, 2006 Author Share Posted January 17, 2006 The Hamilton Movement ones were done by Expansion Records I think so they are likely to be legit. Hats off to Expansion then if true. So it still seems its a bit of a free for all still then re. the Mr Soul / Jimmy Hornes etc etc. we see listed on ebay by their hundreds if not thousands.. Thought they would be legit's coming from certain dealers.. oh well... regards Rich Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Jason S Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 (edited) The Hamilton Movement ones were done by Expansion Records I think so they are likely to be legit. If it's the one on Soul Beat then according to the sales blurb on a UK website its a "7" Single, SR25001 ~ Limited editon (Goldsoul) RE-ISSUE on Soul Beat label ". The Soul Mafia one is definately an Austrian boot if discussion over at www.fryer-mantis.co.uk some time ago is anything to go by. Just got an email from Expansion saying they had nowt to do with it. Edited January 17, 2006 by J-Brew Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Pete S Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 If it's the one on Soul Beat then according to the sales blurb on a UK website its a "7" Single, SR25001 ~ Limited editon (Goldsoul) RE-ISSUE on Soul Beat label ". The Soul Mafia one is definately an Austrian boot if discussion over at www.fryer-mantis.co.uk some time ago is anything to go by. Just got an email from Expansion saying they had nowt to do with it. I was on about the Soul Beat one. Never heard of the other one. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest ShaneH Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 just a friendly notice..... please be careful when pointing the finger at any person or organisation regarding boots/re-issues etc. cheers Shane Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Pete S Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 just a friendly notice..... please be careful when pointing the finger at any person or organisation regarding boots/re-issues etc. cheers Shane If thats referring to me, I apologise, but I was told by the person who wholesaled these that they were pressed for him by the people I said did it! If they weren't, I apologise Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest ShaneH Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 If thats referring to me, I apologise, but I was told by the person who wholesaled these that they were pressed for him by the people I said did it! If they weren't, I apologise it wasnt about was had been said mate. i was referring to the possibility of someone coming on later saying "******** is a thief" for example no worries pete Shane Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Harrogatesoul Posted January 17, 2006 Author Share Posted January 17, 2006 Apologies too Shane if what has been written was meant to unearth or name names. Wasn't any intention . Rich Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest ShaneH Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Apologies too Shane if what has been written was meant to unearth or name names. Wasn't any intention . Rich no need to apologise rich. i was just raising the point that whilst discussion is fine there is also legal implications when accusations are made. Shane Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Harrogatesoul Posted January 17, 2006 Author Share Posted January 17, 2006 no need to apologise rich. i was just raising the point that whilst discussion is fine there is also legal implications when accusations are made. Shane Thats cool Shane. Would be a nice thought ( in a perfect world ) that this stuff would be legit and contributions mads back to original artists / writers etc. I'd always assumed these days there was less ' problem ' issues of records been put out these days due to world being a smaller place due to the internet etc . How wrong I am.... Rich Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Paul Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 My investigations reveal that most (certainly the vast majority) of these repros and look-a-like pressings are bootlegs. They are unlawfully issued without the permission of the owners. As such, record companies, artists and producers are being defrauded of huge amoumnts of money (collectively). Publishers and writers are also being defrauded as no royalties are paid to MCPS. Paul Mooney www.millbrand.com Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Bootlegs are illegal... simple fact, they are unauthorised and the purveyors of such products are breaking the law. Can't understand all this double talk and misting of the reality of this subject matter. Believe you me, if you strike an officer of the law, then they will jump on you like a ton of bricks, same thing occurs if you try and cheat any Corporation out of money.........only they will burn you more.... Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Eamesy Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 This has probably been discussed at severe length before so apologies in advance but... Piling thru the 9000 45s on ebay the % of repro lookalikes ( Jimmy Horne Just Cant DADE to name one ) Are these legit re-issues with money going to artist / songwriters etc? Or for example a 45 like Hamilton Movement on repro ... boots or legal re-issues. Cheers Rich [/quot Rich, Interesting that there is no problem with selling the repro/bootleg records - counterfeit goods, on Ebay. Yet I was recently suspended from it because my daughter listed a counterfeit Chanel purse for £5!!!! Alan Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Pete S Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 My investigations reveal that most (certainly the vast majority) of these repros and look-a-like pressings are bootlegs. Good work Sherlock, what gave it away in the end Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Harrogatesoul Posted January 18, 2006 Author Share Posted January 18, 2006 Rich, Interesting that there is no problem with selling the repro/bootleg records - counterfeit goods, on Ebay. Yet I was recently suspended from it because my daughter listed a counterfeit Chanel purse for £5!!!! Alan Spot on Alan. Many are in fact sold / described as re-issues and not boots ( to get round the problems yr daughter experienced no doubt ) Yet we bark at some sellers for not describing records properly. I know the amounts are smaller but if someones selling hundreds a month surely it all adds up. I dont buy these things -I do prefer originals - but if they were legit I would buy the odd one or two. I havent got 1500 for a Hamilton Movement original but I dont really want to line someones pocket by buying boots... Is there a double standard when it comes to down to WHO's selling /mis selling repro / re-issue 45s? Regards Rich Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Ady Croasdell Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 I think the same amount of money goes to the Artists of these records, as that of originals that are sold on Ebay. In other words nothing! But the difference is the artists and writers were paid the first time around, when the record was new and selling, under the original agreement. The repro boots never paid nowt to no-one (3 negatives makes a negative) except the bootlegger and the dealers who sell bootlegs. I would guess 95-99% of repros are boots. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Netspeaky Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 But the difference is the artists and writers were paid the first time around, when the record was new and selling, under the original agreement. The repro boots never paid nowt to no-one (3 negatives makes a negative) except the bootlegger and the dealers who sell bootlegs. I would guess 95-99% of repros are boots.Let's get real here, re-issues etc, hardly any money goes to the original artist, most are either dead or can't be found so the cash goes into the big pot, which is dished out % wise to the various artists on the books so an obsure soul track is just as likely to fund the latest boy band as anyone else. If it wasn't for boots half the legit re-issues would never see the light of day in the first place, it's only when a major thinks they are losing out that they dig into there back catalogue anyway. From an original's collector Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Ged Parker Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 Consider the following: Waterstones sell a copy of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire - A portion of the price paid goes to JK Rowling. The person who buys that book after reading it lists it on ebay and sells it - JK Rowling neither gets or expects any money from the sale. Just as it should be If however I were to print my own copies of Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire and sell them JK Rowling would have every right to be hacked off and would probably sue. Everyone can see that printing my own copies of HP (or, with all due respect to Alan's Daughter, counterfieting Channel purses) would be illegal and immoral. Why should records be any different? Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
timthemod Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 But the difference is the artists and writers were paid the first time around, when the record was new and selling, under the original agreement. The repro boots never paid nowt to no-one (3 negatives makes a negative) except the bootlegger and the dealers who sell bootlegs. I would guess 95-99% of repros are boots. I think Ady is spot on here, although many records claim to be licensed officially, they are not! In many cases it's not the groups members or solo artists who own the copyright( despite the fact they think they do!), but whom ever owns the catalogue of a particular record label or publisher. This can also have the unfortunate effect that the artists do not receive any royalties because if they are unaware the copyright owner has licensed any particular titles. On the otherside, due to the length of time since the original product was licenced, current copyright owners have no contact details for the artists concerned. TTM (with my work hat on!!) Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Ady Croasdell Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 Let's get real here, re-issues etc, hardly any money goes to the original artist, most are either dead or can't be found so the cash goes into the big pot, which is dished out % wise to the various artists on the books so an obsure soul track is just as likely to fund the latest boy band as anyone else. If it wasn't for boots half the legit re-issues would never see the light of day in the first place, it's only when a major thinks they are losing out that they dig into there back catalogue anyway. From an original's collector No, wrong. There are lots of artists still alive who we've managed to contact, write new contracts and pay them royalties for their past and future releases (advances) we account to them every six months and develop as good a relationship with them as we can. I could give you a list of fifty now who have benefited from being re-released by us. Sometimes we have to downscale the advance because ******** or some other dodgy company has illegally re-issued them (bootlegged them) and we know that the demand for their music has thereby been reduced which will reflect in our future sales. And boots don't spur us on to release things at all, they just ruin it for everyone apart from the bootlegger and the dealer who sells them, Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Supercorsa Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 My first post was to say that if a private seller or even record dealer sells on Ebay a (new) bootleg or a (secondhand) original, then the seller will not part with any royalties. However that wasn't to say that I agree with the practice. For instance I bought a re-issue copy of Patrinelle Staten's, Little Love Affair. I bought it direct from www.lightintheattic.net as I knew from the website that it'd been released with co-operation with her. So therefore I believe money from this will go to the artist responsible, whereas if I bought it on another wellknown reissue label I wouldn't be too sure. At the end of the day what I or anyone else spends their money on, is down to them. I am not going to say I have never bought a boot or never will in the future. What I will say however is that I have bought a lot more original vinyl since I've joined this site (almost 2 years ago), than I had in the previous 20 years. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Ady Croasdell Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 What I will say however is that I have bought a lot more original vinyl since I've joined this site (almost 2 years ago), than I had in the previous 20 years. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Supercorsa Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 What I will say however is that I have bought a lot more original vinyl since I've joined this site (almost 2 years ago), than I had in the previous 20 years. Praise the Lord! I'm not being ironic just exaggerated. We all learn lots about soul music and even bits of real life on this site and if we use that knowledge then the soul world will be a better place. One of those originals, I got through the post only a couple of days ago, Billy Butler's - Nevertheless on Okeh from a very nice man in Market Harboro'. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Ady Croasdell Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 One of those originals, I got through the post only a couple of days ago, Billy Butler's - Nevertheless on Okeh from a very nice man in Market Harboro'. I hear he's cheap in all sorts of ways, Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Pete S Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 I hear he's cheap in all sorts of ways, Has he got any more of those Clockwork Orange thingies for sale? Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Ady Croasdell Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 Has he got any more of those Clockwork Orange thingies for sale? Yes but that went too cheap even for him! Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
mischief Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 No, wrong. There are lots of artists still alive who we've managed to contact, write new contracts and pay them royalties for their past and future releases (advances) imagine being some little singer who hsn't released a record for 30/40 years, and when you did realease it, the only people who heard it lived in your town , then one day getting a knock on your door and someone from the UK offering you a contract .... wouldn't that freak you out a bit... Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Harrogatesoul Posted January 18, 2006 Author Share Posted January 18, 2006 No, wrong. There are lots of artists still alive who we've managed to contact, write new contracts and pay them royalties for their past and future releases (advances) we account to them every six months and develop as good a relationship with them as we can. I could give you a list of fifty now who have benefited from being re-released by us. Sometimes we have to downscale the advance because ******** or some other dodgy company has illegally re-issued them (bootlegged them) and we know that the demand for their music has thereby been reduced which will reflect in our future sales. And boots don't spur us on to release things at all, they just ruin it for everyone apart from the bootlegger and the dealer who sells them, Got to agree with Ady here. Saw an interview with Lee Shot Williams on a blues site and he was still getting royalties from his ' I like Your Style ' 45... I'd just assumed with starting this thread that certain folks would be doing these artists ( or at least some of them ) a service and a little bit of respect by properly licensing the material. Regards Rich Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Ady Croasdell Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 imagine being some little singer who hsn't released a record for 30/40 years, and when you did realease it, the only people who heard it lived in your town , then one day getting a knock on your door and someone from the UK offering you a contract .... wouldn't that freak you out a bit... It does but it's normally a phone call. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Netspeaky Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 (edited) Got to agree with Ady here. Saw an interview with Lee Shot Williams on a blues site and he was still getting royalties from his ' I like Your Style ' 45... I'd just assumed with starting this thread that certain folks would be doing these artists ( or at least some of them ) a service and a little bit of respect by properly licensing the material. Regards RichJust to add that licencing laws are different in countries around the world, so a lot depends on the country the repro was pressed up in. Perhaps ady can tell us more but I believe in Europe that after a certain time royalties do not have to be paid, which why supermarkets pipe music from Europe, as it's cheaper than licencing it in the UK. Edited January 18, 2006 by Netspeaky Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
pow wow mik Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 just a thought, but if people stopped buying bootlegs, people would stop making them. Who does buy them by the way, and why? Say Hamilton Movement was booted, can you not get it legit on CD? So why buy a bootleg 45? Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 just a thought, but if people stopped buying bootlegs, people would stop making them. Who does buy them by the way, and why? Say Hamilton Movement was booted, can you not get it legit on CD? So why buy a bootleg 45? The newcomer`s who are totaly amazed by the prices for the real stuff,and them that dont care,and australian`s Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Ady Croasdell Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 Just to add that licencing laws are different in countries around the world, so a lot depends on the country the repro was pressed up in. Perhaps ady can tell us more but I believe in Europe that after a certain time royalties do not have to be paid, which why supermarkets pipe music from Europe, as it's cheaper than licencing it in the UK. No its a fifty year period in all European countries. You go to a strange supermarket with a European music pipeline. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Dayo Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 Just to add that licencing laws are different in countries around the world, so a lot depends on the country the repro was pressed up in. Perhaps ady can tell us more but I believe in Europe that after a certain time royalties do not have to be paid, which why supermarkets pipe music from Europe, as it's cheaper than licencing it in the UK. That may have more to do with PRS (songwriter's/publisher's royalties) than mechanical copyright (ie the recording). I'm sure others are more expert than me though. Colin Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
mischief Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 just a thought, but if people stopped buying bootlegs, people would stop making them. Who does buy them by the way, and why? Say Hamilton Movement was booted, can you not get it legit on CD? So why buy a bootleg 45? I have friends that buy boots .. if you go through there box they are all boots reissues.. when I ask them they say its because they like the feel of records but can't afford originals.. sometimes they have boots that cost the same as the originals ... and to be honest they are friends so I don't really go into the whole original boot thing .. everyday punters don't seem to worry.. but on the other hand how many of us on here bought boots/reissues before we started spending money, just because we wanted it. What I think is out of order is selling boots/reissues with looky likey labels. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Netspeaky Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 No its a fifty year period in all European countries. You go to a strange supermarket with a European music pipeline.Ady, I use to work for a supermarket in the 80's the music was piped in from Europe as it was cheaper to licence the song playing in your local store was the same song thatwas being played in all 600+ hundred stores around the country, mostly classic 60's pop tunes. Piped was the term used but I guess it could have been on the principle of a radio station without the chatter.By the way the 50 years isn't that far away for some northern tunes. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 The newcomer`s who are totaly amazed by the prices for the real stuff,and them that dont care,and australian`s Oi, leave us ozzies out of it Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 (edited) Move the subject on a bit,Eastern block countrys,china,Iran,etc,got loads of stuff these type of places,dont think these are legit,broberly worth less if they was,are these ok?politicy correct might be the case?,or did there collectors(are there any?) stick to the USA pressing only,anyway Moscow now..... Edited January 18, 2006 by ken Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Stuart T Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 Oi, leave us ozzies out of it I thought you were Welsh? Does this excite you: The really short copyright protection used to be in Belgium, but the period has been standardised across Europe now. I think they had a protection period of 21 years after the artists death. When the original law was passed it probably meant very little, given the musical output of Belgium. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 Oi, leave us ozzies out of it No Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Garethx Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 The really short copyright protection used to be in Belgium, but the period has been standardised across Europe now. I think they had a protection period of 21 years after the artists death. When the original law was passed it probably meant very little, given the musical output of Belgium. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Stuart T Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 No Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 (edited) Move the subject on a bit,Eastern block countrys,china,Iran,etc,got loads of stuff these type of places,dont think these are legit,broberly worth less if they was,are these ok?politicly correct might be the case?,or did there collectors(are there any?) stick to the USA pressing only,anyway Moscow now..... Legit question,Sourcer`s after all dont wanna` be playing them out without S/S`s approval... Edited January 18, 2006 by ken Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Soulsmith Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 I have friends that buy boots .. You need to widen your circle of friends Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Stuart T Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 The really short copyright protection used to be in Belgium, but the period has been standardised across Europe now. I think they had a protection period of 21 years after the artists death. When the original law was passed it probably meant very little, given the musical output of Belgium. Jacques Brel anyone... Exactly. That Seasons in The Sun was based on something by him. Allegedly "His works excel, not so much because of the study of the melody, but because of a science of text and wordplay that functions essentially on the principle of binary opposition (black and white, approximate minimal pairs) and for a certain predestination for neologism. But it is on stage that Brel makes the biggest impression. He gives his songs a new dimension, in gestures, by a very carefully prepared expressionism." Eddie Wally is better. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 Not all lookalikes are boots. At Joe Boy we put out IN LOVE - TONY GALLA on Swan lookalkie and that was licenced from the owners of the Swan label. Since then Glenn Gunton has put out GONE WITH THE WIND IS MY LOVE - RITA AND THE TIARAS on DORE lookalike and that was licenced from the estate of Lew Bedell.. We are releasing a PRECISIONS EP to tie in with their apperance at Prestatyn and we have licenced the tracks from the owners of the DORE catalogue and got the approval of the group who have agreed to sign the records. Link to comment Social source share More sharing options...
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!