Re: [ARSCLIST] Seeking appraiser

["Steven C. Barr" <stevenc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "steven austin" <stevena@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Hmmm. A very good question, isn't it?
>
> There must be many thick books about ownership issues. Can anyone
> provide a sketch of the legal opinions on ownership? Especially of these
> non-retailed items.
>
> I have found many marvelous things in thrift stores that I assume I
> would be free to sell to another collector. In the art world, gaps in
> provenance are "troubling," but seldom thwart an acquisition (and rarely
> to private collectors). But as for manufacturing reproductions for sale
> from any given item, I assume I have no right to do so without acquiring
> the expressed written permission of the artist or a possible copyright
> holder, or determining that the rights have passed into the public
> domain. Once out of my hands, I would expect not to participate in any
> liability realized by the schemes of the buyer.
>
> In Mr. Podietz' case, selling the vault of Sigma Sound tapes would seem
> to me perfectly legal, regardless of the artists represented...IF the
> tapes were in clearly the property of Sigma. If they were left by
> artists for storage or as readily-available working material, then I
> would hope ownership would be retained by the artist (of course, the
> studio may be able to document that they assumed ownership by default if
> the artist declined to claim the tapes). Many of the masters could be
> owned by record labels with lots of lawyers (easily the more dangerous
> sharks in this sea).
>
> Personally, I would want contract files to come with my purchase. I
> always like ephemera.
>
> If a studio makes a duplicate tape master that isn't charged to the
> artist/label, it's clear they only own the tape, right? Not the material
> on the tape.
>
> For rare archival material, the only move would be to include everyone
> who could provide context to enhance the understanding of the material.
> "Sharing" isn't an easy word for possessive museum curators, collectors
> and profiteers, but I see us as serving history while avoiding lawsuits.
> If I had cool Eric Clapton studio outtakes, I would want him involved
> even if that precluded me earning a profit from any project that might
> present the material. (Is that naïve or what?)
>
> I wonder what a purchaser would have in mind. I can imagine neither a
> Rory Block museum nor a rarities CD box set, myself.
>
> Steven Austin
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
> [mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David Lewiston
> Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 11:27 AM
> To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] Seeking appraiser
>
> Hello Eric
>
> A somewhat OT response: I assume you have verified that these tapes
> belong/belonged to Sigma & its successor, rather than to the artists and
> producers? When I use a studio I typically leave a duplicate at the
> studio,
> but it is my property since I have paid for the work which is on it.
>
> A necessary query before moving on to the next stage of the project.
>
Back in the days when record companies had their own studios, the recordings
they made were considered "works for hire" since the artists were paid by
the company to make them.

Today, there would be two complications:

1) The recordings could have been not only made but paid for by the artists
themselves. Were that to be the case, they would own the copyright on the
recording and their permission would be required to issue it commercially.

1a) The recordings could have been made for another party, such as an
independent record firm or other user of sound; in this case the copyright
rests with whomever hired them done.

1b) The recordings could have benn done by and for Sigma...that is, they
hired and paid the artists. In this case, Sigma (or its legal successors)
own the copyright to the recording...and if they gifted the recording
to a third party, one presumes that gift would include any and all rights
to the recording (it is good to check legalities here!)

2) If these recordings were made subsequent to 1942, and the musicians
involved were union members, there may be further considerations!

9.3) Being a (very) part-time blues musician and being on a number
of blues-related e-lists, I can VERY WELL imagine a Rory Block box set!
In fact, I know people who would be in the resulting line-up...!

Steven C. Barr
http://users.interlinks.net/stevenc/