Re: BIS

On 16 Aug, 19:04, "Matthew B. Tepper" <oyþ@earthlink.net> wrote:
Bob Harper <bob.har...@xxxxxxxxxxx> appears to have caused the following
letters to be typed innews:KK-dnSAcjPjanzrVnZ2dnUVZ_q7inZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxx:





Dan Fowler wrote:

I appreciate his participation in this forum (and also that BIS puts out
such great recordings -- that I'm always happy to shell out for!).


Since Mr. von Bahr has never, to my knowledge, deleted a recording issued
by BIS, he's not subject to that criticism. Others are, and the
proliferation of private transfers is the entirely predictable result.

I agree there, too, and repeat my belief that the existence of those "private
transfers," traded in a lively underground, is absolutely essential to the
preservation of classical music and its recordings.

--
Matthew B. Tepper:  WWW, science fiction, classical music, ducks!
My personal home page --http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/index.html
My main music page ---http://home.earthlink.net/~oy/berlioz.html
To write to me, do for my address what Androcles did for the lion
Opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of my employers- Dölj citerad text -

- Visa citerad text -

Thanks for the nice words - they help.
Even if some of my colleagues would grill me for saying this, I would
also maintain that if a record company has deleted a recording for
more than a little time (say, the time it takes to sell out the stock
of a full-price release before re-releasing it at mid/budget price),
it should revert into the public domain, as far as the record
company's rights are concerned.
I personally find it against any morality to delete recordings and
keep demanding the rights to them. The artists have laid down huge
work to record them and, typically, their only income is royalties.
There is a huge *principle* difference between not being able to sell
a record that is in stock and not being able to sell that record,
because it is not stocked, even if the net result may be the same. As
long as I lead BIS we will NOT delete anything, whether it sells or
not. Only then can I look my artists in their faces, and only then
can I, with some credibility, claim that I don't accept other people
"lifting" my properties.

Best - Robert
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again)
    ... >> There was a time when artists whored themselves to rich patrons, ... > Still is, only now the patrons, mostly corporations, demand exclusive ... > rights in addition, seeing as they exist to demand. ... Artists willing to sell have an advantage in the market place. ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again)
    ... > There was a time when artists whored themselves to rich patrons, ... Still is, only now the patrons, mostly corporations, demand exclusive ... sell out have an artificial advantage in the marketplace for patronage. ... It's the "patrons" pushing hard for strengthened monopoly rights, ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: BIS
    ... by BIS, he's not subject to that criticism. ... keep demanding the rights to them. ... There is a huge *principle* difference between not being able to sell ... Only then can I look my artists in their faces, ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: BIS
    ... more than a little time (say, the time it takes to sell out the stock ... keep demanding the rights to them. ... There is a huge *principle* difference between not being able to sell ... Only then can I look my artists in their faces, ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: BIS
    ... the time it takes to sell out the stock of a full- ... As long as I lead BIS we will NOT ... engineers and producers did "work for hire" and they have already been paid. ... Symphony boxes, to replace the original 5-LP sets, and to make a nice common ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)