For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Doxa
the vaults are now locked up for good
- Doxa
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Yeah, I can't help thinking of the beautiful Charlie Is My Darling-release, where they managed to create a wonderful joint product.
Did it sell that bad?
At least I don't want to believe that is it the Stones who are hindering these anniversary sets from happening.
Maybe it's just wishful thinking... Joyce did say something about wanting to get control over the ABKCO-catalogue..
Quote
dcbaQuote
Doxa
the vaults are now locked up for good
- Doxa
Just a random thought but that could mean the new album is coming?
The archive release had just ONE purpose : keeping a media activity around the band when Mick and the boys had nothing new to offer, so the Stones were not considered as a "dead" band. It worked really well (as most plans Jagger designs, do).
Quote
Doxa
Cheers, Rocky! Cool additional info. What do you mean by that if the copyright of recording of "Try Me" could be "enforced". Is that something to do with such gestures as ABKCO have done in regards to remasters - that they still, seeing a hole in a public domain business, can copyright that unique mastering of the song in the form they might have release it? The others could only use/release those already circulating versions?
Anyway, funny to hear about that clever idea of copyrighting the remasters - thereby gaining some 70 years more of ownership (in UK & EU). Anyway, I predict when, say, 2036 comes and "Satisfaction" enters public domain, there will be some specific releases based on the original master release, which, for example, the radio stations will use from then on - not needing pay anything of the publishing royalties, just the song-writer ones. The people who would like to use the tune in commercials would have two options then: go to Jagger/Richards (or their estate) and ask the permission to use the original master or go to ABKCO to use the remastered version, which would cost them more... I am rather certain which option they use... Of course, the premise in this prediction is that there still is a market and interest for this kind of stuff...
I guess all of this is rather boring stuff for most of the people here, but I am rather into it, since I have never really thought or understood anything about these kind of matters earlier. You live and learn...
- Doxa
Quote
DoxaQuote
dcbaQuote
Doxa
the vaults are now locked up for good
- Doxa
Just a random thought but that could mean the new album is coming?
The archive release had just ONE purpose : keeping a media activity around the band when Mick and the boys had nothing new to offer, so the Stones were not considered as a "dead" band. It worked really well (as most plans Jagger designs, do).
Yeah! It could be that digging up archieves isn't the priority at the moment in their task list... Always trusty georgelicks wrote in July 4th: "It [BEGGARS BANQUET] be released with bonus songs, that's the word on Universal, very much like Sticky Fingers on 2015.". Seemingly something happened after that - it would not be that unhearable that Jagger has changed his mind and decided to look forward instead of back...
Jeez, I wish this interpretation to be true...
- Doxa
Quote
Rocky DijonQuote
Doxa
Cheers, Rocky! Cool additional info. What do you mean by that if the copyright of recording of "Try Me" could be "enforced". Is that something to do with such gestures as ABKCO have done in regards to remasters - that they still, seeing a hole in a public domain business, can copyright that unique mastering of the song in the form they might have release it? The others could only use/release those already circulating versions?
Anyway, funny to hear about that clever idea of copyrighting the remasters - thereby gaining some 70 years more of ownership (in UK & EU). Anyway, I predict when, say, 2036 comes and "Satisfaction" enters public domain, there will be some specific releases based on the original master release, which, for example, the radio stations will use from then on - not needing pay anything of the publishing royalties, just the song-writer ones. The people who would like to use the tune in commercials would have two options then: go to Jagger/Richards (or their estate) and ask the permission to use the original master or go to ABKCO to use the remastered version, which would cost them more... I am rather certain which option they use... Of course, the premise in this prediction is that there still is a market and interest for this kind of stuff...
I guess all of this is rather boring stuff for most of the people here, but I am rather into it, since I have never really thought or understood anything about these kind of matters earlier. You live and learn...
- Doxa
In referring to the status of "Try Me" some of what I read here made it sound like any copyright on the recording from 1965 would expire shortly. To your point, if ABKCO releases it and copyrights it 2019 for the sake of argument, the copyright protection would extend as if it were a newly recorded release. Retired Dog may know otherwise.
I work with a literary estate. The author died in 1959. His widow renewed the copyrights in 1977. Copyright protection extends as if his works were newly written material in 1977. The exception are his works published before 1923 may be freely reprinted but no one can use his characters in new works (even characters from his pre-1923 titles) without a license. This is enforced by The Society of Authors in the UK and The Authors Guild in the USA as they jointly administer the literary estate. The likes of Disney and Warner Bros. respect this interpretation and choose not to challenge it legally. I regularly deal with armchair copyright attorneys (as I am with the Stones) who tell me this is against public domain law. No one perseveres who attempts to go forward on their own, though. Copyright is fraught with peril unless no one manages the estate.
Quote
Rocky Dijon
Sorry for not being more clear, Retired Dog, but I think that's been ABKCO's strategy in copyrighting remasters as "new work." It's a trick that's also been used when silent movies are restored and new intertitles added. Anyone can package and distribute grainy public domain copies, but if you distribute a restoration copy on the basis the film is public domain, you discover the restoration is under protection for many years to come. It may be that soon anyone can release some of the Sixties recordings, but they'll need to use the original vinyl as the source because if ABKCO can prove they are sourced from their copyrighted remasters (in some cases that is quite easy to do), they will be sued for infringement.
Quote
retired_dog
The Stones are considered as a "dead band" by the majority of the public
Quote
Big Al
Thanks, Deltics. So, this outtake has never circulated until now? I wonder what other Chess recordings are yet to circulate or be discovered? A Chess-outtakes release would be marvellous; or even a release compiling all their recordings - released and unreleased - from those 1964-65 U.S. sessions.
Quote
dcbaQuote
retired_dog
The Stones are considered as a "dead band" by the majority of the public
No no no (and that's not a fanboy comment. I live in a big European city with a massive touristic turnover and I keep seeing kids (8 to 18) from all nationalities wearing Stones T-shirts.
So as a brand the Stones are hot, trendy. And this is exactly what Jagger tried to achieve all these years : keeping the Stones alive, keeping the Stones media image fresh.
in 2017 2018 when you see young people going to a Stones show for the very 1st time you can say this is the direct result of the non-stop Jagger campaign to keep the Stones hot.
Is ABB lesser than EOMS, it is but these kids don't care at all, all they know is the Stones, the band the iconic tongue are trendy/hot.
Jagger is a marketing genius!
Quote
retired_dogQuote
Rocky Dijon
Sorry for not being more clear, Retired Dog, but I think that's been ABKCO's strategy in copyrighting remasters as "new work." It's a trick that's also been used when silent movies are restored and new intertitles added. Anyone can package and distribute grainy public domain copies, but if you distribute a restoration copy on the basis the film is public domain, you discover the restoration is under protection for many years to come. It may be that soon anyone can release some of the Sixties recordings, but they'll need to use the original vinyl as the source because if ABKCO can prove they are sourced from their copyrighted remasters (in some cases that is quite easy to do), they will be sued for infringement.
Yes, you mentioned this earlier, copyrighting remasters. However, over here it falls under the category of "law against unfair competition" which is a somewhat weaker sword than copyright and neighboring rights, effectively protecting not the recording itself, but more the substantial financial investment into a remastering work of old recordings. That's a tricky subject that alone could fill pages here once we go into details! Let's try to avoid that, after all we're not legal advisers for any young "public domain label entrepreneurs"...
quite lame, and they don't really fit into anything the Stones have done. Those were poor choices of songs to cover.Quote
Hairball
... Their studio versions of My Girl and Under the Boardwalk were lame....
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
retired_dogQuote
Rocky Dijon
Sorry for not being more clear, Retired Dog, but I think that's been ABKCO's strategy in copyrighting remasters as "new work." It's a trick that's also been used when silent movies are restored and new intertitles added. Anyone can package and distribute grainy public domain copies, but if you distribute a restoration copy on the basis the film is public domain, you discover the restoration is under protection for many years to come. It may be that soon anyone can release some of the Sixties recordings, but they'll need to use the original vinyl as the source because if ABKCO can prove they are sourced from their copyrighted remasters (in some cases that is quite easy to do), they will be sued for infringement.
Yes, you mentioned this earlier, copyrighting remasters. However, over here it falls under the category of "law against unfair competition" which is a somewhat weaker sword than copyright and neighboring rights, effectively protecting not the recording itself, but more the substantial financial investment into a remastering work of old recordings. That's a tricky subject that alone could fill pages here once we go into details! Let's try to avoid that, after all we're not legal advisers for any young "public domain label entrepreneurs"...
Wild Slivovitz might have some more knowledge about this, perhaps..
Quote
exilestones
Is there an easy to read complete list of the songs the Stones recorded at Chess Studio? Thanks
Quote
Rockman
A rare reel-to-reel tape recording of the Rolling Stones at the Crawdaddy Club, Richmond, Summer, 1963, approximate running time 90 minutes
To be sold without copyright
Estimate: £20,000-30,000
1. Route 66 [complete]
2. Come On
3. Talkin' Bout You
4. Love Potion No.9
5. Roll Over Beethoven
6. Money
7. Pretty Thing [complete]
8. Jaguar & Thunderbird
9. Don't Lie To Me
10.Our Little Rendezvous [complete, Chuck Berry's rewrite of Good Morning Little Schoolgirl - this Berry song is unknown in any other version by the Stones]
11.You Got Me Running
12.Brown Eyed Handsome Man
13.Diddley Diddley Daddy [complete]
14.Money [complete
Its rumoured that Mick Jagger purchased the above tape
Quote
Big AlQuote
exilestones
Is there an easy to read complete list of the songs the Stones recorded at Chess Studio? Thanks
I’d love to see a complete list, too.
Quote
Deltics
- Tell Me Baby (Big Bill Broonzy) -The Rest Of The Best-version
Quote
djgabQuote
Deltics
- Tell Me Baby (Big Bill Broonzy) -The Rest Of The Best-version
What is this ? the German Box from the 80s ? is it Tell Me (second version) ?
I
Quote
Big Al
Thank you, Deltics!
Quote
riccardo99
Listening to the stereo version it seemed to me that organ and piano at times are played at the same time, this could mean on the organ was a different guy (Jack Nitzsche who played the following day organ on Cry To Me?) as I don't think any overdub was done then. Alternatively, it could be Brian Jones who played organ on That's How Strong My Love Is on the same day.