Radio WMMS broadcast eleven songs in soundboard quality, culminating with the incendiary Uptight/Satisfaction encore jam with tour support Stevie Wonder.

This can't be an official release? Bootlegs never get promo on the website like this on this record store (Platekompaniet in Norway).

[www.platekompaniet.no]





Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-09-20 14:53 by DandelionPowderman.

Wow.

radio shows are a grey area...
this record is a great one btw, had it on cd back in the 90s, it was one of my favourites

Life's just a cocktail party on the street

A public domain release, not authorized and "official", but legal nonetheless...

Quote
retired_dog
A public domain release, not authorized and "official", but legal nonetheless...

How can it be legal if the producer of the release does not own the rights to reproduction?

Mathijs

It is this from johnnythunders:

[iorr.org]

direct link:

[onlyrockandroll.london]

It has not ( yet ) been shared here, neither has the orignal tape:

[iorr.org]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-09-20 16:48 by Rank Stranger.

from [www.discogs.com]
"UK reissue label specializing in unofficial broadcast recordings from the 1960s that have fallen in the public domain."

I guess the early 70s have fallen into the public domain too (for some territories).

Their website (you can order here too, but watch out for high importfee's (add Parcel Tracking for £6.00 to avoid import taxes, works for the Netherlands) is [rhythmandbluesrecords.co.uk] (looks like they have some records at discount )

Life's just a cocktail party on the street



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-10-12 10:14 by MononoM.

Just bought it a couple of weeks ago. The sound quality is pretty ok, but not that great. Uptight/Satisfaction sounding worse than the others. The Ladies & Gentlemen soundtack sounds better than this.
It’s nice to have this, but you can live without it too. Not worth the 28€ I paid for it in a local record store.

I would be surprised that they are legal release in Europe (including UK).

The loophole of the 80's is over now.

Without having heard it I am pretty sure that VGP-243 (or another bootleg) was the source for this LP. (YCAGWYW is in mono, isn't it? )

[onlyrockandroll.london]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-09-21 00:01 by wiredallnight.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
retired_dog
A public domain release, not authorized and "official", but legal nonetheless...

How can it be legal if the producer of the release does not own the rights to reproduction?

Mathijs

Public domain = EVERYBODY owns the rights to reproduction - even you, Mathijs!

Quote
ds1984
I would be surprised that they are legal release in Europe (including UK).

The loophole of the 80's is over now.

This one has nothing to do with the loophole of the 80's.

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
retired_dog
A public domain release, not authorized and "official", but legal nonetheless...

How can it be legal if the producer of the release does not own the rights to reproduction?

Mathijs

Public domain = EVERYBODY owns the rights to reproduction - even you, Mathijs!

So it goes. In a way it is great that all this material is free for anyone to release (at least in UK & EU), and we can buy it nowadays legally, but at the same time it is a bit sad that they didn't release it officially before the time bound expired. With that I mean that if the sonic quality is not that good - like, for example, Padre69 mentioned above - there might have been some sound improvements if had been released officially. Well, I could be wrong, though - nothing could have been done (thinking of Ladies and Gentlemen sound track - but then again they did alter the Brussels Affair soundscape)

In any case, probably they thought that there is not that much money involved in order to trying to protect the rights for 1972 live material (the 1971 is pretty much done so, since I guess the broadcasted Leeds material is probably the only that commercially valuable stuff from that tour). There also seem to have popped up some ABKCO era live material - at least Honolulu 1966 - could it be that the manouvre ABKCO tried with that suspicious youtube trick, turned out not to be successfull after all? Or someone is just brave and not afraid of Klein family lawyers?

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2023-09-21 14:18 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa

So it goes. In a way it is great that all this material is free for anyone to release (at least in UK & EU), and we can buy it nowadays legally, but at the same time it is a bit sad that they didn't release it officially before the time bound aspired. With that I mean that if the sonic quality is not that good - like, for example, Padre69 mentioned above - there might have been some sound improvements if had been released officially. Well, I could be wrong, though - nothing could have been done (thinking of Ladies and Gentlemen sound track - but then again they did alter the Brussels Affair soundscape)

In any case, probably they thought that there is not that much money involved in order to trying to protect the rights for 1972 live material (the 1971 is pretty much done so, since I guess the broadcasted Leeds material is probably the only that commercially valuable stuff from that tour). There also seem to have popped up some ABKCO era live material - at least Honolulu 1966 - could it be that the manouvre ABKCO tried with that suspicious youtube trick, turned out not to be successfull after all? Or someone is just brave and not afraid of Klein family lawyers?

- Doxa

Can we really blame them?

Live albums never were big sellers. For as long as the flow of studio albums was regular, there really was no interest to inflate the market.

Archival releases became important later, only as a marketing strategy to keep the RS name in the limelight when studio releases became less frequent.

Lets face it, if RS fans don't really care (this is what sales figures of the vault releases say), why should they care?

C

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
retired_dog
A public domain release, not authorized and "official", but legal nonetheless...

How can it be legal if the producer of the release does not own the rights to reproduction?

Mathijs

Public domain = EVERYBODY owns the rights to reproduction - even you, Mathijs!

So a radio station broadcasts a bootleg in 1972, and 50 years later the material is in the public domain, free to put on a disc and earn money with it?

I don't believe that at all.

So next year Brussels 1973 will be in the public domain, even though the rights are with ABKCO and KBFH?

Also, my understanding is that all radio shows from before January 1 1978 are in the public domain. However, the contents of the show can be still under copyrights protection. Example: the sketches from a cabaret show from the 1960's is in the public domain, but any music played in that show might be under copyrights. Thus you can release the cabaret show only if you get the rights to the music or if you take the music out.

Mathijs



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-09-21 14:13 by Mathijs.

according to EU copyright law copyrights of music performances expire if these performances are not commercially used with 50 years after they have been recorded. Thus I guess the performances on that release is now public domain.

<the 1971 is pretty much done so, since I guess the broadcasted Leeds material is probably the only that commercially valuable stuff from that tour>

I bet (a) complete Roundhouse show(s) (sounding way better than Leeds) would be pretty valuable as well

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
retired_dog
A public domain release, not authorized and "official", but legal nonetheless...

How can it be legal if the producer of the release does not own the rights to reproduction?

Mathijs

Public domain = EVERYBODY owns the rights to reproduction - even you, Mathijs!

So a radio station broadcasts a bootleg in 1972, and 50 years later the material is in the public domain, free to put on a disc and earn money with it?

I don't believe that at all.

So next year Brussels 1973 will be in the public domain, even though the rights are with ABKCO and KBFH?

Also, my understanding is that all radio shows from before January 1 1978 are in the public domain. However, the contents of the show can be still under copyrights protection. Example: the sketches from a cabaret show from the 1960's is in the public domain, but any music played in that show might be under copyrights. Thus you can release the cabaret show only if you get the rights to the music or if you take the music out.

Mathijs

As Slewan pointed out, BRUSSELS AFFAIR is protected since they released it officially within the 50 years after it was recorded (of course, if we are going to split hairs, there are recordings in the original radio broadcast/bootlegs that were from different shows than in the official released version, so those could be in a theory released by someone else next year). If memory serves, it is protected 70 years from its release year, so that will expire in year 2082, right?

As far as I understand, what goes for copyright for the music, and not that of recording (two different things), the only thing anyone releasing a public domain recording should mind is to make sure that the composers of the music will get their mechanical royalty. For example, in the case of this LIVE IN THE USA 1972 release, Mick and Keith should have their share of the cake (a couple of years ago they actually hired one agency to watch out after their royalties all over the world). But they cannot veto the release of those songs if the recording of them is already entered a public domain.

- Doxa



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2023-09-21 15:20 by Doxa.

Quote
DandelionPowderman


I bet (a) complete Roundhouse show(s) (sounding way better than Leeds) would be pretty valuable as well

Surely! But I guess that's an item - if there actually exists more than is already released - that is hidden deep in their vaults...

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman


I bet (a) complete Roundhouse show(s) (sounding way better than Leeds) would be pretty valuable as well

Surely! But I guess that's an item - if there actually exists more than is already released - that is hidden deep in their vaults...

- Doxa

Time to start digging!

This has been an emerging industry: taking 2nd, 3rd, or 4th generation digital copies of shows that have fallen into the public domain, printing them on vinyl, and selling them online.

I want to know how the band gets paid.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-09-21 15:28 by TravelinMan.

Quote
TravelinMan
This has been an emerging industry: taking 2nd, 3rd, or 4th generation digital copies of shows that have fallen into the public domain, printing them on vinyl, and selling them online.

I want to know how the band gets paid.

While the performance (and the recording thereof) has fallen into the public domain, the compositions have not.

So it's not the "band" (as performers) who gets paid, but the actual composers of the songs embodied in this performance - in this case Jagger/Richards, Chuck Berry for example. These are the so-called "mechanical royalties", usually collected through the respective copyright agency in the country where the album is actually manufactured.

@doxa

If a live album by the Stones won’t sell many copies, who is persuading the record companies to take a gamble with Dylan and Young’s ongoing live releases? They’re both reasonably popular artists but don’t come close to the Stones. Young’s Anthology set must have cost a fortune to produce but how many copies did it sell?

I would love to hear the June 251972 night show in great sound quality and the Wembley 1973 complete show or compendium of all 3 shows.I also hope they have the complete June15, 1975 Buffalo show.That was a great show



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2023-09-24 12:24 by Taylor1.

Quote
TravelinMan
This has been an emerging industry: taking 2nd, 3rd, or 4th generation digital copies of shows that have fallen into the public domain, printing them on vinyl, and selling them online.

This LP is, indeed, a transfer from a digital copy since you can actually hear digital skips/errors on the recording. Not taken from a tape source.

Actually Buffalo June 15th was in 1975, not 1972.

Quote
Father Ted
@doxa

If a live album by the Stones won’t sell many copies, who is persuading the record companies to take a gamble with Dylan and Young’s ongoing live releases? They’re both reasonably popular artists but don’t come close to the Stones. Young’s Anthology set must have cost a fortune to produce but how many copies did it sell?

Honestly, no idea how much those - sometimes huge - releases by both of those artists do commercially. Or is it more like trying to keep the yet non-relaesed material in control, for reasons of artistic integrity or something. At least the Dylan people (and Columbia) has seemed to be pretty consistent in trying to avoid Dylan stuff entering public domain. Plus his BOOTLEG SERIES project has been for years pretty massive project to cover a lot of ground. I am not that sure if Dylan himself is that interest or is even anyway involved in any of those archive releases. But he seemingly has people he trusts, and who are taking care of his legacy in behalf of him. Probably he is just happy if he gains a few dollars out of it (and we are talking about an artist who just sold his incredible catalogue).

For reason or other, The Stones and their people seem to think otherwise. My quess is that there is not much money involved, so they simply don't give a shit if it enters public domain... Or who knows, maybe they consider the material that subpar soundwise or not that significant artisticwise that they think it does not deserve any bigger profile official release. And they have afford to do that, despite losing probably a few bucks there.

Another thing, if compared to Dylan's pretty indifferent attitude towards archive releases, The Stones (especially Mick) seem to be pretty much personally involved in those. It has been basically their major release item since 2011 or so, not a side project. So they, and their record company, has put a lot of effort to make the archive releases commercially fruitful. The idea has been not been protecting copyrights, but 'Hey, we can make money out of this stuff right here and now'.

- Doxa



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2023-09-22 12:31 by Doxa.

Quote
guezeg
Actually Buffalo June 15th was in 1975, not 1972.

Yes , I know .Just mentioned it as close in time .

So this release contains broadcast material that is over 50 years and thus in the public domain. It is legal but unauthorised.We do pay songwriting royalties and we source our photography either from accredited agencies or direct from the photographer or their estate.

If anyone is interested in seeing our extensive back catalogue our website is [rhythmandbluesrecords.co.uk]

I post the details of new releases here and on my blog www.onlyrockandroll.london (click on the Vinyl tab)