Posts by Simon Grigg
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
The most surprising thing is how surprised people are when a corporation screws them.
No one expects companies not to actively pursue profits for their shareholders, but the record companies cannot really put their hands up and cry poor or expect sympathy for their current woes in the face of the way they have acted historically.
To me there is quite a difference between the relationship between a recording artist and a record company, and McDonald's & their customers.
-
Wow. They love their artists so much that they want to give them an even smaller cut of the action then they get now.
it seems to be one of the raison d’êtres of record company legal departments, to reinterpret the provisions of their contracts to reduce payments as much as possible regardless of the intent of the two parties upon signing. I've had personal experience of this and I know of at least two others, recording acts, who have suffered such. They, the companies, know that what they present as their interpretation is usually accepted begrudgingly because a) they have the money and thus are the paying party, and b) its too expensive to do much about it if you disagree.
-
and the best line:
That this increasingly preposterous man should have spoken out on the business is hardly a surprise - the subject on which he cannot be persuaded to give his opinion has yet to be found. But why anyone indulges his pious preaching on this or Africa, when he recently lavished huge sums on pursuing a court case against a former stylist to his band to ensure the return of a hat, some trousers and a sweatshirt - "memorabilia", as he'd have it - is almost beyond comprehension.
-
Let us not forget the fact that what the RIAA does will be followed by RIANZ
These are the same people who in the seventies and before used to credit much of the mechanical publishing to "copyright control" , which meant it was unknown and went into an account to be split when unclaimed.
One of the biggest Australian Indie publishers got their start by claiming such things and then approaching the overseas songwriter and saying that they had collected on their behalf and could continue to do so if they wanted.
-
Who will enforce the new laws? Not the government, but those with vested interest, namely the movie and recording studios representatives.
and its a particularly worrying situation in NZ where legislation seems to be being written by and primarily for the benefit of a commercial entity and of dubious value to the public as a whole. DRM essentially benefits the four major record companies and Apple, no one else (and certainly not the artists they represent), all owned offshore and, less and less representing the music produced by NZers (even the bulk of what they distribute is as licensees of NZ owned labels). We are writing legislation to satisfy offshore whims and demands, nothing more.
Its a short step away from RIANZ being given the ok to invoice Dick Smith for a levy on MP3 players.
-
Ian, there is a nifty little program called something like DVD Region Free which is out there for the PC and, I think, the Mac..you load it when you want to play a DVD..no probs. Its not free but its cheapish
-
No De La Soul, no Salt n Pepa, no Helluva by Brotherhood Creed, no Young MC. I'm not really sure how I'm supposed to relive the awkwardness and humiliation of school dances without them. Although props for having Freak Me and No Diggity on there - should tide me over until the rest of the content is up
Actually the selection of soul and hip hop is appalling...the only Motown stuff is a few hits albums. I want Eddie Kendricks and The Originals and the late Motown Jackson 5. That sort of thing. Black music, aside from Jazz and the more contemporary urban stuff, is treated really shabbily.
You want Young MC?....eMusic has all the Delicious Vinyl catalogue
-
brilliant, The Skeptics would've approved
-
Stephen, our record companies are only just coming to terms with the fact that CDs are not a "new" technology. Warner NZ and Universal NZ don't even have web sites...
-
I would imagine it is to do with rights and stuff (but I don't see how it doesn't affect imports and such on physical music).
because the royalties on those are paid at source. Its the whole argument about parallel importing...the local licensees or Opcos claim that an import deprives them of legitimate income, therefore buying from a foreign iTunes does the same. I guess that there is an argument that not allowing an NZ card holder to buy from an offshore iTunes circumvents NZ's parallel importing laws.
Back in the day, many years ago, importers of music (both physical and sheet) had to pay the royalties again..they got a physical stamp from the publisher or record co to stick on the LPs label certifying such. In effect the artist should have been paid twice...yeah sure...