[78-L] Motown on 78 and weird Filipino labels

[Michael Biel]

From: "Kristjan Saag" <saag at telia.com>
> It doesn't make sense calling issues of recordings that have
> become Public Domain "pirates". CD issues of pre 1959 (US)
> recordings may be "pirates" in the US, but not in Europe (yet).
> Piracy is a crime and shouldn't be associated with fully legal,
> though unauthorized, issues.

I fully understand and actually agree with your position, but these
terms are being used as descriptive of their category not their
legality.  As you indicate, because of our weird copyright law,
practically no recordings are P.D., so our industry even considers
licensed issues or licensed reissues in other countries to be "parallel
imports" if brought into the U.S. by a commercial firm.  

We do need to distinguish reissues done by the originating company or
its successors, and those done by outside firms without authorization. 
Legal or not, these are still unauthorized.  And until a recording has
been put thru the courts, you cannot say that it is not
criminal--remember our BIG surprise when the New York Supreme Court
declared against Naxos because EMI had licensed non-American P.D.
recordings to Capitol/Angel.  My opinion is that EMI committed fraud
because admittedly in their country they had no more rights to those
P.D. recordings than they would have to Tower Bridge, but those
unauthorized P.D. reissues on Naxos -- legal pirates -- became illegal
pirates in New York, and essentially the whole U.S.  Copyright status in
the home country means nothing in the U.S.  ONLY U.S. law applies in the
U.S.   

> And please don't compare with Moldavian or Chinese issues - some
> of these counties have never associated themselves with
> international copyright organizations, which actually allow
> member countries to have different copyright terms.  Kristjan
 
Same thing. ONLY U.S. LAW APPLIES in the U.S.  Our industry and courts
don't give a diddly-damn what is legal or illegal in your country. 
(That's not MY opinion but that of our damn fool government and the
goddamn RIAA.)  (Pardon my french, but it is hard to separate those last
two words.)  And don't be 100% sure about the legal status of these
pirates in their home country.  When I visited Russia in 1995 we were
informed by THE experts that the Russian CD and record industry was 90%
pirate and counterfeit, and they had the evidence to prove it.  While
most of the rest of the world thought that this was happening because
the laws allowed it, the head of the IFPI Moscow office handed me a copy
of the Russian Copyright Law.  I don't know about Moldavia, but in China
they make big show of running bulldozers over mounds of pirate CDs,
DVDs, purses, etc.  They do have a law, although much of it concerns
trademarks.   
 
Mike Biel  mbiel at mbiel.com


 ----- Original Message ----- 
 From: "Michael Biel" <mbiel at mbiel.com>
 To: "78-L Mail List" <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
 Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 7:37 PM
 Subject: Re: [78-L] Motown on 78 and weird Filipino labels
 
 
 >> I don't know anything about how the labels were appropriated
 >> and pressed locally, but assume it was on the shady side,
 >> though not as shady as the outright bootlegs being pressed
 >> in Taiwan at the time. Best, Margaret G. Still
 >
 >
 > I don't want to seem like the "word police" (which is what I must
seem
 > to be to the people over on the ARSCList after I had to slap down
 > someone who insisted that 16-inch pressings were not transcriptions,
and
 > that coated discs should be called "laminated".) But although it
became
 > common to call any unauthorized records "bootlegs", that word has one
 > specific defination in a court of law, and that is a recording that
is
 > unauthorized and has not been released by the legitimate rights
holder.
 > Concert recordings are bootlegs. Recording session out-takes are
 > bootlegs. But if the recording has be legitimately released, and
 > unauthorized release by another party falls into one of two other
 > categories. A "counterfeit" is when someone tries to make a copy that
 > appears to be just like the original. A "pirate" is when the
 > unauthorized copies are not meant to look exactly like the original.
In
 > the 78 world, Biltmore and Jolly Roger are two late-40s examples of
 > pirates. All the legal P.D. CD reissues are actually pirates. That
 > includes Pearl, Flapper, Naxos, IAJRC, ASD Living Era, ZYX, Take Two,
 > etc. These are perfectly legal in their home countries, but they
still
 > fall in the category of an issue that is unauthorized by the original
 > rights holders. There are even pirates of pirates, such as ProperBox,
 > Snady Hook, and Documents, which are unauthorized re-reisues of other
 > pirates. THESE might be illegal since they are "borrowing" newly
 > engineered transfers which themselves are entitled to copyright in
the
 > eyes of many people.
 >
 > Just an explanation of why I had been so insistant back in the 1980s
 > that Goldmine, DisCoveries and other rock publishers know these
 > distinctions. The industry was trying to wipe out all of these,
 > including legal pirates, and were trying to make sure the public was
 > confused. They wanted the public to think that all were the same. I
am
 > dead set against counterfeits because these cheat not only the record
 > company but the consumer. The buyer thinks they are getting the legit
 > issue but are getting a cheap knockoff. You will remember this being
so
 > common during the cassette era. Every flea market had $3.98 cassette
 > dealers selling 25 cent cassette dubs for $3.98. But bootlegs, such
as
 > concerts and outtakes are documenting performances otherwise lost,
and
 > are sold to people who know what they are getting and who usually
 > already have all of that performers legit releases. And pirates, if
 > they are made of legally P.D. recordings are fully legal and legit.
But
 > if they are all called bootlegs, then they all get tarred with the
same
 > RIAA brush and all get wiped out.
 >
 > As for Taiwan and Korean rock-era pressings, many of which were on
 > colored vinyl and were made from stampers plated from real
pressings(!!)
 > those are illegal pirates which might also be semi-counterfeits. They
 > photocopy the original covers very badly and sometimes have the
original
 > matrix numbers, but they didn't use the original labels and are
 > OBVIOUSLY not the originals.
 >
 > Hope this helps straighten the meanings of these words out. Anybody
 > have any questions? (I haven't used that phrase since I retired from
 > teaching!)
 >
 > Prof Mike mbiel at mbiel.com
 >
 > P.S. Yes, this will be on the exam.
 >
 >
 >
 > ====================
 >
 >
 > To: <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
 >
 > I'm pretty sure the Philippine 78's were not manufactured in the
 > Philippines
 > and sold in U.S. Army PX's. They were manufactured and sold to a
 > listening
 > public that knew and loved American Top 40 Music and heard it on the
 > huge
 > number of radion stations that played American music almost
 > exclusively. I
 > was born and grew up there, and remember my older sister bringing
home
 > Imperial Ricky Nelson 78's and Buddy Holly Coral 78's - as well as
 > 45's. The
 > 78's were much rarer by the Brit Invasion era, but I did see some
 > Ventures
 > 78's at that time. We did not have access to any PXes, just the local
 > stores.
 >
 > From: Alexandre Benoit <pathe90rpm at yahoo.fr>
 >
 > Motown recordings on 78s in India?
 > I doubt this. Because this is not the type of music Indians would
have
 > listened to.
 > In India only those people listened to English language music who
were
 > half-breeds (half Indian,?half British). Black music was never
popular
 > there.
 > There were however Motown releases in South Africa - on the Ridge
 > label.
 > This label took licences from many US labels. On Ridge you can find
the
 > Marvelettes and the Shirelles, possibly others. ?I know, because I
had
 > these
 > South African 78s.?
 > ?
 > The situation in the Philippines was pretty?much like the
situation?in
 > France and Germany. Many 1950's and 1960's records that turned up in
 > the
 > 70's and 80's in France and Germany were completely unknown to the
 > French
 > and German listeners And these records were never listed in the
 > complete
 > listings of the record companies, either! Why? Because these records
 > were
 > only sold in U.S. Army PX's (but pressed locally).
 > ?
 > I guess it was similar in the Philippines.
 > ?
 > How did companies in the Philippines appropriate the names of 3 major
 > US
 > record labels?
 > A rethorical question, I presume. Because nowadays, I am sure, you
can
 > register names like 'Columbia' 'Sun', 'Sony' or whatever in
 > Azerbaidjan,
 > Moldavia, Congo or what have you.
 > Just like you could in the Philippines in those days.
 > ?
 > Alex
 > -------- Original Message --------
 > Subject: Re: [78-L] Motown on 78 and weird Filipino labels
 > From: "Margaret Still" <mgstill at bellsouth.net>
 > Date: Sun, July 26, 2009 12:12 pm
 > To: <78-l at klickitat.78online.com>
 >
 > I'm pretty sure the Philippine 78's were not manufactured in the
 > Philippines
 > and sold in U.S. Army PX's. They were manufactured and sold to a
 > listening
 > public that knew and loved American Top 40 Music and heard it on the
 > huge
 > number of radion stations that played American music almost
 > exclusively. I
 > was born and grew up there, and remember my older sister bringing
home
 > Imperial Ricky Nelson 78's and Buddy Holly Coral 78's - as well as
 > 45's. The
 > 78's were much rarer by the Brit Invasion era, but I did see some
 > Ventures
 > 78's at that time. We did not have access to any PXes, just the local
 > stores.
 >
 > _______________________________________________
 > 78-L mailing list
 > 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
 > http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l 
 
 _______________________________________________
 78-L mailing list
 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
 http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l