rmmgj buys the lost wes montgomery tapes, can it be done?
hw
how much we get ;)
#1
Rick Ross
"hw" <nosp...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fno6p4$ef7$03$1...@news.t-online.com...
> see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
> how much we get ;)
>
> #1
>
>
Greger Hoel
From now on, just call me #2, or Number Two, if you will
--
"When swing must become an exercise the world will surely come to an
end." -Tony DeCaprio
DaveB
distinguished honor.... while I've been on and off here for a number of
years I was absent for about 2 years until just recently. (the shame...)
"hw" <nosp...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fno6p4$ef7$03$1...@news.t-online.com...
DaveB
posting a lot lately? But doubt if you'll get forty bucks out of
her/him/whatever...
"DaveB" <davidb...@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:UUNnj.7340$yE1.7232@attbi_s21...
Des Higgins
> OK. I'll be #3, or #4 if Rick is #3, but I doubt I deserve such a
> distinguished honor.... while I've been on and off here for a number of
> years I was absent for about 2 years until just recently. (the shame...)
>
>
> news:fno6p4$ef7$03$1...@news.t-online.com...
>
>
>
> > see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
> > how much we get ;)
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
I wanna be number 6; I am not just a name; I am a number.
Des "no prisoners" Higgins
Kevin Van Sant
in message <fno6p4$ef7$03$1...@news.t-online.com> :
>see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
>how much we get ;)
>
>#1
>
yes!
_________________________________________
Kevin Van Sant
http://www.kevinvansant.com
CDs, videos, mp3s, gigs, pics, lessons, info.
Alex
> On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:47:55 +0100, "hw" <nospam...@yahoo.com> wrote
> in message <fno6p4$ef7$0...@news.t-online.com> :
>
> >see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
> >how much we get ;)
>
> >#1
>
> yes!
>
> _________________________________________
> Kevin Van Sant
>
> http://www.kevinvansant.com
> CDs, videos, mp3s, gigs, pics, lessons, info.
Count me in.....Number 7 or whatever
Alex Pechenik
Michael Standal
(in article <fno6p4$ef7$03$1...@news.t-online.com>):
> see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
> how much we get ;)
>
> #1
>
>
I'm in - put me down for $400.00 - I'm totally serious. I really want these
recordings to see the light of day!!
Btw, I want numbers 41-50. I won't budge on that.
C'mon guys and gals - pony up!! Let's make this happen. Here's your
Invitation - This Could Be The Start Of Something.. er, this could be Our
Shining Hour <let the groans commence>
Seriously, this could be historic. We could re-introduce some truly great
music from an absolute legend to the world. Let's figure out a way to work
together on this.
Mike
mikeo
Nate Najar
i'm good for $100 if anyone's serious enough for it to happen.
N
DougW
to Wes' solos.
"You know that Wes he played a really boss guitar and he was groovin
with his thumb down in Naptown, yeah you know he was a swinging cat
that played the hippest octaves on the scene..."
Tone
335p...@gmail.com
okay I'll chip in $100.
Mark R.
Ric
Ric
SO
SO
Should there be a Paypal account or something? Whatever, I'll gladly
contribute to this!!
"hw" <nosp...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fno6p4$ef7$03$1...@news.t-online.com...
hw
"Michael Standal" <mstandal.removethis.@mac.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:0001HW.C3C51AFD...@news.easynews.com...
here's my suggestion:
as soon as we have 3000$ covered we find a volunteer who is willing to
collect the money via paypal or bank transfer and make a bid, preferably
someone from the US. if we win the auction the recordings would be uploaded
in lossless format for everyone involved to download.
if everyone who has paid has received the recordings the original tape/dat
could be donated. if there are more funds than needed the additional money
could be returned or donated for a good cause.
i'd be willing to keep track of all potentional participants and work
together with someone from the US who would do the bidding and receive the
tapes if we win the auction.
is that a crazy idea or could we pull this off?
paul
335p...@gmail.com
> "Michael Standal" <mstandal.removeth...@mac.com> schrieb im Newsbeitragnews:0001HW.C3C51AFD...@news.easynews.com...
>
>
>
> > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:47:55 -0600, hw wrote
bidding has ended on that auction. If we're serious, someone will have
to try to contact the seller
rhan...@comcast.net
> On Jan 29, 5:40 pm, Kevin Van Sant <kvans...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:47:55 +0100, "hw" <nospam...@yahoo.com> wrote
> > in message <fno6p4$ef7$0...@news.t-online.com> :
>
> > >see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
> > >how much we get ;)
>
> > >#1
Someone' gonna need to coordinate. Organize the payments, keep track
and be point-person on the deal with the seller. I think if we
approached him to "buy direct" we might not have to compete on Ebay.
Also, how do we keep straight rmmgjers that pitch in $40 versus $100
or $400?
Anyway, I'm in. #9 ? (I'm getting all goose bumpy)
pmfan57
> Count me for $500, so long as I get to overdub myself scatting lyrics
> to Wes' solos.
>
That's funny.
lfio
Max Leggett
>I'm delurking to come in on this too!
>SO
>
Ditto.
ott...@hotmail.com
Bucks. $4,000 is only the opening bid.
Bg
James Ludwig
I'm in.
hw
<rhan...@comcast.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:651593dc-9b74-4ecd...@c23g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 29, 6:44 pm, Alex <apeche...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jan 29, 5:40 pm, Kevin Van Sant <kvans...@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:47:55 +0100, "hw" <nospam...@yahoo.com> wrote
>> > in message <fno6p4$ef7$0...@news.t-online.com> :
>>
>> > >see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets
>> > >see
>> > >how much we get ;)
>>
>> > >#1
>
>
>
> Someone' gonna need to coordinate. Organize the payments, keep track
> and be point-person on the deal with the seller. I think if we
> approached him to "buy direct" we might not have to compete on Ebay.
> Also, how do we keep straight rmmgjers that pitch in $40 versus $100
> or $400?
we can't, it would be a public good anway. if someone offers more than 40$
it would be because he want to make this happen.
www.VintageArchtop.com
The best I could come up with is someone buys them and places them on
a webpage, promotes the hell out of it, allows interested parties to
Paypal $20(?) but lets them know up from it'll be 3 months(?) until it
ships. Then pray to your favorite god that enough people order it to
break even. At the end of the period you email a unique password to
all who paid that will only work once, allow them to download very
high quality MP3 files, and then watch as the files appear on every
Torrent list out there...
That's my idea.
I'm a web designer if anyone wants my help :-)
-Thomas
charles robinson
investigated such as who would take possession of the tapes, have them run
off to discs or downloadable files for the contributors, figure out how to
keep them from being bootlegged ( would there be any liability on the part
of the owners if that were to happen?), investigate the possibility of
releasing them legally or contributing them ( just because you have
possession of the tapes would you have the right to use Wes Montgomery's
name, for instance ? I notice that he says for collectors only). There are
probably dozens of other things involved in something like this including
the most obvious one: verification (remember the Wes and Coltrane tape of a
few years ago?).
Charlie
<ott...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:07a4fb0f-7842-4ad7...@f47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
hw
"www.VintageArchtop.com" <t...@craydesign.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:62e2c38c-c76d-4135...@v67g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
the problem is that you'd have to find someone willing to take the risk.
then he'd basically have to sell the recordings which might produce legal
problems. I'd prefer the idea that everybody who is interested just pays
what he can afford and is willing to spend (min. 40$) and that the original
tape/dat could be donated to the montgomery family. if rmmgj would be able
to buy the tapes they would end up as public domain pretty soon anyway.
this would be an act to show our appreciation for wes, and a collective
effort to save these tapes from disappearing in some collector's vault for
good. think of it as a donation for a good cause. it's like giving money to
save the rainforrests. even folks who don't donate benefit from a cleaner
enviroment. economists call it the free-rider-problem ;)
maybe that idea would appeal to the seller as well (since he is a guitarist
too). i've emailed him to see if the tapes are at least still available.
holger
hw
"charles robinson" <robins...@comcast.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:L-SdnZoQK9pS-j3a...@comcast.com...
> In addition there are a lot of things that would have to be decided and
> investigated such as who would take possession of the tapes, have them run
> off to discs or downloadable files for the contributors, figure out how to
> keep them from being bootlegged ( would there be any liability on the part
> of the owners if that were to happen?), investigate the possibility of
> releasing them legally or contributing them ( just because you have
> possession of the tapes would you have the right to use Wes Montgomery's
> name, for instance ? I notice that he says for collectors only). There are
> probably dozens of other things involved in something like this including
> the most obvious one: verification (remember the Wes and Coltrane tape of
> a few years ago?).
> Charlie
what about that tape?
charles robinson
together. It turned out to be a hoax.
Charlie
"hw" <nosp...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fnpplf$jt3$03$1...@news.t-online.com...
hw
> It was supposed to be from the Monterey Jazz Festival on which they played
> together. It turned out to be a hoax.
> Charlie
got a source for that? the wes discography still shows those recordings
(jazzdisco.org) i heard that the tapes are in the hands of the coltrane
family?
charles robinson
remember the announcement here and the stir it created. I'm sure that there
are probably other guys still here who remember it also. I think that the
header was something like "Wes and Coltrane Tape Found !".
Charlie
"hw" <nosp...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fnpqm4$6le$00$1...@news.t-online.com...
kagejs
database-driven system to only allow paying members to be able to
access the files. I can host them on my server if needed.
Josh
Martacus
> see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
> how much we get ;)
>
> #1
In.
willythepicker
>
> > see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
> > how much we get ;)
>
I'm in
Bill Godwin
tom walls
says...
> see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
> how much we get ;)
>
>
>
>
I'm in.
--
Tom Walls
the guy at the Temple of Zeus
mejoemo...@yahoo.com
BTW, if we collectively buy the tapes and don't try to "sell" the
recordings, instead taking "donations accepted" type thing, would we
be on better legal footing...
I know a guy who is close to Greeninger, if he is the owner of the
tapes), I'll look into it and see what's up.
JM
RTFirefly
> "www.VintageArchtop.com" <t...@craydesign.com> schrieb im Newsbeitragnews:62e2c38c-c76d-4135...@v67g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>
> - Show quoted text -
I would be happy to contribute - put me down for a $40 minimum.
Chris
335p...@gmail.com
I think you would still need permission from Wes' estate to use his
name and likeness.
RickH®
wrote:
> In addition there are a lot of things that would have to be decided and
> investigated such as who would take possession of the tapes, have them run
> off to discs or downloadable files for the contributors, figure out how to
> keep them from being bootlegged ( would there be any liability on the part
> of the owners if that were to happen?), investigate the possibility of
> releasing them legally or contributing them ( just because you have
> possession of the tapes would you have the right to use Wes Montgomery's
> name, for instance ? I notice that he says for collectors only). There are
> probably dozens of other things involved in something like this including
> the most obvious one: verification (remember the Wes and Coltrane tape of a
> few years ago?).
> Charlie
>
>
> news:07a4fb0f-7842-4ad7...@f47g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > Hate to be a spoil sport, but I thought the price is around 21,000
> > Bucks. $4,000 is only the opening bid.
>
> - Show quoted text -
The Smithsonian or National Archive I think will hold items actually
owned by others if they are historically significant enough. But
since the National Archive already lost JFK's brain they were supposed
to hold, I'd go with the Smithsonian. A third party holding the tapes
in a vault seems like the fairest arrangement.
RickH®
> see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
> how much we get ;)
>
> #1
I'm in for $100
Tim McNamara
<62e2c38c-c76d-4135...@v67g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
"www.VintageArchtop.com" <t...@craydesign.com> wrote:
> At the end of the period you email a unique password to all who paid
> that will only work once, allow them to download very high quality
> MP3 files,
"Very high quality MP3 files" is an oxymoron. For something utterly
unique like this, you want to do lossless like FLAC.
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
> see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
> how much we get ;)
>
> #1
>
>
Can someone point me to the other thread for background?
Thanks,
Steve
--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001
Tim McNamara
"hw" <nosp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> if rmmgj would be able to buy the tapes they would end up as public
> domain pretty soon anyway.
Well, not legally in the public domain under current copyright laws.
But practically in the public domain since the files would somehow end
up being freely available sooner rather than later. Someone would say
"man, I should make a copy for my buddy John" and then John might make a
copy for a buddy of his and then it's on the torrent trackers.
Tim McNamara
has been pledged?
RickH®
> I'd be in for $50, too. Is anyone keeping count as to how much money
> has been pledged?
I put what I could gleen into Excel:
Rick Ross $40.00
Greger Hoel $40.00
DaveB $40.00
Des Higgins $40.00
Kevin Van Sant $40.00
Alex $40.00
Michael Standal $400.00
mikeo $40.00
Nate Najar $100.00
DougW $500.00
Tone $40.00
335player $100.00
Ric $100.00
SO $40.00
paul $40.00
lfio $40.00
Max Leggett $40.00
James Ludwig $40.00
kagejs $40.00
Martacus $40.00
willythepicker $40.00
tom walls $40.00
mejoemontgomery $50.00
RTFirefly $40.00
RickH $100.00
Tim McNamera $50.00
hw ?
total $2,120.00
RickH®
I meant glean not gleen
tom walls
says...
> hw wrote:
> > see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
> > how much we get ;)
> >
> > #1
> >
> >
>
> Can someone point me to the other thread for background?
>
> Thanks,
> Steve
>
>
tom walls
1g2000hsl.googlegroups.com>, pass...@windcrestsoftware.com says...
> On Jan 30, 10:24=A0am, "RickH=AE" <passp...@windcrestsoftware.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 30, 10:08=A0am, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
> >
> > > I'd be in for $50, too. =A0Is anyone keeping count as to how much money
> > > has been pledged?
> >
> > I put what I could gleen into Excel:
>
> I meant glean not gleen
>
>
I like it either way, but I think Doug was joking about the $500.
Jazzer
>see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
>how much we get ;)
>
>#1
Count me in.
.
.
.
*** The Sig below is automatically inserted by Teranews.
I do not endorse their products. ***
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
RickH®
> In article
> <62e2c38c-c76d-4135-b03d-ff3890afc...@v67g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
Thats the easy part, the hard part will be finding a studio with a
properly aligned Ampex machine or whatever to read the tapes as
accurately as possible.
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
> In article <Pe1oj.4331$4f.3184@trndny06>, bornfe...@dentaltwins.com
> says...
>> hw wrote:
>>> see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
>>> how much we get ;)
>>>
>>> #1
>>>
>>>
>> Can someone point me to the other thread for background?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Steve
>>
>>
> Google "Wes Montgomery's Lost Tapes".
Thanks--why would I try the obvious?
charles robinson
fire...........................Charlie
"RickH®" <pass...@windcrestsoftware.com> wrote in message
news:347f0374-724f-4fea...@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com...
mejoemo...@yahoo.com
"the big boys," Benson, Bruno, Martino, Wilkins, etc., into this?
Surely, the legalities could be addressed with the collective
experiences they must have with copyright, publishing, et al.
Maybe a CD project/compilation by some of them could theoretically
raise enough capital to cover any number of uture contingencies and
keep the WES TAPES in the .org category as opposed to .com, where all
the snags therein lie?
typing out loud,
JM
Charlie X
Charlie X
moreyr...@shaw.ca
I don't want to rain on everyone's parade here and don't want to come
across as a naysayer but what makes everyone on this group think that
they have any right to collectively pitch in money to acquire this
"master tape"?
Doesn't anyone think that if these tapes were somehow easily cleared
for release that the "owner" would have done so and collected more
than whatever he's going to get from the auction? Or that sometime
between 1958 and now someone would have realized that maybe these
recordings had some commercial value and already released them?
The fact is, even though these recordings were supposedly made before
Wes' first contract, there has been no proof that the Wes estate
approves of the sale of same, nor that the current "owner" has any
right to sell them.
So if you all buy this and everyone gets or has access to a copy,
doesn't that strike you all as a bit immoral? Doesn't anyone here feel
that the Wes estate should have a say about this, or at least grant a
seal of approval on the sale of a bootleg that they will ultimately
receive nothing for if you guys all buy it?
My advice to anyone interested in this auction is to have someone
contact the Wes estate and ask for permission to bid, purchase and
subsequently release these recordings, even if it only means online
downloading access. I would also suggest that whoever might be
interested in these contact the seller and ask him for the paperwork
trail that resulted in him "acquiring" the tapes and from where he got
them to make sure that he has the right to sell them.
Someone had Wes go into the studio to record this and presumably,
unless there's some clear provenance on the title submitted by the
current owner, there are some serious questions to be asked about who
owns them - at the very least, the Wes estate should be consulted
about whether they approve of this auction or not.
What makes this different than anyone selling any recording of anyone
that was made presumably without their knowledge or approval and how
many of you would be happy purchasing such unauthorized recordings?
The fact that it is of historical significance and rare does not mean
it is exempt from master copyright does it?
I fully understand that everyone means well and only want these
recordings to be heard but imo more information is needed before
anyone spends their money to hear it.
Paul K.
for me. why does this guy want it to go "only to collectors"? why isnt he
trying to sell it to a company to release it on CD and instead insisting it
goes to a collector? How did he get a hold of the tapes? It makes me wonder
if he's up against Wes' estate and is trying to get around the fact that
they don't want it released.
Paul K
On 1/30/08 10:25 AM, in article
0f45d9a1-3fa2-4d0a...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com,
Kevin Collins
>[snip of very sound points]
It is the combination of my ignorance of the complexities of copyright
law, coupled with a woosy feeling about financial tangles between even
people who are good friends (to say nothing of people who only know
each other through this medium), along with a selfish desire to focus
my limited energies on my own musical output, that has me not wanting
to touch this deal with a stick.
And feelings about Christianity aside (I am one, but I honestly see it
as immaterial to this matter), the ethics of this guy sitting on and
then suddenly selling this stuff for upwards of 12K doesn't sit right
with me. Ditto that for Carlos Santana, if he really does have a
similar collection. Is he waiting to put out a few more lines of
women's shoes before he lets us hear it? ;)
You guys do what you want, but tread lightly, is all I'm saying. The
clips sound awesome but you know, unfortunately, it's not just about
the music.
-Kevin
charles robinson
the original tapes being destroyed.
Charlie
"Paul K." <no...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:C3C62D96.5A1BE%no...@nowhere.net...
charles robinson
offer. The samples have turned up here on You Tube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG8I34ZOSIo
Charlie
"hw" <nosp...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fno6p4$ef7$03$1...@news.t-online.com...
mejoemo...@yahoo.com
cted upon in order to be placed in the commercial domain thru Wes'
estate, etc., it's all about $$$.
If it's in the .org realm (and by that I mean NON Profit) doesn't that
change EVERYTHING?
My great uncle's valuable 40's D'Angelico (hypothetically) gets
"lost," then turns up years later at a garage sale...suddenly I'm on
Antiques RoadShow asking some guy in a Hawaiian shirt what's it worth
and can I sell it...doesn't possession being 9/10ths have anything to
do with it? That + the passage of time, Statute of Limitations, etc.
Why can't we 'buy" the tapes on ebay as easily as buying great unc's
DA?
And if jazz musicians of the 50's "owned" all the recordings they ever
made, would Lester Young, Billie Holiday, Blue Note Label Artists and
countless others have fared better in their later lives?
Just asking...
jm
JM
RickH®
> In article <fcccfacd-7102-47a1-9fcd-8014991e2436@
>
> > I meant glean not gleen
>
> I like it either way, but I think Doug was joking about the $500.
> --
> Tom Walls
> the guy at the Temple of Zeus
Fixed:
Rick Ross $40.00
Greger Hoel $40.00
DaveB $40.00
Des Higgins $40.00
Kevin Van Sant $40.00
Alex $40.00
Michael Standal $400.00
mikeo $40.00
Nate Najar $100.00
DougW $0.00 ?
Tone $40.00
335player $100.00
Ric $100.00
SO $40.00
paul $40.00
lfio $40.00
Max Leggett $40.00
James Ludwig $40.00
kagejs $40.00
Martacus $40.00
willythepicker $40.00
tom walls $40.00
mejoemontgomery $50.00
RTFirefly $40.00
RickH $100.00
Tim McNamera $50.00
hw $0.00 ?
jazzer $40.00
CharlieX $50.00
total $1,710.00
Joey Goldstein
I haven't really been following this, because I think it's a silly idea...
But if y'all are going ahead with it, then who gets to keep the tapes at
their house?
And who gets to decide what to do with the tapes after you acquire them?
Has that been decided yet?
--
Joey Goldstein
<http://www.joeygoldstein.com>
<http://homepage.mac.com/josephgoldstein/AudioClips/audio.htm>
joegold AT sympatico DOT ca
Kevin Collins
opine on it, but here goes anyway:
On Jan 30, 2:25 pm, mejoemontgom...@yahoo.com wrote:
> I think the whole thing boils down to .org vs .com. If the music is
> cted upon in order to be placed in the commercial domain thru Wes'
> estate, etc., it's all about $$$.
>
All I'm saying is, you'd better *know*, and not *think*,
what .org, .com., and anything else related to this, boil down to.
> If it's in the .org realm (and by that I mean NON Profit) doesn't that
> change EVERYTHING?
>
Be absolutely sure of the answer to that before proceeding, is what
I'd say. Since we're talking mere thoughts, my thought is that a good
legal team will cut one to ribbons even if one is absolutely convinced
that he is on sure footing.
> My great uncle's valuable 40's D'Angelico (hypothetically) gets
> "lost," then turns up years later at a garage sale...suddenly I'm on
> Antiques RoadShow asking some guy in a Hawaiian shirt what's it worth
> and can I sell it...doesn't possession being 9/10ths have anything to
> do with it? That + the passage of time, Statute of Limitations, etc.
>
> Why can't we 'buy" the tapes on ebay as easily as buying great unc's
> DA?
>
Again, all I have is a hunch, and my hunch is that intellectual
property is what's at stake here, not an instrument. If your great
uncle owned a guitar company in the 40s, and some of his early design
blueprints were up for auction by a third party, that might be more
similar to this situation. Even still, in that case you're more likely
to be part of his estate (I'm totally shooting in the dark here!) if
you're his great-nephew. Maybe. I don't have a clue, actually. I also
don't know if there is a Statute of Limitations in either scenario or
how long it would be.
My best guess is that anyone asking these questions should proceed no
further, unless all they're doing is speculating. No one asked my
opinion, but the enthusiasm expressed earlier in the thread seemed to
be heading in the direction of a kind of pressurized tone ("come on,
RMMGJ-ers! pony up!"), so it's mainly in defense that I'm being the
wet blanket here. Additionally, I've seen adult 5-piece bands split up
and friendships ended over mic stands and cables funded by "band
funds", and this is an order of magnitude more complex and high-stakes
than that.
> And if jazz musicians of the 50's "owned" all the recordings they ever
> made, would Lester Young, Billie Holiday, Blue Note Label Artists and
> countless others have fared better in their later lives?
>
Not sure of the relevance of this question - can you clarify?
> Just asking...
> jm
> JM
-Kevin
hw
"charles robinson" <robins...@comcast.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:Eq2dnUObhoK0Uz3a...@comcast.com...
> The latest is that there were no offers on Ebay so he is now considering
> any offer. The samples have turned up here on You Tube:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SG8I34ZOSIo
> Charlie
I'd be in for 40$. I contacted Jim Greeninger and the tapes are still for
sale. I think I should point him to this thread, maybe he is willing to work
with us and even answer some questions about the origins of the tapes.
335p...@gmail.com
> I think the whole thing boils down to .org vs .com. If the music is
> cted upon in order to be placed in the commercial domain thru Wes'
> estate, etc., it's all about $$$.
>
> If it's in the .org realm (and by that I mean NON Profit) doesn't that
> change EVERYTHING?
>
> My great uncle's valuable 40's D'Angelico (hypothetically) gets
> "lost," then turns up years later at a garage sale...suddenly I'm on
> Antiques RoadShow asking some guy in a Hawaiian shirt what's it worth
> and can I sell it...doesn't possession being 9/10ths have anything to
> do with it? That + the passage of time, Statute of Limitations, etc.
>
> Why can't we 'buy" the tapes on ebay as easily as buying great unc's
> DA?
>
I think it's because copyright law requires that you get permission to
use the name and the likeness(photo image) of a person if you are
selling a product that's associated with them. If you found some lost
Hendrix recordings you couldn't just publish them online or on CD
without permission. You won't see a picture of Hendrix or hear a note
of his music in any commercial context if it hasn't been cleared with
his estate first. I doubt if .org or .com has much to do with it. Wes'
estate would most likely have to give permission to the buyers from
rmmgj to purchase and distribute the recordings. Without their
blessing there would probably be legal issues.
Mark R
charles robinson
more credible.
Charlie
"hw" <nosp...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fnqmvq$q6r$01$1...@news.t-online.com...
hw
I mailed him and pointed him to this thread. I do understand the legal
concerns but would like to point out that there are already recordings by
Wes out there that are practically public domain. The Half Note recordings
are available for free on the net (not the verve recordings, but additional
material). There are even people out there selling these on websites which I
do not really find cool.
As far as I'm concerned this should be an effort to make these recordings
available with disregard to the free-rider-effect. I certainly could live
with the fact that I'd have paid 40$ to hear some unreleased Wes, even if
other people would benefit from this without having paid money.
Kevin Van Sant
after reading the ebay page, I immediately assumed that there is some
reason why these can't be officially released or it they'd already be
out. Thus his insistence on a "private collector" buying them. But
the way I see it, we are just a collective collector. If we as a
group bought the tapes , that's not really any different than this one
guy owning them. That is to say, if he is in fact a legal owner, then
so can we be. And if once our consortium of co-owner/collectors each
has a copy we then turn over the masters to the Wes estate, a good
deed will also have been done.
Maybe he could just be persuaded to up the session to dime :)
_________________________________________
Kevin Van Sant
http://www.kevinvansant.com
CDs, videos, mp3s, gigs, pics, lessons, info.
mejoemo...@yahoo.com
> > made, would Lester Young, Billie Holiday, Blue Note Label Artists and
> > countless others have fared better in their later lives?
>
> Not sure of the relevance of this question - can you clarify?
OK, let's use Bo Diddley instead of Lester Young. We've all heard
stories of artists from the day not being granted royalties, being
"owned" by record companies, not getting their fare share by virture
of trading "fame" for "residuals." I was just suggesting that
ownership of the WES tapes in question could, in fact, not be "owned"
by WES or his estate (as the case may be) at all...that's possible
isn't it, depending on the circumstances at the time of the
recordings...
I am merely raising issues to see how others are thinking and respond
to all this...I still think the whole thing has a much better chance
of realization of the final goal (getting the WES material out to the
interested public) if a smaller number of HIGH PROFILE Professional
Jazz Guitarists were to get as enthused with the possibilities, as are
we on this thread.
And true, my one year of law school 20 + years ago did not involve
intellectual property, but nevertheless, its basis is in property law,
a beefy and complex beast.
I have no answers per se, only questions.
jm, no esq.
invisaman75
> see the other thread. we'd probably need 100 rmmgjers, 40$ each. lets see
> how much we get ;)
>
> #1
Didn't someone mention that Jamey Abersold had copy of the so called
"Lost Wes Tapes". See the link above! According to his Goggle profile
name "Richie" heard this music last summer!
moreyr...@shaw.ca
> concerns but would like to point out that there are already recordings by
> Wes out there that are practically public domain.
Huh? What makes any recording of Wes "practically in the public
domain" and not subject to compensation for rights holders?
The Half Note recordings
> are available for free on the net (not the verve recordings, but additional
> material). There are even people out there selling these on websites which I
> do not really find cool.
Anything offered for free (legally) that is currently in copyright
would need permission from the owners of the masters as well as
mechanical rights clearance (publishing). And if you don't think it's
cool for people to sell content they got for free, what makes you
think it's ok to sell a master recording that currently shows no proof
of ownership, no clearance or sanctions from the estate and no plans
for compensation to the artist?
>
> As far as I'm concerned this should be an effort to make these recordings
> available with disregard to the free-rider-effect. I certainly could live
> with the fact that I'd have paid 40$ to hear some unreleased Wes, even if
> other people would benefit from this without having paid money.
What about the fact that Wes or his heirs don't get anything from the
sale or subsequent profitting?
Kevin Collins
> > > And if jazz musicians of the 50's "owned" all the recordings they ever
> > > made, would Lester Young, Billie Holiday, Blue Note Label Artists and
> > > countless others have fared better in their later lives?
>
> > Not sure of the relevance of this question - can you clarify?
>
> OK, let's use Bo Diddley instead of Lester Young. We've all heard
> stories of artists from the day not being granted royalties, being
> "owned" by record companies, not getting their fare share by virture
> of trading "fame" for "residuals." I was just suggesting that
> ownership of the WES tapes in question could, in fact, not be "owned"
> by WES or his estate (as the case may be) at all...that's possible
> isn't it, depending on the circumstances at the time of the
> recordings...
>
It's a good question, that much I do know. Perhaps someone with the
necessary legal toolkit at their disposal will get onboard with this.
I wonder if there's even any precedent for it; those Benedetti
recordings of Bird come to mind, but this being (mostly) intentional
studio material changes things.
> I am merely raising issues to see how others are thinking and respond
> to all this...I still think the whole thing has a much better chance
> of realization of the final goal (getting the WES material out to the
> interested public) if a smaller number of HIGH PROFILE Professional
> Jazz Guitarists were to get as enthused with the possibilities, as are
> we on this thread.
>
Someone mentioned Mosaic getting involved - there's a tasty
proposition for us. I don't know what happens to the recordings they
reissue as "limited editions" after they run out, though. Probably not
much.
> And true, my one year of law school 20 + years ago did not involve
> intellectual property, but nevertheless, its basis is in property law,
> a beefy and complex beast.
>
Well, that's one year more than I've had, so there ya go! Err..if the
shoe fits, my foot's in my mouth, as it were...
In my ignorance, I tend to err on the side of caution, and I had as
much reason to presuppose that you'd studied some law as you'd have to
presuppose that I'm a registered nurse - not a heckuva lot.
-Kevin
hw
<moreyr...@shaw.ca> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:5bc13d02-4e22-44e9...@e32g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
The Half Note recordings are available on dime, so it would take only one
single email from the Montgomery family to stop them being shared for free
(that's dime's policy). In a perfect world the "lost tapes" would be aquired
by a record company (mosaic has been noted of their existence, I hear) and
the Montgomerys would be compensated. If anybody has any idea how to contact
the Montgomery family (I'm only aware of the Startrek guy ;)) and find out
their thoughts about this, I'd be all for it.
But to be honest, all jazz fans buy recordings where the recorded artist or
his heirs are not rightfully compensated, I'm pretty sure that no due
compensation has been paid for all the recordings from Wes' European tour
that are out there on various labels. I do realize that this doesn't make it
right but there is no way I'd throw away my treasured CD "Wes Live At Ronnie
Scotts'" because of that. Call me selfish ;)
invisaman75
"When I was at Jamey Abersold Jazz Camp last summer, he played a
record
of Wes playing at a house party. He was just playing a 12-bar "low-
down-dirty" blues, and sounded like a good blues player. With only an
occational 9th or 11th in some places."
moreyr...@shaw.ca
> > > And if jazz musicians of the 50's "owned" all the recordings they ever
> > > made, would Lester Young, Billie Holiday, Blue Note Label Artists and
> > > countless others have fared better in their later lives?
>
> > Not sure of the relevance of this question - can you clarify?
>
> OK, let's use Bo Diddley instead of Lester Young. We've all heard
> stories of artists from the day not being granted royalties, being
> "owned" by record companies, not getting their fare share by virture
> of trading "fame" for "residuals." I was just suggesting that
> ownership of the WES tapes in question could, in fact, not be "owned"
> by WES or his estate (as the case may be) at all...that's possible
> isn't it, depending on the circumstances at the time of the
> recordings...
>
Yes, that's all very true but in this case there has been no proof
that the current "owner" has legitimate rights to the tapes, nor has
he offered to produce a paper trail back to the original recordings
that show proper provenance - all he's doing is trying to sell
something he has in his possession to "a collector". I suspect he
knows the issues at hand and is looking for an affluent fanatic to buy
it for his own personal use - but the fact remains that so far he has
shown no proof that he has the right to do so, nor the right to profit
from it.
moreyr...@shaw.ca
> <moreyrich...@shaw.ca> schrieb im Newsbeitragnews:5bc13d02-4e22-44e9...@e32g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
Well, first of all, no one is asking for $12K for the right to listen
to dime uploaded recordings are they? So theoretically, the fact that
no one is profitting from those might make people think differently
about stuff they get there - of course, the fact that free dime or bit
torrent files even exist that don't compensate the artist is pretty
controversial to begin with wouldn't you say? (Not me, I think shared
concert files distributed for free and sanctioned by the artist are
GOOD for the artist).
> But to be honest, all jazz fans buy recordings where the recorded artist or
> his heirs are not rightfully compensated, I'm pretty sure that no due
> compensation has been paid for all the recordings from Wes' European tour
> that are out there on various labels.
Yes, but if the recordings are legitimate there would still be a paper
trail, a sign-off contractually that the artist had knowledge of the
recordings and whatever his compensation was at the time, fair or
unfair, was surely granted. Of course there are lots of unauthorized
recordings out there, some of them even distributed by respected
labels but let's not justify or perpetuate more of that activity ...
Derek
BTW, welcome back Max.
Paul C
What intrigues me about this discussion is not the copyright question
but the general assumption almost everyone seems to be making that the
recordings are genuine. I had a quick look at the Ebay auction page
and listened to some of the clips. It is not self-evident to me that
this is Wes. I would need some convincing --- including a believable
documented account of when and where the recordings were made and how
they found their way into the present owner's possession. I think
there are some serious grounds for skepticism:
- the history of previous Wes imposture
- the alleged but undocumented destruction of the original tapes
- the lack of any documentation of the origin or provenance of the
recording
- the lack of any documentation linking the recording that is for sale
with the recording that is said to have been made by Wes and
subsequently destroyed
- the seller's anonymity
- the seller's insistence that these are for collectors only
Reminds me of the (fairly) recent New Yorker story about gullible
collectors paying fortunes for fake rare wines.
In any event, before I start worrying about who holds copyright in
these recordings, I need some reason to be confident that they are
what they purport to be. So far, IMHO, that's lacking.
Paul Craven
Kevin Van Sant
wrote in message
<63b1cc05-30a1-4c9a...@k2g2000hse.googlegroups.com> :
>What intrigues me about this discussion is not the copyright question
>but the general assumption almost everyone seems to be making that the
>recordings are genuine. I had a quick look at the Ebay auction page
>and listened to some of the clips. It is not self-evident to me that
>this is Wes.
there is no question the guitarist in those clips is Wes. All it
takes is the first couple of notes from each clip to be sure.
charles robinson
Charlie
"Kevin Van Sant" <kvan...@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:5m12q3h18j7abav5n...@4ax.com...
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
>
> What intrigues me about this discussion is not the copyright question
> but the general assumption almost everyone seems to be making that the
> recordings are genuine. I had a quick look at the Ebay auction page
> and listened to some of the clips. It is not self-evident to me that
> this is Wes. I would need some convincing --- including a believable
> documented account of when and where the recordings were made and how
> they found their way into the present owner's possession. I think
> there are some serious grounds for skepticism:
>
> - the history of previous Wes imposture
>
> - the alleged but undocumented destruction of the original tapes
>
> - the lack of any documentation of the origin or provenance of the
> recording
>
> - the lack of any documentation linking the recording that is for sale
> with the recording that is said to have been made by Wes and
> subsequently destroyed
>
> - the seller's anonymity
>
> - the seller's insistence that these are for collectors only
>
> Reminds me of the (fairly) recent New Yorker story about gullible
> collectors paying fortunes for fake rare wines.
>
> In any event, before I start worrying about who holds copyright in
> these recordings, I need some reason to be confident that they are
> what they purport to be. So far, IMHO, that's lacking.
>
> Paul Craven
I agree 100%. I'm particularly concerned about the alleged destruction
of the original masters.
In Holger's correspondence I must say--me being the cynical SOB that I
am--the thing about the abused children made my BS sensors stand on end.
Steve
--
Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001
tony...@yahoo.com
If this can work I'm in! With 84 emails so far it looks like only 30
people are in, with a commitment so far for a total of $2,280.00.
Yesterday I had thought 400 people would sign up and we would only be
paying $10 each. Some due diligence should be done and CDs or Tapes
need to be made plus postage. I also feel strongly that something
should go to the estate. So I had thought that if we only got a 100
people the tab would be closer to $80. I was pleasantly surprised with
the $500 & $400 offer. There are a bunch of regular posters that I'm
surprised we have not heard from, come on you guys we only need 316
more people to make this work. If anyone is holding back because the
thing looks flaky, we can pool resources and make sure this is real
and there are no legal ramifications. Have to ask are, there no
lawyers out there who read this forum? 'cause you owe some pro bono to
all your brothers that are both out there in the trenches and week-end
warriors.
Cheers,
Tony Kayne
Michael Standal
(in article
<13d2e870-efd5-4612...@e6g2000prf.googlegroups.com>):
Sorry Kevin - you're not the "wet blanket" here. I didn't mean to make anyone
defensive or feel any kind of pressure with my "pony up" statement - I was
just genuinely enthused about the prospect of hearing some Wes that I've
never heard before and sharing it with the world. You have brought up some
very reasonable and logical issues - especially in light of Holger's recent
postings of his communications with the seller. And, you're right - there's a
whole hornets nest of issues related to intellectual property related to this
prospective venture. I wholeheartedly apologize if my naive enthusiasm made
anyone feel any kind of pressure. I just love Wes' playing and wish there
were more recordings.
Mike
Tim McNamara
<03b47531-a5fd-48df...@q77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
mejoemo...@yahoo.com wrote:
> I think the whole thing boils down to .org vs .com. If the music is
> cted upon in order to be placed in the commercial domain thru Wes'
> estate, etc., it's all about $$$.
>
> If it's in the .org realm (and by that I mean NON Profit) doesn't
> that change EVERYTHING?
No. Making a profit vs. giving it away from free has no bearing on
copyrights. The RIAA is now trying to get a bill through Congress that
will allow them to sue for $1.5 million for illegally sharing a 10 song
CD. Granted, that's nuts but they are desperate to continue to maintain
the ability to suck vast sums of money out of artists.
> My great uncle's valuable 40's D'Angelico (hypothetically) gets
> "lost," then turns up years later at a garage sale...suddenly I'm on
> Antiques RoadShow asking some guy in a Hawaiian shirt what's it worth
> and can I sell it...doesn't possession being 9/10ths have anything to
> do with it? That + the passage of time, Statute of Limitations, etc.
Nope. The reason is that a 1940s D'Angelico can't be reproduced.
Digital files can be easily reproduced by the millions of copies.
> Why can't we 'buy" the tapes on ebay as easily as buying great unc's
> DA?
For that reason.
> And if jazz musicians of the 50's "owned" all the recordings they
> ever made, would Lester Young, Billie Holiday, Blue Note Label
> Artists and countless others have fared better in their later lives?
Record companies, "managers," etc. have made billions by scamming naive
musicians out of their rights to the music they created- and with it, by
scamming them out of the compensation they should have had. This still
happens all the time- any form of publishing uses these scams to
maximize profits. Part of how you maximize profits is to avoid having
to pay the artist.
Chickenhead
Something doesn't smell right.
Whether or not it's really Wes, I'll leave to those better qualified than
myself. I haven't even listened to the clips. However, I have to question
the veracity of the seller. Here's why:
1. What kind of bozo would attend AES conventions on restoration, be
capable of restoring and transferring them to DAT, but couldn't convert them
to mp3 without repeating the last few notes? Doesn't sound like any pro
engineer I know. Maybe he's retired since 1990 and hasn't kept up with .mp3
conversion technique, but for an item this valuable you'd think he'd either
learn to do it right or hire someone who knows how. It's really not the
least bit hard to convert ANY audio into an .mp3 file without that kind of
error. An engineer who had an opportunity to even get close to tapes like
that should have no issues with it whatsoever. Most 13 year olds can do it.
2. He doesn't say where he got them or how he acquired them; there's no
chain of custody.
3. Mighty convenient that the "masters" were destroyed in a fire and flood;
unless they were burned to a crisp, surviving sections could be analyzed for
aging, degradation, and chemical composition of the tape itself; thus at
least proving the age of the masters. re at
4. Is there at least insurance and police report verification of this fire
and flood, including police report(s) and insurance claims mentioning the
masters? I doubt it. And I sure bet you won't get to see it before the
dewd gets his dough.
5. Even they are legit, how the hell do we know he has full and legitimate
rights to the recordings and full legal right to sell and transfer them?
Since there's no mention of licensing, even if they're the real deal I doubt
he has full legal rights to them and is legally able to sell them.
I love Wes, but I'm not enough of a Wes scholar to be able to tell if the
clips are from stuff that's already been released. I'll leave that to
someone more qualified. Regardless, I wouldn't even buy a stuffed teddy
bear from this seller.
"charles robinson" <robins...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:Rf2dnWzszYM-lzza...@comcast.com...
paulmitc...@gmail.com
Wolf Marshall where he's copying well-known Wes solos note-for-note -
same gear, setup etc. It didn't really nail the spirit, phrasing and
tone (confirming that a genius may imitate - as Wes did with CC - but
they are themselves inimitable).
Something is shouting 'buyer beware!' here. Regarding the fire, any
chance that these tapes were rescued from the same fire in Indy that
almost consumed one of his L5s? Gibson certainly did a nice job on the
restoration:
http://www.larkstreetmusic.com/list/pict/Hwes.jpg
Paul M Brown
woland99
Yes you are a cynical SOB - don't you want to help the kids?
And while you are at it perhaps you could buy some art from me -
high resolution photos of couple Warhols's paintings that
unfortunately were destroyed by the uncaring art gallery.
I will throw in box of demo tapes from Sgt Pepper sessions.
Max Leggett
wrote:
>No question this is Wes. I once heard the CD that came with a book by
>Wolf Marshall where he's copying well-known Wes solos note-for-note -
>same gear, setup etc. It didn't really nail the spirit, phrasing and
>tone (confirming that a genius may imitate - as Wes did with CC - but
>they are themselves inimitable).
>
>Something is shouting 'buyer beware!'
Yes. I'm out. Things not adding up.
Mark & Steven Bornfeld
For compassion, try Kunich first.
Steve
--
Chickenhead
"DougW" <dougw...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:65cc47ea-5de9-40c1...@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> "You know that Wes he played a really boss guitar and he was groovin
> with his thumb down in Naptown, yeah you know he was a swinging cat
> that played the hippest octaves on the scene..."