Marcus Stork wrote:Hahahaa! thanks for todays biggest laugh in the office!patrick bateman wrote: oh by the way, it can also be that ancient aliens have stolen the master recordings and are using them in outer space!
Ranting about licensing.
-
patrick bateman
- mnml maxi
- Posts: 5432
- Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 10:02 am
- Location: Copenhagen Denmark
- Contact:
Taking things back on track 
Sometimes you need to look at things from multiple points of view, things aren't always as obvious as many of us would like.
I recently asked a friend why he hadn't re-issued some of the tracks from his back-catalogue on digital. The label he ran had some stone cold classics, still considered by many to be the fore-runners for a lot of material we hear today.
I answered the question myself and he confirmed that I was correct....
The reason some people won't re:issue is because they feel it de:values the material, the label management and some of the artists themselves feel it's nice that people have to search hard to find these forgotten classics and it helps to prop up the small economy in second hand vinyl.
One thing I kinda feel which also might be relevant (and I don't mean to offend - just thinking outside the box here) As people involved in the techno scene, do you feel it pays homage to the original spirit of innovation associated with techno music by rinsing out the old classics year on year by licencing them ? My own thoughts on that are that -I think it would be really nice to see people taking more chances on newer material and licencing that.
Anyways - I nearly spat my tea when I seen a Maurizio track on some 'kings of electro' compilation for example, it was bad enough back when that material was fresh, you'd see a good track appear on every compilation going and it made it very hard to be 'discerning' with your selections if every man and their dog had a copy of what you were playing - that sounds really elitist, but techno at it's best is kinda elitist - the whole club mentality of people getting together who share a common interest is by definition cliquey or elitist - particularly in the more underground scenes, and I feel there's nothing wrong with that.
It all depends on your outlook tho, I can see this being frustrating to anyone who perhaps isn't looking at the value of artistic integrity and all of the 'bullshit' that goes with that - it does look like people are shooting themselves in the foot for the sake of it, but it's not always gonna be black and whilte like that, sometimes there's good reason to play a little bit elusive...
Interesting topic - thanks for sharing, and good luck to you - I'm sure if it's meant to be, it's meant to be...
Sometimes you need to look at things from multiple points of view, things aren't always as obvious as many of us would like.
I recently asked a friend why he hadn't re-issued some of the tracks from his back-catalogue on digital. The label he ran had some stone cold classics, still considered by many to be the fore-runners for a lot of material we hear today.
I answered the question myself and he confirmed that I was correct....
The reason some people won't re:issue is because they feel it de:values the material, the label management and some of the artists themselves feel it's nice that people have to search hard to find these forgotten classics and it helps to prop up the small economy in second hand vinyl.
One thing I kinda feel which also might be relevant (and I don't mean to offend - just thinking outside the box here) As people involved in the techno scene, do you feel it pays homage to the original spirit of innovation associated with techno music by rinsing out the old classics year on year by licencing them ? My own thoughts on that are that -I think it would be really nice to see people taking more chances on newer material and licencing that.
Anyways - I nearly spat my tea when I seen a Maurizio track on some 'kings of electro' compilation for example, it was bad enough back when that material was fresh, you'd see a good track appear on every compilation going and it made it very hard to be 'discerning' with your selections if every man and their dog had a copy of what you were playing - that sounds really elitist, but techno at it's best is kinda elitist - the whole club mentality of people getting together who share a common interest is by definition cliquey or elitist - particularly in the more underground scenes, and I feel there's nothing wrong with that.
It all depends on your outlook tho, I can see this being frustrating to anyone who perhaps isn't looking at the value of artistic integrity and all of the 'bullshit' that goes with that - it does look like people are shooting themselves in the foot for the sake of it, but it's not always gonna be black and whilte like that, sometimes there's good reason to play a little bit elusive...
Interesting topic - thanks for sharing, and good luck to you - I'm sure if it's meant to be, it's meant to be...
-
patrick bateman
- mnml maxi
- Posts: 5432
- Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 10:02 am
- Location: Copenhagen Denmark
- Contact:
Re: Ranting about licensing.
I tried where it was the artists wish not to have the track re-released at any other labels (licenses). So don't blame it all on the labels.PsyTox wrote: but instead of giving a license for the re-issue of these tracks (and getting cash for their artists they represent, mind you) they simply refuse to give licenses.
Re: Ranting about licensing.
That's just it: artists in both cases were very keen to do it. One of them had never seen any money from the initial release back in 1994 so he was really proud and happy that I told him how much I loved it and that I wanted to rerelease it on a small vinyl pressing only so it would still be pretty exclsuive but at the same time would save it from being forgotten. But the publisher (who controlled the rights) was not so music minded and even said litterally "I don't care about the artist's opinion, it's me who you talk to and I say no". Wasn't for a dodgy compilation or whatever...patrick bateman wrote:I tried where it was the artists wish not to have the track re-released at any other labels (licenses). So don't blame it all on the labels.PsyTox wrote: but instead of giving a license for the re-issue of these tracks (and getting cash for their artists they represent, mind you) they simply refuse to give licenses.
I know I'm very naïve and perhaps a hopeless romantic but I guess I hoped that it wouldn't be only about money, but that love for music and respect also counted a little. Besides, we really made an offer that was way above the usual market standards so I just think the publisher was a proper wanker on a power trip
I vote Kirk btw. Picard was cool, but there's simply no substitue for the coolest man on earth: mr. Shatner.
PsyTox.
Coincidence Records.
www.coincidencerecords.be
www.myspace.com/coincidencerecords
www.myspace.com/djpsytox
Coincidence Records.
www.coincidencerecords.be
www.myspace.com/coincidencerecords
www.myspace.com/djpsytox
-
patrick bateman
- mnml maxi
- Posts: 5432
- Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2005 10:02 am
- Location: Copenhagen Denmark
- Contact: