smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "Michael Bennett" <mrhonorama@hotmail.com> |
| Subject | Re: Robbs...licensing info |
| Date | Fri, 25 Jun 2004 11:39:37 -0500 |
[Part 1 text/plain (1.7 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
Maybe I'm a bit thick -- but what do majors gain in making it financially
and/or logistically difficult to license a few bonus tracks? If those
tracks are making zero dollars sitting in a vault, isn't ANY money made on
them (once royalties, I suppose, are factored out) better than nada?
Mike Bennett
Record reviews and more at http://fufkin.com
Find out about Chicago shows:
http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/chicagopopshowreport/
>From: Not Lame <popmusic@notlame.com>
>
> > I just confirmed with Gordon at Collectors Choice
>
>The main reason they can't do bonus trax is that many of the majors have
>policies regarding licensing their recordings to third parties where
>agreement is set up to *only* include what was on the original release.
>
>These are done to streamline, I believe, their legal work and make the
>application for many potential licensors easily applied to any of the indie
>labels they work with in licensing their lingering music assets.
>
>A label, like CC(or even Not Lame), *could* add bonus trax, if they really
>wanted to----BUT the minimum amount guaranteed by the licensing label
>increases by a factor of 3+, making the realistic numbers that an
>niche-styled re-issue like this could obtain, well, unobtainable.
>
>Not Lame will be doing, increasingly, some catalog reissues w/ WEA and
>others in the coming years and almost all them will be like this----without
>bonus trax. But they will have great booklets and liners and sound great.
_________________________________________________________________
Watch the online reality show Mixed Messages with a friend and enter to win
a trip to NY
http://www.msnmessenger-download.click-url.com/go/onm00200497ave/direct/01/
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.