smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | "bryan" <munki100@pacbell.net> |
| Subject | Re: Robbs...licensing info |
| Date | Fri, 25 Jun 2004 15:30:22 -0700 |
[Part 1 text/plain iso-8859-1 (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
Regarding licensing -- and following up on what Bruce
said and Mike said....
I have dealt on both sides of this and one other factor
that Mike touched on concerns to costs incurred when
you have to take the previously-unreleased master tapes
into a studio, mix them down (sometimes "baking" the
tapes too) and digitize them, too. Someone has to cover
these costs, and more often than not, the labels or
master owners don't want to let the original tapes out
of their sight....and so third-party labels don't really get
to deal with "bonus" material....it can get pretty
expensive once you really start to factor in how much
studio time and manpower is needed...It seems (like
Mike said above) that the labels should see this as an
opportunity to release material that was previously never
made available, but that's not what happens. Then, there
are issues about licensing, publishing (if the song never
came out, it might not be published...opens up another
can of worms), and artwork needs to be changed...all
kinds of issues pop up. Those are some of the reasons
you won't see bonus material on third-party labels, let
alone coming from the companies that own the tapes...
Bryan
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.710 / Virus Database: 466 - Release Date: 6/23/04
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.