elektro80
Site Admin
Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21959
Location: Norway
Audio files: 21
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2004 4:17 pm Post subject:
Robert Fripp kicks EMI ass. |
  |
|
The Robert Fripp blog : http://www.disciplineglobalmobile.com/diary/diary-RobertFripp.shtml
the register . http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/04/fripp_dowloads_bustup/
| Quote: | A posting in Robert Fripp's online diary provides some fascinating inside information on the poor and starving but caring, sharing music industry. Fripp and obscure but legendary band King Crimson have parted company with EMI/Virgin over digital download rights; not, apparently, because Fripp is agin downloading as such, but because he has just a couple of minor quibbles about distribution of the royalties.
Apple, you'll recall, gets to keep 4 cents out of the 99 cents price of a download. What does Fripp get? Read on: "the reason for the foundering of our re-licensing negotiation with EMI, last year, was on the subject of accounting for digital downloads. we were told - face to face - that digital downloads "were not important" and therefore should not concern ourselves with a royalty of 6 cents when EMI received c. 69 cents per download (the artist royalty subject to packing deduction, of course). we proposed a third party licensing arrangement, to receive 75% of receipts. and if downloading was not important, then why not? the reply, to support the investment in downloading technology EMI need a high royalty, is spurious. the investment in that technology came from IT, not record companies. a small part of that investment (a mere $4 million) was the result of an initiative by david singleton here at DGM (BootlegTV in seattle)."
King Crimson and Fripp never granted any digital download rights to Virgin, as the technology didn't exist when the original deal was struck in 1993. This expired at the end of 2003 (we presume the "2004" in Fripp's diary is a typo), with existing stock sale being permissible until 30th June 2004. King Crimson downloads however started appearing on iTunes Europe and OD2 in July, while various "partners" appear to have been selling back catalogue well after the cut-off date.
The diary quotes the caring, sharing EMI: "As you are aware, we have notified our digital partners a number of times about the loss of rights and believe that we have discharged our obligations to you in respect thereof - they are aware that they are not entitled to exploit your repertoire and if they continue to do so, you should pursue them for infringement of your rights." The response to this is entertainingly blunt, almost good enough to make us want to listen to a King Crimson track (almost...), but a lot of artists aren't going to feel able to tell labels where they can stick their 6 cent faits accomplits.
But hang on, what kind of process is going on where a company shares digital music it doesn't own with other companies? Good lord, it's not illegal filesharing, is it? Not unauthorised distribution, is it? Will EMI have to sue itself? |
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/04/fripp_dowloads_bustup/
_________________
A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"
MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr |
|
Oskar
Joined: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1751
Location: Norway
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 08, 2004 1:28 am Post subject:
|
|
|
I like that man. Not ALL his music, but the man himself. In a purely platonic way of course.
He's maybe not a modern-day Robin Hood, but he's definitely a modern-day Robert Fripp. Unlike Mr Quijote, he doesn't fight windmills - he merely loosens the bolts on the wings, so that they may eventually fall off. 
Long may he continue.
_________________
Where there are too many policemen, there is no liberty. Where there are too many soldiers, there is no peace. Where there are too many lawyers, there is no justice.
Lin Yutang (1895-1976) |
|
Forum index » News... » Miscellaneous News
FAQ
Calendar
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Chat Room
