FINALLY, PD LAWS HAVE OFFICIALLY CHANGED!!

confirmation here;

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/ ... e-20130107

Sony Releases Limited Edition, 86-Track Bob Dylan Outtakes Collection in Europe

The set was designed to copyright the material under new European laws


By Andy Greene

January 7, 2013 8:00 AM ET

Last year, about 100 lucky Bob Dylan fans in Europe came across a pretty amazing find on record store shelves: a four-CD set titled The 50th Anniversary Collection. The set contains 86 Dylan songs recorded in 1962, including numerous takes of "Mixed Up Confusion," "Sally Gal," "That's All Right, Mama" and "Baby, Please Don't Go." Contrary to appearances, this was no bootleg. It's an official release from Sony and copies are already selling on eBay for upwards of $1,000.

"This isn't a scheme to make money," a Sony Music source tells Rolling Stone. "The copyright law in Europe was recently extended from 50 to 70 years for everything recorded in 1963 and beyond. With everything before that, there's a new 'Use It or Lose It' provision. It basically said, 'If you haven't used the recordings in the first 50 years, you aren't going to get any more.'"


Bob Dylan's 1962 debut LP became a part of the European public domain on January 1st, meaning anybody in Europe can release the music without paying Dylan one dime. "The whole point of copyrighting this stuff is that we intend to do something with it at some point in the future," says the source. "But it wasn't the right time to do it right after he released Tempest. There are other things we want to do in 2013 though."

Roughly 100 copies of the collection were given to random record stores in France, Germany, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Fans who logged onto Bob Dylan's official website from France or Germany in the final days of 2012 were also allowed to download the collection for 100 Euros.

These 86 songs, many of which have circulated in bootleg circles for years, don't even represent everything Dylan recorded in his first year on Columbia Records. "This isn't every shred," says a source. "But these are all fully realized songs and the kind of things fans would enjoy. Some takes were just 90 seconds or so long, and we didn't release those."

Recordings by Miles Davis, Frank Sinatra, Chuck Berry and other stars of the 1950s and early 1960s hit the European public domain in recent years. Pressure mounted on lawmakers to change the law as it began to threaten the Beatles, the Rolling Stones and other superstars of the era. As the law stands now, songs released after January 1st, 1963 won't hit the public domain for 70 years. Expect that to change, however, shortly before New Years Day 2033.

so based on that, there will be no more elvis PD releases that contain any material from 1963 onwards until 70 yrs is reached (instead of 50) long overdue as far as I`m concerned, but better than nothing I guess

It's actually a very sad day for popular music as the new law is designed to keep music out of the hands of the fans and in the hands of multi-billion dollar corporations. I'm glad Sony took a screwing on the Dylan release. Let the people who care about the music release it. 70 years is ridiculous and counter productive. What Sony and people like Paul McCartney is flat out buy the rights to popular culture following on the lead of the Disney corporation which with its might and power has basically ended the public domain in the US.

The good thing is that the law is outmoded and obsolete almost the second it passes. With all the options of presenting music in the digital domain the industry can never keep up with the spread of the music.

About time. Shame they can't backdate it!

Even the 50 years is absurd. It's far, far in excess of any other type of patent law. And many of those are far more important to the public health. Public domain is for the good people. That's why the idea exists. The ownership of the work and what it inspires goes to the poublic where its impact can be trebled.

I still can't believe corporations have sold this idea that keeping their profits artificially high, using work they often had nothing to do with creating is somehow protecting the legacy of the great artists. With rare exceptions it's not. It doesn't provide them with money as we know from our Elvis and beyond him (who at least got paid for his master rights) and countless other artists to numerous to name. Public domain though means the artist doesn't lose the right to make revenue from the recordings. It just prohibits exclusive rights. It doesn't protect the recordings, because again with few exceptions corporations could give a damn about artistic legacies. Look at the record stores right now. Most of the time if you want some Dion or Five Satins or Tony Martin or Muddy Waters (or any other artist from the era that's not a superstar among superstars) your best option is probably picking up something in the public domain.

Make no mistake. This was not a decision made from a right versus wrong perspective. This was a law that was purchased by the major media companies. And that purchase was made to protect (largely undeserved) profits.

About time. Shame they can't backdate it!

What a pointless comment!!

No, it is a viewpoint.

This is a very sad day for lovers of music outside of people such as Elvis, Cliff Richard and The Beatles. While their music, and a handful of others, are exploited to a certain degree by PD companies, there will now be thousands of artists whose music will literally die and never be heard again. These are artists who made music not for the money, but because they loved music. Jazz musicians, folk musicians, blues musicians, and so on.

There are literally tens of thousands of hours of jazz that have been issued solely on PD labels over the years that would otherwise be languishing in a vault. Much of this is material from now defunct labels, and from musicians who have passed away many years ago - often where the next of kin would be hard to trace as well. Instead of their legacy and contribution to the genre living on, their music will sit in a vault, with not enough money to be made from it for a major label to release it.

The same kinds of laws have resulted in many films rotting in vaults too. Literally hundreds of silent films will never be seen by the public again because the studios that own them cannot make money from them as the audience is small, and yet they are still in copyright and thus preventing labels such as Grapevine from releasing them.

Anyone who sees the PD law as simply an exploitation of the big artists of the day is missing the point and short-sighted and seemingly unable to view the situation beyond the major players. It was a way - intentionally or not - of the forgotten gems and forgotten artists no longer being forgotten. While certain PD labels were intent on churning out poor-sounding rips of vinyl etc, others created masterpieces; boxed sets that kicked those produced by the major labels out of the ballpark, such as this remarkable 100 CD set:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/From-Ragtime-Swing-1898-1952-Histoire/dp/B003WL7EAS/ref=pd_sim_m_h__2

Or how about four albums by legendary saxophonist Johnny Hodges, that are not available anywhere else?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Four-Classic-Albums-Castle-Perdido/dp/B00383UJ20/ref=sr_1_2?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1357736500&sr=1-2

In order to keep the music of Elvis in copyright, we will now lose forever the music of thousands. And so that Walt Disney can keep their hands on Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, the vast majority of the surviving 5% of silent films will never be seen again.

This isn't music and film we are losing, it is history.

PD RIP.

the amount of crap PD elvis releases that have hit the market since 2004 - 2012 is ludicrous and have hurt/diminished elvis` legacy. If you care at all about his legacy then the new changes regarding this law should make you extemely happy as it does me, if you still have doubt then please read the excellent article regarding this topic in the latest issue of the excellent magazine Elvis the man and his music by Luther Moore. This is an elvis forum and I`m an elvis fan / collector, if other artist(s) catalog (unknown or not) are hurt by this change then pressure the company to release his or her material or seek out other avenues. I love many of the greats from `54 - `62 but what elvis accomplished during those yrs in nothing short of pure brilliance, time to stop dimiinshing his achievements as these numerous PD labels have done...

...and if we truly wanted to make a list of good versus bad PD releases, think long and hard about who`s final list would have the most entries because for every good Pd release, there is 10 bad ones (probably more)...

the amount of crap PD elvis releases that have hit the market since 2004 - 2012 is ludicrous and have hurt/diminished elvis` legacy. If you care at all about his legacy then the new changes regarding this law should make you extemely happy as it does me, if you still have doubt then please read the excellent article regarding this topic in the latest issue of the excellent magazine Elvis the man and his music by Luther Moore. This is an elvis forum and I`m an elvis fan / collector, if other artist(s) catalog (unknown or not) are hurt by this change then pressure the company to release his or her material or seek out other avenues. I love many of the greats from `54 - `62 but what elvis accomplished during those yrs in nothing short of pure brilliance, time to stop dimiinshing his achievements as these numerous PD labels have done...

This may be an Elvis board sweetangeline, but it does not hurt you that much to broaden your scope a little bit and look around in the real world so once in a while:

In order to keep the music of Elvis in copyright, we will now lose forever the music of thousands. And so that Walt Disney can keep their hands on Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, the vast majority of the surviving 5% of silent films will never be seen again.

This isn't music and film we are losing, it is history.

This may be an Elvis board sweetangeline, but it does not hurt you that much to broaden your scope a little bit and look around in the real world so once in a while:

did you read the article in EMM?? After you do so then talk to me, your trade off is ludicrous...but have a nice day

I read each and every issue of EMM but your big words are ludicrous: "PD releases damage the Elvis legacy"... Rubber docks with the image are damaging the legacy if you ask me. There are more important thing in life than Elvis' Legacy if you ask me. Thousands of pieces of less popular arts that are now in vaults rotting away, forgotten history. There is more in life, but obviously not in your book... But have a nice day and get out a little more often

It's actually a very sad day for popular music as the new law is designed to keep music out of the hands of the fans and in the hands of multi-billion dollar corporations. I'm glad Sony took a screwing on the Dylan release. Let the people who care about the music release it. 70 years is ridiculous and counter productive. What Sony and people like Paul McCartney is flat out buy the rights to popular culture following on the lead of the Disney corporation which with its might and power has basically ended the public domain in the US.

Because of this, at least for Elvis fans, we might see the resurgence of bootlegs as we did in the 80's and 90's. And although a Sony label, ongoing FTD releases through the next few years. Aside from MRS, is anyone even buying Elvis Presley PD music releases?

I read each and every issue of EMM but your big words are ludicrous: "PD releases damage the Elvis legacy"... Rubber docks with the image are damaging the legacy if you ask me. There are more important thing in life than Elvis' Legacy if you ask me. Thousands of pieces of less popular arts that are now in vaults rotting away, forgotten history. There is more in life, but obviously not in your book... But have a nice day and get out a little more often

let me be very clear here as your obviously uneducated on this topic;

I agree other things do damage his legacy, but we take one step at a time on these issues and this change is a positive for elvis presley. Unlike you, I wish to perserve his legacy as it rightly should be, you obviously don`t live up to your own avatar but keep enjoying your Elvis PD collection, so sad...

Rubber docks

that explains it

I read each and every issue of EMM but your big words are ludicrous: "PD releases damage the Elvis legacy"... Rubber docks with the image are damaging the legacy if you ask me. There are more important thing in life than Elvis' Legacy if you ask me. Thousands of pieces of less popular arts that are now in vaults rotting away, forgotten history. There is more in life, but obviously not in your book... But have a nice day and get out a little more often

let me be very clear here as your obviously uneducated on this topic;

I agree other things do damage his legacy, but we take one step at a time on these issues and this change is a positive for elvis presley. Unlike you, I wish to perserve his legacy as it rightly should be, you obviously don`t live up to your own avatar but keep enjoying your Elvis PD collection, so sad...

The lack of education is your own, not Alexander's. You quite clearly cannot see that there is a bigger picture beyond the works of maybe half a dozen superstars. You quite clearly have given no thought to the artist's whose music is going to completely evaporate due to this change in the law. Not every musical artist was an Elvis, and not every film director was a Hitchcock. Despite this, the works of the now-forgotten singers, directors and so on are part of our cultural heritage and part of our history. Their work will now be obliterated from the map. Sadly many are so obsessed with the fact that there are endless compilations of Elvis from PD companies that they cannot realise that there are implications far beyond Elvis with this change in the law. If you don't care about any other music, so be it. But that doesn't mean a self-centred view on the work of one person should deprive the world of hearing music just as good (and often better) by other people from the same, and other genres.

Elvis's music will never vanish with or without the PD law. However, the music of thousands of others will.

the amount of crap PD elvis releases that have hit the market since 2004 - 2012 is ludicrous and have hurt/diminished elvis` legacy. If you care at all about his legacy then the new changes regarding this law should make you extemely happy as it does me...

It changes nothing for the recordings which are originally released before 1963 so what is achieved for Elvis legacy by the new PD law? Nothing, unless you believe Elvis made his impact after 1962.

However I'm not too sad about this. Most of the best music was released prior to 1963. That music remains better available at nice prices than the music released after 1963. I hope and suspect this will help many people to explore for instance original blues legends instead of those British blues bands that covered them.

the amount of crap PD elvis releases that have hit the market since 2004 - 2012 is ludicrous and have hurt/diminished elvis` legacy. If you care at all about his legacy then the new changes regarding this law should make you extemely happy as it does me...

It changes nothing for the recordings which are originally released before 1963 so what is achieved for Elvis legacy by the new PD law? Nothing, unless you believe Elvis made his impact after 1962.

However I'm not too sad about this. Most of the best music was released prior to 1963. That music remains better available at nice prices than the music released after 1963. I hope and suspect this will help many people to explore for instance original blues legends instead of those British blues bands that covered them.

This has little to do with nice prices, and simply to do with availability. Major labels will not re-release stuff unless there is money to be made. The PD companies can make money from the same recordings because they have less to budget for within each release (no royalties etc). While some might see the lack of royalties for these artists to be a sin of the highest order, it is without doubt that the majority of the lesser-known artists whose music we shall now lose would be glad to just think their music was available. Their royalty checks would be miniscule anyway. If I wrote a book and issued it tomorrow and had the choice of people not reading it in 50 years time or people reading it and me not getting a penny, I would go for the latter option.

The lack of education is your own, not Alexander's. You quite clearly cannot see that there is a bigger picture beyond the works of maybe half a dozen superstars. You quite clearly have given no thought to the artist's whose music is going to completely evaporate due to this change in the law. Not every musical artist was an Elvis, and not every film director was a Hitchcock. Despite this, the works of the now-forgotten singers, directors and so on are part of our cultural heritage and part of our history. Their work will now be obliterated from the map. Sadly many are so obsessed with the fact that there are endless compilations of Elvis from PD companies that they cannot realise that there are implications far beyond Elvis with this change in the law. If you don't care about any other music, so be it. But that doesn't mean a self-centred view on the work of one person should deprive the world of hearing music just as good (and often better) by other people from the same, and other genres.

Elvis's music will never vanish with or without the PD law. However, the music of thousands of others will.

thousands!!!and the water supply is getting extremely low too...give me a break from your nonsense!!

It changes nothing for the recordings which are originally released before 1963 so what is achieved for Elvis legacy by the new PD law? Nothing, unless you believe Elvis made his impact after 1962.

However I'm not too sad about this. Most of the best music was released prior to 1963. That music remains better available at nice prices than the music released after 1963. I hope and suspect this will help many people to explore for instance original blues legends instead of those British blues bands that covered them.

it simply stops this crap from continuing!!! I can guarantee you that the amount of PD releases would not have reduced because elvis career was about to hit a low point - PD labels would still be all over his catalog...waiting for every new year to arrive...however your final remarks on this topic do show a little more insight

This has little to do with nice prices, and simply to do with availability. Major labels will not re-release stuff unless there is money to be made. The PD companies can make money from the same recordings because they have less to budget for within each release (no royalties etc). While some might see the lack of royalties for these artists to be a sin of the highest order, it is without doubt that the majority of the lesser-known artists whose music we shall now lose would be glad to just think their music was available. Their royalty checks would be miniscule anyway. If I wrote a book and issued it tomorrow and had the choice of people not reading it in 50 years time or people reading it and me not getting a penny, I would go for the latter option.

no insight whatsoever!! name one artist that you have had contact with who would gladly give up their royalties just to be heard?? how can you speak for them?? As far as your book as the saying goes EASIER SAID THEN DONE, please return to ETMAHM for better insight Dec. issue #98 page 26, you certainy give us a good laugh...

For Elvis and other mayor artists it's a good thing, for the rest not so much...
I'm an Elvis fan, so I'm happy with this, sorry guys.

sorry guys.

nothing to be sorry about, you deserve praise YOU GET IT!!! Thank you.

To argue that Elvis' legacy has been diluted by the PD is the height of insanity considering the record compiled by his own label over the past 40 plus years. Who gave us monstrosities like Elvis Sings Hits from His Movies, Burning Love and Hits from His Movies Volume Two, Elvis Sings for Children and Grownups Too, Elvis' Greatest Hits (which only contained a few actual hit recordings) and dozens of love song compilations including super cheapos like the ever popular, ever available Very Best of Love? Why his own record label. The legacy of one of Elvis' finest LPs Elvis Country has been submarined by his own label putting out other comps with the same name leaving fans to believe that EC is just another comp. Yes, they've been exemplary stewards of the work.

Further a great many Elvis PD compilations have enhanced appreciation of his work. Think of the work that MRS has done. Their GI Blues boxed set, in particular, matched anything FTD has ever done. This was not a quick buck compilation. This was done by people who care about the music and want to contextualize it, people who would like their say in the great Elvis debate.

There's also the lower PD prices to consider. For all the people who get turned off allegedly, there are fans out there who can take a chance because of the lower prices. I think many of these fans understand sound limitations and may move up to the bigger releases simply because they like the songs they hear.

Also, the availability of Elvis to multi-artist compilations is a huge benefit. You now get to hear Elvis next to Chuck Berry, Fats Domino, Dion, Buddy Holly, Connie Francis, one hit wonders like the Silhouettes and Buster Brown and whomever else was on the charts in his hey day. This is a great chance to contextualize him and the era. After all what can a late 50s comp tell us without the biggest artists of the era. Now we get to hear the era as it originally happened.

The benefits to popular music in general are immeasurable as Peter has pointed out. I have Muddy Waters and Dinah Washington boxes tghat the major labels would have never attempted. The money there has to be big and with CDs dying out it's just not anymore. The education and pleasure these records provide is immense. One of the best series of all time was a survey of all the R&B hits of each year that was done early in the last decade. Only PD made this possible. Songs that were once only titles in a book, you now got to hear. Songs you maybe didn't know existed before. And this is the essence of what's going on. As Peter pointed out. Without the PD law much music will disappear. As the years go on and you get further away in time from the original hits only the super super stars will survive as the songs no longer get played on radio. Audiences who might have enjoyed these songs will not hear them because they don't know they exist or they are simply unavailable. Unless the music is loaded on the internet, which the majors are also trying to stop, you can kiss it goodbye.

The lack of education is your own, not Alexander's. You quite clearly cannot see that there is a bigger picture beyond the works of maybe half a dozen superstars. You quite clearly have given no thought to the artist's whose music is going to completely evaporate due to this change in the law. Not every musical artist was an Elvis, and not every film director was a Hitchcock. Despite this, the works of the now-forgotten singers, directors and so on are part of our cultural heritage and part of our history. Their work will now be obliterated from the map. Sadly many are so obsessed with the fact that there are endless compilations of Elvis from PD companies that they cannot realise that there are implications far beyond Elvis with this change in the law. If you don't care about any other music, so be it. But that doesn't mean a self-centred view on the work of one person should deprive the world of hearing music just as good (and often better) by other people from the same, and other genres.

Elvis's music will never vanish with or without the PD law. However, the music of thousands of others will.

thousands!!!and the water supply is getting extremely low too...give me a break from your nonsense!!

Yes, thousands. You clearly have no idea about the amount of music there is out there aside from the big players and the people we remember today. The boxed set I linked to earlier in the thread by itself has music from 580 different artists over 100 CD. Those artists are both well-known today and forgotten, but the music contained on the set is by and large unavailable elsewhere. There are albums my musical legends that are still officially unavailable on CD. At least three pre-1963 albums by Duke Ellington are not available, for example. There is copious music by Billie Holiday, Ella Fitzgerald, Frank Sinatra, Oscar Peterson, Hank Williams, Dinah Washington, Jo Stafford, Doris Day, Count Basie, Dizzy Gillespie that has only been released via PD companies on CD. If the major labels can't make money, the major labels don't care. And who can blame them? But should we really be in a situation where there isn't a single album on CD by Ketty Lester - not even her huge hit album Love Letters? Now that the PD law has been changed, it is unlikely that will ever hit retail again in CD form.

I have no interest in reading a Man and his Music article which is clearly going to be about one artist and one artist alone. There is a bigger world out there. As LTB has stated, the PD companies have only followed in the line of Sony/BMG/RCA. You moan about the PD companies flooding the market with substandard product, and yet Sony do exactly that. How many Christmas CDs are they going to issue exactly? And that's just one example. Sadly too many people on here who moan about the PD law are so obsessed with the music of one person that they fail to see the bigger picture - and that is their loss; there is a multitude of music out there just waiting to be heard, and a great deal of it is far more worthy of our ears than some of the crap Elvis spewed out over the years.

The point that you actually miss is that there are a number of Elvis albums that are no longer in print, mostly soundtracks, which will now more than likely never ever see the light of day at retail level due to the PD law being extended. Sony clearly have no plans to continue the soundtrack series from a few years ago, so don't ever expect to find Kissin Cousins, Speedway, Harum Scarum, Spinout and Double Trouble on the shelves in a record store again. Of course, had the PD law not been extended, these albums could have had decent releases and been available for all to "enjoy" once again. . What's more, if it wasn't for PD companies, such great performances as the 1956 TV shows, the 1956 live performances at the Dairy Fair, and the 1961 Hawaii concert would no longer be available to buy on CD other than second hand.

There is a myth that PD releases are rip offs, poorly compiled and in terrible sound. That is not the case for the vast majority of PD labels. Collections are more often than not put together with care by music lovers for music lovers. They are often brilliantly remastered and contain copious liner notes that are generally more accurate than those written by major companies. Yes, that isn't the case for all releases, including many with Elvis's name on them. That's too bad. But the pros of the PD law far outweighs the cons as any lover of jazz, blues, country, folk, rockabilly, gospel and classical music, and anyone who has ever bought a release by Avid, Proper and many labels will tell you.

As for my comments about jazz and blues artists more interested in their music being heard than getting a royalty cheque, you quite clearly haven't read much about those artists either, have no idea what made them tick, or ever heard interviews with them. They played for the love of music, not for the love of money. Either way, with or without the PD releases they and their families will not get a dime, but at least with the PD releases they get recognition and acknowledgment for the contribution they made to musical history.

Turning to the Dylan collection of unreleased material, what a stupid marketing strategy: release something officially, but make it almost impossible to get, and then release it properly later...by which point one of the people who bought the release has put it online and all the fans have downloaded it in sparkling quality. A round of applause to Sony for sheer stupidity.

Last edited by poormadpeter on Thu Jan 10, 2013 3:11 am, edited 1 time in total.

To argue that Elvis' legacy has been diluted by the PD is the height of insanity considering the record compiled by his own label over the past 40 plus years. Who gave us monstrosities like Elvis Sings Hits from His Movies, Burning Love and Hits from His Movies Volume Two, Elvis Sings for Children and Grownups Too, Elvis' Greatest Hits (which only contained a few actual hit recordings) and dozens of love song compilations including super cheapos like the ever popular, ever available Very Best of Love? Why his own record label. The legacy of one of Elvis' finest LPs Elvis Country has been submarined by his own label putting out other comps with the same name leaving fans to believe that EC is just another comp. Yes, they've been exemplary stewards of the work.

Further a great many Elvis PD compilations have enhanced appreciation of his work. Think of the work that MRS has done. Their GI Blues boxed set, in particular, matched anything FTD has ever done. This was not a quick buck compilation. This was done by people who care about the music and want to contextualize it, people who would like their say in the great Elvis debate.

There's also the lower PD prices to consider. For all the people who get turned off allegedly, there are fans out there who can take a chance because of the lower prices. I think many of these fans understand sound limitations and may move up to the bigger releases simply because they like the songs they hear.

Also, the availability of Elvis to multi-artist compilations is a huge benefit. You now get to hear Elvis next to Chuck Berry, Fats Domino, Dion, Buddy Holly, Connie Francis, one hit wonders like the Silhouettes and Buster Brown and whomever else was on the charts in his hey day. This is a great chance to contextualize him and the era. After all what can a late 50s comp tell us without the biggest artists of the era. Now we get to hear the era as it originally happened.

The benefits to popular music in general are immeasurable as Peter has pointed out. I have Muddy Waters and Dinah Washington boxes tghat the major labels would have never attempted. The money there has to be big and with CDs dying out it's just not anymore. The education and pleasure these records provide is immense. One of the best series of all time was a survey of all the R&B hits of each year that was done early in the last decade. Only PD made this possible. Songs that were once only titles in a book, you now got to hear. Songs you maybe didn't know existed before. And this is the essence of what's going on. As Peter pointed out. Without the PD law much music will disappear. As the years go on and you get further away in time from the original hits only the super super stars will survive as the songs no longer get played on radio. Audiences who might have enjoyed these songs will not hear them because they don't know they exist or they are simply unavailable. Unless the music is loaded on the internet, which the majors are also trying to stop, you can kiss it goodbye.

Yes, thousands. You clearly have no idea about the amount of music there is out there aside from the big players and the people we remember today. The boxed set I linked to earlier in the thread by itself has music from 580 different artists over 100 CD. Those artists are both well-known today and forgotten, but the music contained on the set is by and large unavailable elsewhere. There are albums my musical legends that are still officially unavailable on CD.

I have no interest in reading a Man and his Music article which is clearly going to be about one artist and one artist alone. There is a bigger world out there. As LTB has stated, the PD companies have only followed in the line of Sony/BMG/RCA. You moan about the PD companies flooding the market with substandard product, and yet Sony do exactly that. How many Christmas CDs are they going to issue exactly? And that's just one example. Sadly too many people on here who moan about the PD law are so obsessed with the music of one person that they fail to see the bigger picture - and that is their loss; there is a multitude of music out there just waiting to be heard, and a great deal of it is far more worthy of our ears than some of the crap Elvis spewed out over the years.

The point that you actually miss is that there are a number of Elvis albums that are no longer in print, mostly soundtracks, which will now more than likely never ever see the light of day at retail level due to the PD law being extended. Sony clearly have no plans to continue the soundtrack series from a few years ago, so don't ever expect to find Kissin Cousins, Speedway, Harum Scarum, Spinout and Double Trouble on the shelves in a record store again. Of course, had the PD law not been extended, these albums could have had decent releases and been available for all to "enjoy" once again.

As for my comments about jazz and blues artists more interested in their music being heard than getting a royalty cheque, you quite clearly haven't read much about those artists either, or heard interviews with them. They played for the love of music, not for the love of money. Either way, with or without the PD releases they and their families will not get a dime, but at least with the PD releases they get recognition and acknowledgment for the contribution they made to musical history.

Turning to the Dylan collection of unreleased material, what a stupid marketing strategy: release something officially, but make it almost impossible to get, and then release it properly later...by which point one of the people who bought the release has put it online and all the fans have downloaded it in sparkling quality. A round of applause to Sony for sheer stupidity.

To argue that Elvis' legacy has been diluted by the PD is the height of insanity considering the record compiled by his own label over the past 40 plus years. Who gave us monstrosities like Elvis Sings Hits from His Movies, Burning Love and Hits from His Movies Volume Two, Elvis Sings for Children and Grownups Too, Elvis' Greatest Hits (which only contained a few actual hit recordings) and dozens of love song compilations including super cheapos like the ever popular, ever available Very Best of Love? Why his own record label. The legacy of one of Elvis' finest LPs Elvis Country has been submarined by his own label putting out other comps with the same name leaving fans to believe that EC is just another comp. Yes, they've been exemplary stewards of the work.

Further a great many Elvis PD compilations have enhanced appreciation of his work. Think of the work that MRS has done. Their GI Blues boxed set, in particular, matched anything FTD has ever done. This was not a quick buck compilation. This was done by people who care about the music and want to contextualize it, people who would like their say in the great Elvis debate.

There's also the lower PD prices to consider. For all the people who get turned off allegedly, there are fans out there who can take a chance because of the lower prices. I think many of these fans understand sound limitations and may move up to the bigger releases simply because they like the songs they hear.

Also, the availability of Elvis to multi-artist compilations is a huge benefit. You now get to hear Elvis next to Chuck Berry, Fats Domino, Dion, Buddy Holly, Connie Francis, one hit wonders like the Silhouettes and Buster Brown and whomever else was on the charts in his hey day. This is a great chance to contextualize him and the era. After all what can a late 50s comp tell us without the biggest artists of the era. Now we get to hear the era as it originally happened.

The benefits to popular music in general are immeasurable as Peter has pointed out. I have Muddy Waters and Dinah Washington boxes tghat the major labels would have never attempted. The money there has to be big and with CDs dying out it's just not anymore. The education and pleasure these records provide is immense. One of the best series of all time was a survey of all the R&B hits of each year that was done early in the last decade. Only PD made this possible. Songs that were once only titles in a book, you now got to hear. Songs you maybe didn't know existed before. And this is the essence of what's going on. As Peter pointed out. Without the PD law much music will disappear. As the years go on and you get further away in time from the original hits only the super super stars will survive as the songs no longer get played on radio. Audiences who might have enjoyed these songs will not hear them because they don't know they exist or they are simply unavailable. Unless the music is loaded on the internet, which the majors are also trying to stop, you can kiss it goodbye.

Yes, thousands. You clearly have no idea about the amount of music there is out there aside from the big players and the people we remember today. The boxed set I linked to earlier in the thread by itself has music from 580 different artists over 100 CD. Those artists are both well-known today and forgotten, but the music contained on the set is by and large unavailable elsewhere. There are albums my musical legends that are still officially unavailable on CD.

I have no interest in reading a Man and his Music article which is clearly going to be about one artist and one artist alone. There is a bigger world out there. As LTB has stated, the PD companies have only followed in the line of Sony/BMG/RCA. You moan about the PD companies flooding the market with substandard product, and yet Sony do exactly that. How many Christmas CDs are they going to issue exactly? And that's just one example. Sadly too many people on here who moan about the PD law are so obsessed with the music of one person that they fail to see the bigger picture - and that is their loss; there is a multitude of music out there just waiting to be heard, and a great deal of it is far more worthy of our ears than some of the crap Elvis spewed out over the years.

The point that you actually miss is that there are a number of Elvis albums that are no longer in print, mostly soundtracks, which will now more than likely never ever see the light of day at retail level due to the PD law being extended. Sony clearly have no plans to continue the soundtrack series from a few years ago, so don't ever expect to find Kissin Cousins, Speedway, Harum Scarum, Spinout and Double Trouble on the shelves in a record store again. Of course, had the PD law not been extended, these albums could have had decent releases and been available for all to "enjoy" once again.

As for my comments about jazz and blues artists more interested in their music being heard than getting a royalty cheque, you quite clearly haven't read much about those artists either, or heard interviews with them. They played for the love of music, not for the love of money. Either way, with or without the PD releases they and their families will not get a dime, but at least with the PD releases they get recognition and acknowledgment for the contribution they made to musical history.

Turning to the Dylan collection of unreleased material, what a stupid marketing strategy: release something officially, but make it almost impossible to get, and then release it properly later...by which point one of the people who bought the release has put it online and all the fans have downloaded it in sparkling quality. A round of applause to Sony for sheer stupidity.

I'm so glad you can argue intelligently. Just what the board needs, someone else who finds they can only express themselves through smilies and have severe limitations with words and ideas.