Intrada Soundtrack Forum

www.intrada.com
It is currently Tue Sep 30, 2014 8:58 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2013 10:23 am 
Robin's reply:

http://www.filmscoremonthly.com/board/p ... &archive=0

Quote:
Guys, I have to weigh in here. I am sick of having to explain and defend my actions, so here they are; straight from the horse's mouth. Once and for all.

Slipstream is NOT a bootleg. I had a licensing deal with the Elmer Bernstein estate that allowed me to manufacture and sell the CD. Unfortunately, as it turned out, they claimed to own the rights to the score's masters in addition to the publishing which turned out not to be true. I had done my due diligence and gotten a license. If someone sells you a car you don't go around asking other people if they own it instead, do you?

Bootlegs: We didn't do Deadly Blessing; that wasn't ours. I wish MV would get his facts straight before accusing me of illegal activities. That is the second time he did that. If he does it again he might find himself in court for libel. I'm serious.
Prophecy I and II: I admit: This one is a gray area; While David Williams and I got the OK from the producer to do the albums, not even he could tell us who owned the masters. The franchise had changed ownership so many times that no one knew who owned the rights. We figured we'd go ahead anyway. Is this something I would still do today? Probably not.

Craig Safan Promo: I did this as a favor for a friend. We are not selling these and are actually losing money on them. It cost us money to produce them, plus we have to give Craig his royalty on top of that. Bootleggers are in it for the money; big money; bootleggers don't pay royalties. I pay royalties on ALL my releases, commercial or promo.

Chinatown and Edge of Darkness: These are legitimate commercial releases. I have licenses for both. The reason why they don't say the film title on the cover is that the production companies (Paramount and GK Films, respectively) didn't want the albums to be associated with the films in question. So, we had to come up with a different title. In the case of Edge of Darkness, we weren't even allowed to reference the movie at all in the package. In both cases the composer came up with the alternate title.

Rain Man: Hans didn't actually want to stop this release (I don't know where you got that information); he merely wasn't interested in releasing the score. We already had a deal with MGM and put a lot of money in the project, so we decided to go ahead with it. Again, I probably wouldn't do this today.

Expanded Re-issues: The reason why Witches of Eastwick wasn't expanded was that we thought the music on the original WB album was already the best representation of the score. If you know the rest of the music you'll find that it is the same thing over and over again. That's why John Williams released it that way originally. We don't think there needs to be every single note from a score on a CD for a good listening experience, but that's just our opinion. If you don't agree, don't buy the album. Nobody is forcing you to. Furthermore, whereas the album is owned by one entity (WEA), the additional music is controlled by another one (Warner Bros Films); to license anything additional would have cost us considerably more money, and we wouldn't have been able to pass a fair price on to you. Also, more legalities would be involved.

Newsletter Emails: I am sorry you think they look amateurish. You are, however, the first ones to complain about this. No one else has so far, at least not to me. We are in the process of re-designing our Web site, however, and we hope you'll like the outcome.


In closing: I am not a bootlegger or someone who engages in illegal business practices because it makes my life easier. I wish people would stop saying I am.

Robin Esterhammer


Top
  
 
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2013 10:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 3:47 pm
Posts: 3216
jwb wrote:
Robin's reply:

http://www.filmscoremonthly.com/board/p ... &archive=0

Quote:
Guys, I have to weigh in here. I am sick of having to explain and defend my actions, so here they are; straight from the horse's mouth. Once and for all.

Slipstream is NOT a bootleg. I had a licensing deal with the Elmer Bernstein estate that allowed me to manufacture and sell the CD. Unfortunately, as it turned out, they claimed to own the rights to the score's masters in addition to the publishing which turned out not to be true. I had done my due diligence and gotten a license. If someone sells you a car you don't go around asking other people if they own it instead, do you?

Bootlegs: We didn't do Deadly Blessing; that wasn't ours. I wish MV would get his facts straight before accusing me of illegal activities. That is the second time he did that. If he does it again he might find himself in court for libel. I'm serious.
Prophecy I and II: I admit: This one is a gray area; While David Williams and I got the OK from the producer to do the albums, not even he could tell us who owned the masters. The franchise had changed ownership so many times that no one knew who owned the rights. We figured we'd go ahead anyway. Is this something I would still do today? Probably not.

Craig Safan Promo: I did this as a favor for a friend. We are not selling these and are actually losing money on them. It cost us money to produce them, plus we have to give Craig his royalty on top of that. Bootleggers are in it for the money; big money; bootleggers don't pay royalties. I pay royalties on ALL my releases, commercial or promo.

Chinatown and Edge of Darkness: These are legitimate commercial releases. I have licenses for both. The reason why they don't say the film title on the cover is that the production companies (Paramount and GK Films, respectively) didn't want the albums to be associated with the films in question. So, we had to come up with a different title. In the case of Edge of Darkness, we weren't even allowed to reference the movie at all in the package. In both cases the composer came up with the alternate title.

Rain Man: Hans didn't actually want to stop this release (I don't know where you got that information); he merely wasn't interested in releasing the score. We already had a deal with MGM and put a lot of money in the project, so we decided to go ahead with it. Again, I probably wouldn't do this today.

Expanded Re-issues: The reason why Witches of Eastwick wasn't expanded was that we thought the music on the original WB album was already the best representation of the score. If you know the rest of the music you'll find that it is the same thing over and over again. That's why John Williams released it that way originally. We don't think there needs to be every single note from a score on a CD for a good listening experience, but that's just our opinion. If you don't agree, don't buy the album. Nobody is forcing you to. Furthermore, whereas the album is owned by one entity (WEA), the additional music is controlled by another one (Warner Bros Films); to license anything additional would have cost us considerably more money, and we wouldn't have been able to pass a fair price on to you. Also, more legalities would be involved.

Newsletter Emails: I am sorry you think they look amateurish. You are, however, the first ones to complain about this. No one else has so far, at least not to me. We are in the process of re-designing our Web site, however, and we hope you'll like the outcome.


In closing: I am not a bootlegger or someone who engages in illegal business practices because it makes my life easier. I wish people would stop saying I am.

Robin Esterhammer


I think the title was Deadly Friend which he did put out, unlicensed from Warner Bros. I had even talked to him about the publishing mechanicals on that and he had no idea what I was talking about. I was trying to help him understand how the soundtrack business works. When we pay advances/royalties to the studios, new use to the union, mechanicals to the publishers, it is frustrating when someone else thumbs their nose at the rules and just does their thing.

I remember fondly working with Lukas on his release of ICE PIRATES. Bruce called one day, a bit confused, to say Robin was putting it out. Doug, Lukas and I were mystified as Lukas had a license and Bruce had provided us the elements to assemble the album. So we all had a heart to heart with Robin. A few weeks later, Bruce calls and says, "You know Robin is still working on that Ice Pirates album." I mean...WTF?

By the way, when you buy a car you get a pink slip that proves ownership. If that doesn't come with the car, be very suspicious. The IP owner on Slipstream has no interest in licensing the soundtrack rights.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2013 11:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:10 am
Posts: 539
Robin just replied to Roger's post on JWFan

Quote:
To Roger:

Nothing could be further from the truth. I did want to release Ice Pirates, but when I was informed by Bruce Broughton that someone else was working on it, I stopped trying to get it released. And NO ONE had a "heart to heart" talk with me. That is simply not true.

Ands when you get a pink slip, which, essentially, is teh equivalent of a license, such as I got from the Bernstein estate, you don't question that pink slip.

So, Roger, get off your high horse and get real.


http://www.jwfan.com/forums/index.php?s ... 6&p=921552


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2013 11:49 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 8:38 pm
Posts: 2069
At this point, I think this stuff is best discussed in private among the parties involved in the business.

I know it is beside the overall argument of copyright, but I don't think this Safan sampler will affect sales of complete releases. There's much more depth to these scores than a few short cues.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2013 1:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 3:47 pm
Posts: 3216
Jay wrote:
Robin just replied to Roger's post on JWFan

Quote:
To Roger:

Nothing could be further from the truth. I did want to release Ice Pirates, but when I was informed by Bruce Broughton that someone else was working on it, I stopped trying to get it released. And NO ONE had a "heart to heart" talk with me. That is simply not true.

Ands when you get a pink slip, which, essentially, is teh equivalent of a license, such as I got from the Bernstein estate, you don't question that pink slip.

So, Roger, get off your high horse and get real.


http://www.jwfan.com/forums/index.php?s ... 6&p=921552


I love my high horse, though. Look, my point here is for those that care and don't like to support stuff that may not be on the level, take note. Labels like LaLa, Quartet, Music Box -- just to name a few -- are run by stand up guys with a commitment to doing things right and well. I'd spent a lot of time searching for the complete Santa Claus score...but never did. Jose found them and put it out. When I heard about it at first I was a little disappointed that we weren't doing it, but I knew Jose would do it right. And he delivered the goods. Those are the guys to stand behind and support. Once Robin figures out how this business works and plays cleanly by the rules, I'm happy to add them to this list. But Mission of the Shark hit just too close to home.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2013 1:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 5:56 am
Posts: 2054
Location: Earth
I think Robin is just trying hard to get released stuff we all would want to see happening, and when he gets stuck in legal issues, he doesn't slow down, he desperately wants to cross the finish line and deliver the CD. His manners may not be everytime right and perfectly legal, but he seems to put money and heart in those releases and I definitely don't consider him as a bootlegger. He's got a passion and sometimes his passion makes him cross lines too early and dangerously.
Roger you are the wisely passionate, Robin is the blind impassioned and he surely would learn great things from you. But you both have the same passion in the end. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2013 5:34 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 8:13 pm
Posts: 365
:) I can say I've met I believe just about all the labels except for Quartet and Music Box and Howling Wolf and all these guys are so so passionate and the amount of stuff they know on scores, who owns what, where the rights lie is, for a geek like me is very fascinating. Though I have spoken to Wall at H.Wolf Records and he's SO kind and Jose at Quartet could not have been any cooler!

Most know I love us coming together as a community whether it be the fans come together or the labels who ALL put out great stuff. Heck Intrada alone has filled my Horner catalogue so generously that I will always be in their corner.

LLL has given me some of my grails and they have been nothing but super cool and nice, especially Blazing Saddles which had instrumentals of the songs. I love that, yes I'm just that nerdy!

Roger what you said about Santa Claus the Movie, I LOVE IT! That is the kind of stuff I love hearing and if I was in your shoes making soundtracks, I would have thought the exact same, Darn we couldn't do it, but thankful someone else could and know they would give the score the respect it deserves. Also one of my biggest grails ever. Thank you Quartet for that one. I would love to see someday each label sending to all the other labels copies of what they just released as a good gesture kind of thing. I think that could really be a great thing and it wouldn't be a lot of copies, just one or two copies to each label. Keeps the good vibes flowing from label to label. I know some do this, but don't know if everyone does. Again, I'm a community guy. I love seeing everyone coming together for the greater good which is making great projects!

I've also had the opportunity to meet and hang out with Robin and I believe his heart is in the right place, he's just made some goofs, heck we all goof up, I know I do. Though I don't know a lot of the history that happens behind closed doors in the soundtrack industry, but maybe others have slipped up here and there. I feel the most important thing is to learn from all your mistakes and this goes way far beyond this issue and into daily life. Learn from your mistakes. Now saying that sometimes in the past it's taken me a few times to follow my own advice. I've sat with Robin quite a bit and I really do feel his heart is in the right spot and he's been absolutely one of the nicest guys to me.

I also am the type of person who really tries to believe in a person and give them a chance etc. It's just in my character. I appreciate all of the labels for doing so much for us fans. It pains me to see you guys put so much into a release only to be chastised by my fellow fans because there's one misspelled word or, you didn't use the cover art from this poster that this one fan liked etc. etc. There are bigger problems in the world then a misspelled word or something.

I think a new chapter at Perseverance Records is about to take flight and as Roger said so elegantly, "he'd be happy to add them to the list."

Congrats on Mission of the Shark and I just have to add, LOVE LOVE LOVE what I heard on the Safan promo by the way and it's because of those few tracks that once you guys release it, you bet I'll be ordering my copy. Though now I'll have to start paying sales tax since I live out here, darn darn darn. It's worth it to keep all of you going :)

Please keep up the great work every single label does. Us blood thirsty score craving fans love em! :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Wed Jul 24, 2013 7:10 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 3:48 pm
Posts: 2384
T. Newman Fan wrote:
At this point, I think this stuff is best discussed in private among the parties involved in the business.

I know it is beside the overall argument of copyright, but I don't think this Safan sampler will affect sales of complete releases. There's much more depth to these scores than a few short cues.


Sadly, this is not true. There can be a drastic effect. And having the discussion in public is just where it apparently needs to be.

Rewind: Some fifteen years ago or whatever, composers and studios would allow promotional albums to help generate interest in the composer's work or sometimes even the film in question. It all slipped in under AFM policies where legitimate releases were prohibitive in costs. Then Intrada, alongside other labels, negotiated with the union to finally usher in the "historic rates" policy that allowed limited copies for sale, legitimately, for whatever profits could be made. It was an incredible turning point for all of us who love this music. The era of promos and gray area releases was over. An era of fully licensed releases to anything that could be located and licensed was now affordable and in.

Fast forward: We are proud to have been of this new era, which now has lasted quite a few years. BUT - the union has always maintained the position that each of the contracts for these licensed releases are for that release alone, and the entire policy can be terminated at any time should the system be abused.

What Mr. Esterhammer is doing IS abusing that system. And I have a dog in this fight, as does MV Gerhard, and the folks at Quartet and Music Box and all of the other labels... and including all of you folks, because we do not want to see this policy shut down and revert back to the era when the only things coming out were either affordable non-union projects or bootlegs with crappy quality made from underground tenth generation cassettes and whatnot.

It isn't even necessary to abuse the system today. The studios will make their actual vault masters available, license the recordings, the AFM will enter into a contract with the labels, and everything happens legitimately at reasonable costs for the most part.

It bothers me a lot to read people defending the issue of unlicensed albums today, especially when the piracy isn't necessary... and especially since it jeopardizes us all.

I love and respect the wonderful competitive environment us labels are experiencing today. If we don't release SANTA CLAUS, we enjoy seeing it come out elsewhere just the same. What happens over at Perseverance is no longer just ignorance of the system, nor is it because of misguided passion. It is just bad form. And if it is going to injure the system all of us legitimate labels today have fought hard to establish so these releases can be done in the best possible quality... yes, I am going to speak out.

For the record. Composers rarely control their music nor do they have much say in what studios and the union do with the recordings. But relationships do get made with labels, things are made possible, especially when the composers may have located the only surviving copies of tapes and whatnot... and again, we can all benefit. In the case of this Safan promo, Craig has no involvement in the licensing and by providing tapes was simply helping make a project happen under the guise that the corresponding label was covering all of the legal bases... which Perseverance was not.

I hope people will keep these thoughts in kind, just as I hope Robin will stick to creating CDs with the proper licenses... so we can all enjoy the music.
--Doug


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 1:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 3:48 pm
Posts: 2384
Kind of a post scriptum. It might be more appropriate for people to view this promo backlash not as labels now casting stones at Perseverance but as labels having adapted to rules that changed many years ago, making the soundtrack industry today a richly exciting and competitive one that benefits all of us listeners with both studios and musicians happily on board. In a way it was once like the wild west with law and order finally coming in to sort things out for everyone. To try and continue as if things were still rooted in those early times runs counterproductive to what us and so many other terrific labels have since worked out with all the appropriate licensing parties. Entering into licensing agreements with studios and musicians as well as publishers are now the industry rules. Since they are reasonable rules to work with, it just isn't necessary to avoid them anymore. My feelings are that if a label can not obtain a license on a given project, it should simply tackle another one. Sooner or later legitimate deals will probably happen anyway, such as what finally happened with us and Disney, or with FSM and Rhino, or La La Land with Paramount from the beginning, and so forth. The system does work better now. I for one want to keep all the parties bargaining at the table... and I hope Perseverance will accept a seat at this table rather than duck under it.
--Doug


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 2:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2010 10:52 pm
Posts: 106
Douglass Fake wrote:
T. Newman Fan wrote:
At this point, I think this stuff is best discussed in private among the parties involved in the business.

I know it is beside the overall argument of copyright, but I don't think this Safan sampler will affect sales of complete releases. There's much more depth to these scores than a few short cues.


Sadly, this is not true. There can be a drastic effect. And having the discussion in public is just where it apparently needs to be.

Rewind: Some fifteen years ago or whatever, composers and studios would allow promotional albums to help generate interest in the composer's work or sometimes even the film in question. It all slipped in under AFM policies where legitimate releases were prohibitive in costs. Then Intrada, alongside other labels, negotiated with the union to finally usher in the "historic rates" policy that allowed limited copies for sale, legitimately, for whatever profits could be made. It was an incredible turning point for all of us who love this music. The era of promos and gray area releases was over. An era of fully licensed releases to anything that could be located and licensed was now affordable and in.

Fast forward: We are proud to have been of this new era, which now has lasted quite a few years. BUT - the union has always maintained the position that each of the contracts for these licensed releases are for that release alone, and the entire policy can be terminated at any time should the system be abused.

What Mr. Esterhammer is doing IS abusing that system. And I have a dog in this fight, as does MV Gerhard, and the folks at Quartet and Music Box and all of the other labels... and including all of you folks, because we do not want to see this policy shut down and revert back to the era when the only things coming out were either affordable non-union projects or bootlegs with crappy quality made from underground tenth generation cassettes and whatnot.

It isn't even necessary to abuse the system today. The studios will make their actual vault masters available, license the recordings, the AFM will enter into a contract with the labels, and everything happens legitimately at reasonable costs for the most part.

It bothers me a lot to read people defending the issue of unlicensed albums today, especially when the piracy isn't necessary... and especially since it jeopardizes us all.

I love and respect the wonderful competitive environment us labels are experiencing today. If we don't release SANTA CLAUS, we enjoy seeing it come out elsewhere just the same. What happens over at Perseverance is no longer just ignorance of the system, nor is it because of misguided passion. It is just bad form. And if it is going to injure the system all of us legitimate labels today have fought hard to establish so these releases can be done in the best possible quality... yes, I am going to speak out.

For the record. Composers rarely control their music nor do they have much say in what studios and the union do with the recordings. But relationships do get made with labels, things are made possible, especially when the composers may have located the only surviving copies of tapes and whatnot... and again, we can all benefit. In the case of this Safan promo, Craig has no involvement in the licensing and by providing tapes was simply helping make a project happen under the guise that the corresponding label was covering all of the legal bases... which Perseverance was not.

I hope people will keep these thoughts in kind, just as I hope Robin will stick to creating CDs with the proper licenses... so we can all enjoy the music.
--Doug


a) those of us who were around know exactly who began the negotiations with the AFM that resulted in the big change. b) EVERYONE who runs a label has a dog in this fight, not just you and Quartet and MV Gerhard and Music Box.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 2:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:27 am
Posts: 117
Location: Cambridge, UK
haineshisway wrote:
EVERYONE who runs a label has a dog in this fight, not just you and Quartet and MV Gerhard and Music Box.


... and ...

Douglass Fake wrote:
And I have a dog in this fight, as does MV Gerhard, and the folks at Quartet and Music Box and all of the other labels...


(Emphasis mine.)

I don't believe Doug intended to exclude anyone.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 2:44 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 9:23 am
Posts: 961
Location: Los Angeles
Cheap and underhanded as are a lot of things in this life.

_________________
"I used to worry about losing my mind, now that I've lost it, I don't worry about it anymore." -Wavy Gravy


Last edited by WorkingWithKnives on Fri Jul 26, 2013 11:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 3:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 3:48 pm
Posts: 2384
haineshisway wrote:
Douglass Fake wrote:

a) those of us who were around know exactly who began the negotiations with the AFM that resulted in the big change. b) EVERYONE who runs a label has a dog in this fight, not just you and Quartet and MV Gerhard and Music Box.


Sort of odd post Mr. Kimmel since I did nod to all of the labels. Taking time to recall every one of them was not necessary. In your case, I had not seen you making any comments with regards to the topic under discussion so you were, to me, in the background of the discussion and not part of it.

As to your AFM comment? I'm not sure what direction you are heading here. I don't know factually who "started" the discussions about lowering the rates but do I know I personally was one of them. I met at length with Billy Liebert in person at the local's office in Los Angeles with regards to the rates and limited editions and how to finance the musician fees way back in June of 1985 when we were launching with Red Dawn. And I had meetings with the AFM again about rates in 1990 when we did Quigley Down Under and had signed to so The Russia House (before terms with the artist Branford Marsalis caused the release to happen with MCA). In fact, that was the year the AFM ushered in their half-rate 'new use' policy for soundtracks to new films. And we were yet again in dialog with them when we did Broughton's Carried Away in 1996 when discussions were about recording scores for low budget films and doing soundtracks for them. After that the historic rate policy became the next agenda everyone involved look towards.

I imagine a lot of label heads were in dialog with the AFM over those years, albeit when we first started talking about some kind of special rate for limited editions or anything that might help get the albums released back in 1985, with Red Dawn, I can say there were only a couple of soundtrack labels in similar dialog (presumably another was Varese) since there were only a couple of soundtrack labels at that time. I don't recall you ever being in any of those early talks and I don't even know what roll you could have played back in 1985 BUT if you want credit anyway... you get it my man. And so does every label who worked with the AFM over those years and continues to do so. In fact, Nick Redman and his dialog with the union over rates for 20th Century Fox way back when he first began helming their projects was a surely a very important factor, too. But I just can't list every contribution here.

As to your apparent desire to shift the topic from a promo that interfered with one of our licenses to my not listing all the labels or extending credit to all the parties that may have spoken with the AFM over the last thirty years, I can only add that my initial posts (and presumably the other label execs posting as well) were not intended to be documentations of those entire last three decades but merely a reflection on how things evolved. Sorry Mr. Kimmel, but your name just never came up way back then. I don't take that as any kind of slight. Neither should you.
--Doug

P.S. I actually do hope Perseverance works with the system in place now. They have done some really cool albums in the past... as has your label. I don't do a lot of hugging of persons I don't really know but if a hug is what you were looking for, I can sort of send you one here: ***Hug***


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Thu Jul 25, 2013 6:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 10, 2010 10:52 pm
Posts: 106
Douglass Fake wrote:
haineshisway wrote:
Douglass Fake wrote:

a) those of us who were around know exactly who began the negotiations with the AFM that resulted in the big change. b) EVERYONE who runs a label has a dog in this fight, not just you and Quartet and MV Gerhard and Music Box.


Sort of odd post Mr. Kimmel since I did nod to all of the labels. Taking time to recall every one of them was not necessary. In your case, I had not seen you making any comments with regards to the topic under discussion so you were, to me, in the background of the discussion and not part of it.

As to your AFM comment? I'm not sure what direction you are heading here. I don't know factually who "started" the discussions about lowering the rates but do I know I personally was one of them. I met at length with Billy Liebert in person at the local's office in Los Angeles with regards to the rates and limited editions and how to finance the musician fees way back in June of 1985 when we were launching with Red Dawn. And I had meetings with the AFM again about rates in 1990 when we did Quigley Down Under and had signed to so The Russia House (before terms with the artist Branford Marsalis caused the release to happen with MCA). In fact, that was the year the AFM ushered in their half-rate 'new use' policy for soundtracks to new films. And we were yet again in dialog with them when we did Broughton's Carried Away in 1996 when discussions were about recording scores for low budget films and doing soundtracks for them. After that the historic rate policy became the next agenda everyone involved look towards.

I imagine a lot of label heads were in dialog with the AFM over those years, albeit when we first started talking about some kind of special rate for limited editions or anything that might help get the albums released back in 1985, with Red Dawn, I can say there were only a couple of soundtrack labels in similar dialog (presumably another was Varese) since there were only a couple of soundtrack labels at that time. I don't recall you ever being in any of those early talks and I don't even know what roll you could have played back in 1985 BUT if you want credit anyway... you get it my man. And so does every label who worked with the AFM over those years and continues to do so. In fact, Nick Redman and his dialog with the union over rates for 20th Century Fox way back when he first began helming their projects was a surely a very important factor, too. But I just can't list every contribution here.

As to your apparent desire to shift the topic from a promo that interfered with one of our licenses to my not listing all the labels or extending credit to all the parties that may have spoken with the AFM over the last thirty years, I can only add that my initial posts (and presumably the other label execs posting as well) were not intended to be documentations of those entire last three decades but merely a reflection on how things evolved. Sorry Mr. Kimmel, but your name just never came up way back then. I don't take that as any kind of slight. Neither should you.
--Doug

P.S. I actually do hope Perseverance works with the system in place now. They have done some really cool albums in the past... as has your label. I don't do a lot of hugging of persons I don't really know but if a hug is what you were looking for, I can sort of send you one here: ***Hug***


I wasn't trying to shift anything, nor am I trying to start an argument. And just because you were not there at all discussions doesn't mean I never met with the AFM because I most certainly did, with Nick, way back in the Bay Cities days. But that's not when the change happened, as you know. The change happened later and Nick was the driving force that made it happen. I don't need or desire credit for anything - that's not who I am or what I'm about - ever. I understand what THIS discussion is about - I haven't commented here - I would have commented at FSM but that thread was locked. I'm sure Robin means well, and if Mr. Safan was involved then he surely must share in some of this - but I don't know any of the facts and am just an observer in this discussion.

Hugs all around and back to work!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Craig Safan Promo
PostPosted: Fri Jul 26, 2013 12:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 8:13 pm
Posts: 365
Good vibes from label to label. Gosh I love it! Keep up all the fantastic work you all do:) :)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 32 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group