"Iain M Churches" wrote in message
...

"Keith G" wrote



Happens all the time - the guy trying to sell Workmates struggled for 14
years to get someone to buy the idea. Finally got Black and Decker to buy
it on about the third attempt. His end of the deal was a quid for every
one sold - they've sold over 40 million of them!!

Plus there must be millions of look alikes, for which the poor
man doesn't get a penny:-((

Much less OT for this group is the fact that Ray Dolby tried to
sell the idea for his "S/N stretcher" as it was then called to
both Decca and EMI. He needed serious funding to get it
off the ground. Neither company thought it was a viable
idea. EMI were working on their own "compander" which
never got further than prototype testing.



Workmates OT for this group? WTF do you think speakers are made on?

"Iain M Churches" wrote in message
...

"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message
om...
In article , Iain M Churches
wrote:
The first point is that the artist is not paid over and over again.
This applies also to everyone else involved in the project.
Staff and salaried people get paid a certain sum per year,
irrespective, in the short-term at least, whether the recordings
they make are a commercial success or not.

Artists usually sign a royalty contract, which stipulates an
advance (not repayable if the record does not sell)
and then a percentage on sales after that.

Doesn't a "percentage on sales" amount to the same thing as being paid
over and over again? The more they sell, the more the artist gets paid,
even though they only did the work once.

Good point. But would you think it right if a band were paid a flat
fee, say EUR 500 for a record that achieved platinum sales?



Sure. Their next fee would be 500,000 Euros and the one after that 5,000,000
if they were *that* good - that's how it works in the rest of the world...

"Keith G" wrote in message
. ..

"Iain M Churches" wrote in message
...

"Roderick Stewart" wrote in message
om...
In article , Iain M Churches
wrote:
The first point is that the artist is not paid over and over again.
This applies also to everyone else involved in the project.
Staff and salaried people get paid a certain sum per year,
irrespective, in the short-term at least, whether the recordings
they make are a commercial success or not.

Artists usually sign a royalty contract, which stipulates an
advance (not repayable if the record does not sell)
and then a percentage on sales after that.

Doesn't a "percentage on sales" amount to the same thing as being paid
over and over again? The more they sell, the more the artist gets paid,
even though they only did the work once.

Good point. But would you think it right if a band were paid a flat
fee, say EUR 500 for a record that achieved platinum sales?



Sure. Their next fee would be 500,000 Euros and the one after that
5,000,000 if they were *that* good - that's how it works in the rest of
the world...


No that wouldn't work either:-)
Few artists (of course there are exceptions) exceed the sales
of their first or second album with subsequent efforts.

Iain

"Signal" wrote in message
...
"Iain M Churches" emitted :

Ask Jason Nevins... paid $5k for the Run DMC remix.... No.1 in 30
countries. Remixers often accept a flat fee, but that's gotta hurt.

There is probably no one in the record business who has
not burned his or her fingers in a "flat fee or royalty" deal.
I know that I have - many times. But you have to do what
you feel might be right/best. In many cases, the budget
is so tight, that unless people were to show their faith in
what they were doing by accepting a percentage in place
of a fee, then the record would never get made.

Cordially,

Iain Churches
Recording Engineer/Philanthropist.

"Iain M Churches" wrote


No that wouldn't work either:-)
Few artists (of course there are exceptions) exceed the sales
of their first or second album with subsequent efforts.



Exceptions? Name one band/artist who has made it big who would show up for
the same money they started out on?

Anyway, enough of all this, there are a number of human
activities/predilections that the Smart Alecs have managed to twist into a
highly lucrative gravy train (music, certain games, 'designer stuff') - what
makes me laugh is that they have managed to weave a web of rules that
ordinary people feel *bound* by!

The MI works to the following set of rules:

Rule 1 - We will shaft you (CD prices in the UK etc.)

Rule 2 - You will not shaft us....


Only it's like 'speeding' - everybody breaks the rules in their own way at
some time or other....

In article , Keith G
wrote:

How did the Music Industry (and Hollywood) ever manage to get the entire
world to play the 'Royalties Game'??

Why do 'artistes' expect to get paid over and over again for a job of
work they get/got paid for and which gets put into the Public Domain? A
builder can construct a ****ter for a busy market square and he'll get
paid for his work but he don't get a slice of every dump taken in it
for the next hundred years or whatever? IYSWIM...

My own response is similar to Iain's.

If you live in (and wish to participate in) a 'capitalist' 'free market'
model of economy/society, then any work that you wish to exploit may have
to be paid for, and if you work, it is reasonably for you to expect those
who benefit to pay *you* for.

'works' (be they musical, or written, or whatever) may be 'bought' by
someone. So someone might agree to pay me money as a one-off payment for
me to write something for them. If that is the agreement, then I would not
necessarily get any further payment if they make and sell many copies.

Bit like when a builder builds a crapper. You get paid for making it, then
you have no real financial connection with repeated use. :-)

OTOH the agreements may be that you 'sell' your work for a royalty in the
form of a fee anyone who wants to *use* the 'work' may be expected to pay.
This spreads the cost amongst the users.

Should anyone be *expected* to work for nothing? Be they a builder, or a
writer, or a composer/musician?

However, any of us may *choose* to 'work for nothing' in finantial terms.
I do that whenever I produce a webpage. If I'd wanted I could have spent
that time working on writing a book, or a paid article for a magazine.

Matter of choice on both sides. People may expect to be paid in exchange
for their work. People who want the benefit may have to pay for the work.
If you don't want this, then don't engage in the process and/or campagin
for a different sort of society/economy... :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

"Keith G" wrote in message
. ..

"Iain M Churches" wrote


No that wouldn't work either:-)
Few artists (of course there are exceptions) exceed the sales
of their first or second album with subsequent efforts.



Exceptions? Name one band/artist who has made it big who would show up for
the same money they started out on?

I was not talking about advances, I was talking about sales.
Most contracts are for a three or four record deal.

Anyway, enough of all this, there are a number of human
activities/predilections that the Smart Alecs have managed to twist into a
highly lucrative gravy train (music, certain games, 'designer stuff') -
what makes me laugh is that they have managed to weave a web of rules that
ordinary people feel *bound* by!

The MI works to the following set of rules:

Rule 1 - We will shaft you (CD prices in the UK etc.)

Have you considered that in some areas of the world (the former
Eastern bloc, and the FarEast) that pirate/counterfeit recordings
account for 95% of sales?

Thinks what an effect that must have on prices of the genuine
article.

Rule 2 - You will not shaft us....

Piracy/counterfeiting is just that.


Iain

In article , Roderick
Stewart wrote:


It's a valid point, and one that I've often thought about myself, but
consider the practicality of any alternative. For example, you've spent
a lot of time, money and effort in creating something of "intellectual
value" such as a book, a picture, a piece of music etc. It's value is
embodied in the idea of it and not any material object that contains
it, so it would be easy to make copies at little cost.

In my experience, writing a textbook takes around 1-2 years, and may
involve some years of collecting and understanding the relevant material
before that. It does not seem unreasonable to me to expect that if someone
wants the results, they pay something for the work/time/effort involved.
Particularly if the info boosts their own ability to earn a living.


What can you do if they then create and sell enormous numbers of copies
(because they have a publishing system in place to do this and you
haven't), and make huge profits, and you are left with nothing?

Alas, this still happens quite a lot. Many 'pirate' copies of textbooks are
published in the 'third world'. This may be fine if it means that the
poorer people get cheaper books. But where will the next textbooks come
from if no-one pays the authors?...

Above said, not many authors would be able to live on the royalties from a
few textbooks. Most 'academic' authors therefore tend to write them for
other reasons than the royalty cheques... :-)

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

In article , Iain M Churches
wrote:

"Keith G" wrote in message
...


There you go - you done it again! 'Sample' MP3s now removed from my
Show N Tell page!

I don't think anyone is going to clap you in irons and send you off to
spend the rest of your days in the hulks in Romney marshes because you
posted an .mp3 :-)

Take a look at UKRAV and the post entitled "Vinyl Rips" or whatever it
was called about six from the top. The site to which it referred
disappeared in a whisp of smoke within 24hrs.

There is a distinction to be made between "giving away" copies of your
*own* work, and "giving away" the work of others.

If the work is yours, you are quite entitiled to decide to allow people
access for free - just as you are entitiled to ask them to pay if they want
a copy. But if the work is not yours, then you are not entitiled to decide
on their behalf that they wish to work for nothing.



I think if the record industry wants you, or any of us for that matter
to advertise their wares, they will ask us:-)

I do find some of the behaviour of the record industry annoying. In
particular, their tendency to keep 'in the vaults' works which some of us
would *wish* to pay for and have a copy. [1] Thus I welcome the 'spur' that
recordings eventually become re-copyable after a suitable time. Although
the musicians/composers may still be entitiled to payment, so this isn't
'public domain' in that sense.

[1] In my case, particularly annoying that EMI kept many Barbirolli
recordings 'out of print' for decades.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html

In article , Dave
xxxx wrote:


Dr. Ruben Rausing, makes money every time a carton of milk or whatever
is in a tetra pack is sold

He is/was UK second richest person worth about £4 billion expect down a
couple when new list comes out with that Russian having moved here.

When I went to a meeting to explain IPR some years ago I was surprised that
two of the top UK owners at that time we

1) The ring pull on ring-pull cans

2) Bubbles in chocolate.

Apparently, one of the main worries of the relevant firm at that time was
that the main patent on (2) was about to expire...

IIRC Compared to (1), the income for things like Dyson cleaners came
no-where...

Slainte,

Jim

--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Audio Misc http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/AudioMisc/index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html