OT Where's my royalties?

Simon Mason

Yours truly is involved in this bizzare law suit!

http://wired.com/news/digiwood/0,14...tw=wn_tophead_3

--
Simon Mason
Anlaby
East Yorkshire.
53°44'N 0°26'W
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net

Mark

> Yours truly is involved in this bizzare law suit!
>
> http://wired.com/news/digiwood/0,14...tw=wn_tophead_3

Will Irdial also be suing Boards Of Canada, then? There's a sample of one of
the Conet Project tracks on one of the tracks on their "Geogaddi" album...

Mark

Graeme

"Simon Mason" <simon@simonmason.karoo.co.uk> wrote in news:At-
cndtI7IyzckfdSa8jmA@karoo.co.uk:

> Yours truly is involved in this bizzare law suit!
>
> http://wired.com/news/digiwood/0,14...tw=wn_tophead_3
>

"Mason may be maintaining a Zen exterior."

You just take your frustrations out on us then? :-)


Graeme

Keith Willoughby

Simon Mason wrote:

> Yours truly is involved in this bizzare law suit!
>
> http://wired.com/news/digiwood/0,14...tw=wn_tophead_3

IANAL, of course, but

| "All that money I could have made if I had copyrighted them!" Mason
| wrote. "Since I gave Akin the recordings willingly for nothing, I
| don't have any come back.

isn't true. If he's correct that copyright exists in the recordings,
then it's yours. You don't need to do anything to copyright it, it just
exists. Further, unless you formally handed over the copyright to him,
rather than merely gave him license to use the recordings, the copyright
is still yours.

--
Keith Willoughby http://flat222.org/keith/
"I've had pretty good success with Stan by throwing him my best pitch and
backing up third." - Carl Erskine

Jon Senior

In article <At-cndtI7IyzckfdSa8jmA@karoo.co.uk>,
simon@simonmason.karoo.co.uk says...
> Yours truly is involved in this bizzare law suit!
>
> http://wired.com/news/digiwood/0,14...tw=wn_tophead_3

Interesting but...

<rant>
'"phonetic alphabet" letters -- the abbreviations pilots use ("alpha"
for a, "bravo" for b and so on).'

It's not the "phonetic" alphabet. That is the one used in dictionarys to
demonstrate the "phonetics" of a word allowing pronunciation.
</rant>

What will you be buying with your royalties Simon?

Jon

dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers

>Yours truly is involved in this bizzare law suit!
>
> http://wired.com/news/digiwood/0,14...tw=wn_tophead_3

Should I be donning the celeste tutu and wielding the slabs on your behalf???

Cheers, helen s ;-)


--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
to get correct one remove fame & fortune
h*$el*$$e*nd**$o$ts**i*$*$m*m$o*n*s@$*a$o*l.c**$om$

--Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel is switched off--

David Nutter

Keith Willoughby <keith@flat222.org> said:

> isn't true. If he's correct that copyright exists in the recordings,
> then it's yours. You don't need to do anything to copyright it, it just
> exists. Further, unless you formally handed over the copyright to him,
> rather than merely gave him license to use the recordings, the copyright
> is still yours.

At least until the Men In Black turn up to say "Well, actually it was *our*
broadcast tape"...

Regards,

-david

Simon Mason

"Mark" <mark.harris.nospam@ukonline.co.uk.nospam> wrote in message
news:40daf15c$0$11288$afc38c87@news.easynet.co.uk...
> > Yours truly is involved in this bizzare law suit!
> >
> > http://wired.com/news/digiwood/0,14...tw=wn_tophead_3
>
> Will Irdial also be suing Boards Of Canada, then? There's a sample of one
of
> the Conet Project tracks on one of the tracks on their "Geogaddi" album...

and Stereolab, Porcupine Tree and the film makers behind Vanilla Sky!

--
Simon M.

Simon Mason

"dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers" <wafflycathcs@aol.comcomcom> wrote in
message news:20040624113501.04229.00000464@mb-m15.aol.com...
> >Yours truly is involved in this bizzare law suit!
> >
> > http://wired.com/news/digiwood/0,14...tw=wn_tophead_3
>
> Should I be donning the celeste tutu and wielding the slabs on your
behalf???

No, but thanks for the offer H. I'm kicking myself more for the fact
that when I moved house in 2000, I didn't need to sell my old one and kept
it empty for 6 months. After that time I had to start paying council tax on
it again, so I sold it for 30k. The same houses are now going for 105k!
That's what hurts most ;-)

Still, I wouldn't trade being fit and healthy for 105k, much.
--
Simon M.

Simon Mason

"David Nutter" <dnutter@hemswell.lincoln.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:slrncdlt57.h8c.dnutter@vampire.lincoln.ac.uk...
> Keith Willoughby <keith@flat222.org> said:
>
> > isn't true. If he's correct that copyright exists in the recordings,
> > then it's yours. You don't need to do anything to copyright it, it just
> > exists. Further, unless you formally handed over the copyright to him,
> > rather than merely gave him license to use the recordings, the copyright
> > is still yours.
>
> At least until the Men In Black turn up to say "Well, actually it was
*our*
> broadcast tape"...

Ah you see we are safe there as according to the spooks, these stations do
not exist!

--
Simon M.

Simon Mason

"Jon Senior" <jon@restlesslemon_DOT_co_DOT_uk.remove> wrote in message
>
> What will you be buying with your royalties Simon?

A packet of polo mints I think.

Tony Raven

Keith Willoughby wrote:
> Simon Mason wrote:
>
>> Yours truly is involved in this bizzare law suit!
>>
>> http://wired.com/news/digiwood/0,14...tw=wn_tophead_3
>
> IANAL, of course, but
>
>> "All that money I could have made if I had copyrighted them!" Mason
>> wrote. "Since I gave Akin the recordings willingly for nothing, I
>> don't have any come back.
>
> isn't true. If he's correct that copyright exists in the recordings,
> then it's yours. You don't need to do anything to copyright it, it just
> exists. Further, unless you formally handed over the copyright to him,
> rather than merely gave him license to use the recordings, the copyright
> is still yours.

I agree. Even if you gave him permission to use them in his recordings, you
didn't give t'other lot permission and therefore they were breaching your
copyright, not his (unless they also included significant sections of his own
work). Copyright is an automatic right, there is no need to register it like
there is with a patent. Can you prove the "stolen" track is your recording and
not one he made as he claims? Presumably if it includes a random sequence of
letters, the probability of him being able to record exactly the same sequence
as you had would be very low.

Tony

Dave Kahn

Jon Senior <jon@restlesslemon_DOT_co_DOT_uk.remove> wrote in message news:<MPG.1b4504dc960721f29896ff@news.clara.net>...

> It's not the "phonetic" alphabet. That is the one used in dictionarys to
> demonstrate the "phonetics" of a word allowing pronunciation.

It's certainly not a phonetic alphabet in that sense but it is
generally known as the phonetic alphabet, and that's how it was
described when I had to learn ot for gliding. See:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?A1EB225A8

or (full link):

http://www.scphillips.com/morse/ind...e/alphabet.html

--
Dave...

Jon Senior

In article <57db8bde.0406250201.3c2449e@posting.google.com>, dkahn400
@yahoo.co.uk says...
> It's certainly not a phonetic alphabet in that sense but it is
> generally known as the phonetic alphabet, and that's how it was
> described when I had to learn ot for gliding. See:

I know this. I had the argument with a friend at university who had also
learnt it as such. Despite this, I attempt to correct as many people as
possible in the vain hope that one day people will understand what
"phonetic" means. I can't remember what its official title is, but when
my father learnt it in the military they didn't use "phonetic".

Jon