Pink Floyd '1965' double 7"

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by John Collins, Nov 27, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ranasakawa

    ranasakawa Forum Resident

    Piper era Floyd Immersion box may be finally a possibility!

    Hoping for also a 1969-1972 Floyd Immersion box as well
     
  2. Ayshpaysh

    Ayshpaysh Forum Resident

    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    I love the feeling of owning an original disc, that's genuinely rare as much as the next person, but what's with limited releases these days? Come on! I want this so much, but I will never see it for a regular price now... Especially here in Australia. This blows.
     
    AlienRendel, qwerty, hazard and 8 others like this.
  3. Ayshpaysh

    Ayshpaysh Forum Resident

    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    I love the feeling of owning an original disc, that's genuinely rare as much as the next person, but what's with limited releases these days? Come on! I want this so much, but I will never see it for a regular price now
     
  4. muffmasterh

    muffmasterh Forum Resident

    Location:
    East London U.K
    lakeside ?
     
  5. RobCooper

    RobCooper Cobwebs & Strange

    Location:
    Essex, UK
    Sorry Basildon! Also phoned Southend and got the same story!
     
  6. darling

    darling Forum Resident

    Location:
    Philadelphia, PA
    They're not releasing it because they want to, they're releasing it because they have to.

    They put out enough copies to ensure copyright protection and no more. The implication: they would rather die hards find an illegal copy than have it available to mass-market casual listeners.
     
  7. sandmountainslim1

    sandmountainslim1 Vicar Of Fonz

    I will oblige them as soon as illegal copies become available ;)
     
  8. brainwashed

    brainwashed Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Releasing previously unissued recordings protects the material for another 50 years. It's a simple as that. It's possible down the road that EMI/Universal and/or Floyd will release these recordings on some future project. Ron
     
  9. MarkTheShark

    MarkTheShark Forum Resident

    That's what it sounded like from what Andy Jackson wrote (though apparently EMI/Universal/Parlophone will not necessarily be part of it). Nick Mason was talking about doing a Syd-era compilation years ago. These tracks predate the EMI contract anyway. One of the cool things about this release is now, we definitively know which songs they did at those early sessions. I'd have to look it up, but I'm not even sure Random Precision listed all the specific titles. That they all exist and now have finally come out (in some manner, even if it's only because of a legal necessity in the UK) is awesome. Hopefully we'll all get to hear them some day.

    I'm kind of liking that law. On one hand, if you created something, then the rights belong to you, and that seems right to me. But I also like how trademark laws work here in the US -- you want to keep the trademark, you have to use it or the rights expire. If our copyrights worked like that, it would help to keep stuff available and not buried to rot in some vault.
     
  10. Slubberdegullion

    Slubberdegullion Forum Resident

    Location:
    Denmark
    For another 70 years, in fact. And now we know that next year will see a similar release of the "San Francisco" version of Interstellar Overdrive, 2017 will bring Scream Thy Last Scream and Vegetable Man, and for 2019, Moonhead. On top of that there is the BBC stuff starting in 1967 plus various live dates.
     
  11. brainwashed

    brainwashed Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Boston, MA
    I'm sure EMI/Universal/Parlophone would be happy to lease the rights if they determine it has commericial appeal AND the Floyd members and their estates OK such a release. It's all good if this comes out. Those of us interested will seek out a copy... and yea, if that proves elusive will procure the recordings elsewhere. Ron
     
    zobalob, vonwegen and Hattipper like this.
  12. RonBaker

    RonBaker Forum Resident

    Location:
    Jackson, Ohio USA
    I'm sure there will be counterfeits available to those of us who weren't lucky enough to find the real deal.
     
  13. Hawthorn

    Hawthorn Forum Resident

    Location:
    Germany
  14. marigoldilemma

    marigoldilemma Forum Resident

    Location:
    usa
    Needle drops of these will be up on YouTube soon.
     
    sandmountainslim1 likes this.
  15. RonBaker

    RonBaker Forum Resident

    Location:
    Jackson, Ohio USA
    Thanks for the samples..."I'm a King Bee" is really good.
     
  16. crozcat

    crozcat Forum Resident

    Location:
    Sweden
    Butterfly is nice!
     
    mr.datsun and sandmountainslim1 like this.
  17. Spaghettiows

    Spaghettiows Forum Resident

    Location:
    Silver Creek, NY
    A little bit off-topic but shouldn't this law mean that The Beatles' Carnival of Light would either have to be released in 2017 or else it would become public domain?
     
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2015
    vonwegen and BeSteVenn like this.
  18. RonBaker

    RonBaker Forum Resident

    Location:
    Jackson, Ohio USA
    Then Paul can release it without anyone else's permission?
     
  19. Aghast of Ithaca

    Aghast of Ithaca Forum Resident

    Location:
    Angleterre
    On balance I would say Syd was right to drop the American accent.
     
    Baby Driver and vonwegen like this.
  20. Tristero

    Tristero A Muted Trumpeter Swan

    Location:
    MI
    Yeah, I can't feel too bad about pursuing bootlegs in cases where the bands refuse to make the stuff available. I'm still not convinced that the Pink Floyd brand managers will acquiesce to a widespread official release of rare material from the late 60s.
     
  21. Arnold Grove

    Arnold Grove Senior Member

    Location:
    NYC
    Carnival of Light would become public domain after 2017 IF someone could sneak into the vault and steal it. Otherwise, it remains under lock and key.

    HOWEVER, Apple Records seems to be taking a different approach to the copyright dilemma. They released a 1963 "Bootleg" compilation, but skipped 1964 and do not seem to be doing a 1965 one. So their lawyers are somehow viewing this differently.
     
  22. Arnold Grove

    Arnold Grove Senior Member

    Location:
    NYC
    Theoretically, yes.

    Realistically, no.
     
    revolution_vanderbilt likes this.
  23. JediJoker

    JediJoker Audio Engineer/Enthusiast

    Location:
    Portland, OR, USA
    Hmmm... In the U.S., there are generally two copyrights: one for the music and one for the sound recording. For a major label release, the sound recording copyright generally belongs to the label, while the artist usually retains their music copyright. I'm not sure what happens when the sound recording copyright expires, but I don't think the recording usually passes into the public domain, whereas once a music copyright expires, the composition typically does pass into the public domain. It's strange to think of anyone with access to a recording (a master, a copy, or an extant release) being able to duplicate, distribute, and sell with impunity something they did not create or license.
     
  24. Arnold Grove

    Arnold Grove Senior Member

    Location:
    NYC
    Even when a song falls into the public domain, the company issuing the recording still has to pay PUBLISHING royalties to the proper authorities. If not, then they would be in violation of the law.
     
    JediJoker likes this.
  25. brainwashed

    brainwashed Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Except Apple Corp. requires ALL releases to be approved by Paul, Ringo, Yoko and Olivia/Dhani. I seriously doubt Paul would risk their disapproval for such a vanity release. No recordings exist in the "Grey World" so it won't see light of day until Apple approves its release. Ron
     
    zobalob likes this.
  26. brainwashed

    brainwashed Forum Hall Of Fame

    Location:
    Boston, MA
    As we know, Universal and Sony simply refuse requests to license the material. That's why we won't be getting a 1965 Copyright Set from the Beatles. THEY and their labels believe the law gives them the right to NOT grant licenses for this material. Ron
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page