http://www.spectropop.com ________________________________________________________________________ ______________ ______________ ______________ ______________ ______________ S P E C T R O P O P ______________ ______________ ______________ ________________________________________________________________________ America's First Family of Fine Recordings ________________________________________________________________________ There are 3 messages in this issue #31. Topics in this digest: 1. The In Crowd" - recorded at Gold Star? From: "WASE RADIO" 2. Various From: Carol Kaye 3. Ronnie sings Spector (or not) - Redux From: LePageWeb ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Message: 1 Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 07:21:49 -0400 From: "WASE RADIO" Subject: The In Crowd" - recorded at Gold Star? To Carol Kaye: You mentioned in one of your posts that you worked with Dobie Gray on his 1965 hit "The In Crowd". The song likes it was recorded at Gold Star, because it has that distinctive echo. I wonder if it was done there? thanks. Michael G. Marvin WASE radio. --------------------[ archived by Spectropop ]-------------------- Message: 2 Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2000 17:51:11 -0700 From: Carol Kaye Subject: Various I apologize for my writing some very personal things inre: the funeral for Jack Nitzsche...I was in somewhat of a shock and wasn't writing very well and shouldn't have written in such depth. Also, yes, Billy Strange did play very loud at Gold Star on the track of Zip-a-dee-doo-dah"...as usual. Both he and Glen Campbell usually kept their amp volumes extremely high during their solos, great rock solos tho' >from both of them. Carol Kaye http://www.carolkaye.com/ --------------------[ archived by Spectropop ]-------------------- Message: 3 Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2000 15:03:14 +0900 From: LePageWeb Subject: Ronnie sings Spector (or not) - Redux At the beginning of August David Young wrote: >I'm confused about...the alleged injunction Spector has >against Ronnie's singing his songs in public. It seems >like I remember that the ban did not apply to her live >concerts, only to appearances in broadcast media. To which I replied... > I cannot think of a single reason or > circumstance that would persuade a judge to grant such a > ruling.
> ...defining to what extent an "author" may control use of > its works...clearly does not extend to control over > who can record or publicly perform those [songs]... This is an excerpt from an article in Billboard (July 01, 2000) > The decision...ruled that despite the girl group's request, > it was not entitled to the masters of its recordings. > > Without ownership of the masters, the victory is not as > sweet, admits Robert Donnelly, Ronnie Spector's music > attorney. "The thing that a lot of people don't realize is > because Phil Spector refuses to license "Walking In The > Rain' or "Be My Baby,' Ronnie can't perform these songs in > television or film. There's a whole part of her career > that has been obliterated." No wonder everyone got confused. The statement attorney Robert Donnelly made was designed to draw public sympathy for the Ronettes and disdain for Phil Spector. Clever, yes, but the statement is misleading and the logic is flawed. Mother Bertha declining requests for synch licenses is not a legal issue. It has nothing to do with the Ronettes case, and the fact the Ronettes were not given control of the Phil Spector masters has NOTHING to do with the right of a songwriter to decide how his or her copyrights are used in TV and film. You gotta wonder about Robert Donnelly stating this publicly. It's propaganda Without careful examination of Donnelly's statement, any reader would believe that Phil ("the villian") is preventing Ronnie ("the victim") from singing her songs because the judge didn't give the Ronettes ownership of Phil's masters. Well it just ain't so, folks. It doesn't matter who owns the masters. It matters who owns the songs. As co-writer and co-publisher of nearly all his hits, Phil is entitled by law to approve or decline proposed synch uses. It doesn't make him the bad guy. It makes him a songwriter allowing use of his songs the way he deems appropriate. We might view Phil's licensing policy as overprotective. We might regret that Mother Bertha songs are not frequently used in film etc., or more to the point, that Ronnie can't perform these songs in television or film. Nevertheless, I think it's a very good thing that copyright law provides for creators or owners of copyrights to govern the way their copyrighted works are used, and I find Donnelly's character assasination of Spector for doing just that despicable. "There's a whole part of her career that has been obliterated."??? How so? Ronnie can perform Phil's songs in public performances, and she is free to re-record them for commercial release too. That puts Ronnie in virtually the same position as any other singer of other people's songs. Despite any inference by Donnelly to the contrary, it has nothing to do with who owns the master rights to Be My Baby. Jamie --------------------[ archived by Spectropop ]-------------------- End
Spectropop text contents & copy; copyright Spectropop unless stated otherwise. All rights in and to the contents of these documents, including each element embodied therein, is subject to copyright protection under international copyright law. Any use, reuse, reproduction and/or adaptation without written permission of the owners is a violation of copyright law and is strictly prohibited. All rights reserved.