Music Ownership and Collectors - The BIG problem re UNRELEASED

It is for me the same ‘broken record’!!!!! [or in our case CD].

Do the music owners care about the fans and collectors?…….Well that is perhaps one question. The first REAL question though is who owns the music? Especially when it has lain on session tapes in an Archive Storage for over 50 years. Knowing that, then you can properly blame someone for the tracks that remain ‘unreleased’. But WHO?

 

In the case of the Motown Unreleased they were said to be owned by Universal, the problem of ownership and licensing became very complex back in 2000. But not so now, I believe [whilst not being a music industry lawyer]

 

As most readers of this know I have been writing about the release of ‘previously’ unreleased recordings on analog tapes at Motown since 2000 by Frankie Valli and The Four Seasons. So the questions have been ……who owns them and …...is the problem Bob Gaudio for not approving the tracks …….or Universal Motown for not clearing them for release.? For fans neither should be a problem.

 

So how are things so different today than in 2000 ….apart from the fact that those still alive are 24 years older than when I received the Motown Tape Index……. of course the truth is out!!! Well we have 13 more tracks and 8 alternative versions/’takes’ physically released by Motown via Snapper Music of London in 2023 after 20 years effort….proving my claims since then.

 

So today ...who actually has ‘ownership’ or copyright and licencing rights over the Four Seasons Motown Unreleased tracks [the latest of which was recorded 51 years ago.?] Back in the noughties, I was told that the Motown Contract with the Four Seasons Partnership ‘did not exist’ or ‘could not be found’ [by the late Peter Bennett, the FSP lawyer at the time]

 

This is where legalities get complex…….Research reveals that for 1970s recordings…..”Under most exclusive recording contracts, the artist will assign copyright in the sound recordings to the record company. An assignment is a transfer of ownership for the full life of copyright. In the case of sound recordings this will be 50 years from release.” What is clearly the case with tracks that remain unreleased during that 50 year period is that Ownership returns to the Artist after 50 years have passed with them still stored.

 

 

The MoWest/Motown record company [now Universal] would claim[if no contract can be found found] that it was a standard contract and they paid for the sessions and so have the right to recover studio costs etc via copyright and publishing rights.

 

However the Artist may claim this right has expired!!! And research supports this.

 

Finds on ‘Detroit Soul Forum’ reveal so much lack of clarity re the potential claim of Universal re ownership by them of ‘unreleased’ tracks…..Nobody seems to be definitive about a standard contract back in 1971 in a search among past experts posts

 

According to Dean Taylor, Mike” Valvano and Mrs. Edwards, the original Motown contracts were based on list price of the records and nothing was deducted except for salary money advanced to the artist and AF of M scale for the musicians. No studio time charges, no producer's royalty, no promotion, none of the common things that artists get charged for today. The percentage numbers were low but the actual cash they received was better than most labels. Of course the lawyers had a field day with the smaller than Hollywood royalty rates.” Also I read another post saying…”as a rule studio time was not charged to artists, “

 

However one expert said…..”I was told unreleased tracks were charged back to the producers.”….and some say re the group and their producers at Motown that maybe this practice of ‘Track Dumping’ [recording the same track with many artists to claim costs] was happening with Valli and the Seasons?

 

Adam Whites piece on the subject of Stevie Wonder delves into the contract procedures at Motown in 1971 and them changing…..but maybe just for Berry Gordy to retain Stevie?

 

Generally, Motown had a good reputation according to some music historians….but as JoeyD says…..”recording contracts have long been debated in the music industry. While these agreements give artists exposure and financial support at levels they wouldn’t achieve independently, some argue they can harm their artistic freedom and long-term success. Labels are after all, businesses, and businesses need to profit to survive. One of the most significant concerns surrounding recording contracts is the potential loss of artistic control. Labels may pressure artists to conform to a specific sound or image that aligns with current market trends, potentially compromising their creative vision and limiting their artistic expression.”

 

That clearly didn’t happen with Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons at Motown as it is now clear after the Snapper Project that the songs with multiple producers are quite superb and it was the ‘release programme’ that was the problem with so many tracks ‘unreleased’. Only 22 of a potential 68 tracks are demonstrated to have been released. The exact number in total is unclear due to lack of tape data records being checked. Celebrated saxophonist at MoWest at the time…Dave Pell..[hired by Gordy to be "in charge of all MoWest's music, production and signings]places the blame clearly at Berry Gordy’s door during that period……..when he says….."Berry was involved in everything," Pell says. "He was a strong record man and I really liked him, but I fought him every day. He hired me to change things, then stood in my way. It was like, 'What the hell did you hire me for?'"

There was, feels Pell, little impetus from above to make MoWest work. Motown's marketing men and pluggers were constantly preoccupied with Marvin Gaye, or Stevie Wonder, or extending the Jackson Five's run of hits.

That was then, but after 50+ years in the vaults how does the FSP feel about these tracks?

What has seemed apparent for some years is that the FSP perhaps cannot figure out how to make ‘enough’ money from the catalogue, [having ‘leased’ the publishing of their catalogue of owned music] Many older groups and artists including Elton John have made such a decision…. ‘get the money we can NOW’ ….and hedge funds have seen the value in back catalogues…..it became an ‘in my lifetime’ solution for them both.

For fans reading this there are mainly two types of ‘royalties’ regarding a musical track relevant to it’s release….

• Sales/Streaming: These are called “reproduction” royalties for sound recording, and “mechanical” royalties for the composition. In either case, any time a song is sold in any format, or streamed, a royalty is due.

• Licensing: Music is often licensed for placement in TV shows, films, ads, videogames, CD’s, vinyl and so on. These licenses generate Synchronization (or “synch”) royalties and are a one-time payment negotiated between the copyright holder and the company licensing the music.

So is the practice of the latter with constant re-issuing/relicensing of ‘the hits’ by the FSP the main objective, thus getting payments of royalties upon issue of the product?. The Snapper Project and the CD era licensing program show evidence of this in our CD discography. The former would be a separate royalty, based on being placed in a streaming catalogue. Then probably at a very low rate that needs volume to bring in any reasonable return…...and we are not talking Taylor Swift here or even The Beach Boys!!

 

BUT the big problem being reported by independent record companies is ‘clearance’. For the last few years the problems of the time taken by Motown Universal to ‘license’ or provide ‘clearance’ of both previously released and unreleased tracks has become longer and longer taking 3 months to sometimes 3 years to complete as reported by independent Record Company’s like ACE Records of London and Real Gone Music.

 

Today anyone could start a record company so anyone could approach the Four Seasons Partnership for a release of their songs by Frankie Valli and/or The Four Seasons…I am told this could be viable.….but they/we would need guaranteed orders[to pay royalties to composers, and maybe the recording studios-even if a ‘Not For Profit’ project]….Maybe via a new form of ‘crowd funding’…..re-titled as ‘release funding’.? We could plan the project and do the research…..BUT could we deliver the product? Clearly the answer is NO……..but whilst new bands are doing this….’our band’ are lost.

 

To today’s artist that is a clear project plan and something that could be done as they see the future. And for us fans particularly with regard to recordings they have in their LA storage or in Bob and Frankie’s personal collections it could be so…..BUT it is the problem they have with ‘Looking Back’ .

 

To be ambitious and have belief in a back catalogue you have to know your customer base. Then you need people who know how to manage via projects.

 

 

So based on the Snapper Project we cannot be sure of Bob Gaudio or Frankie’s commitment to fight [certainly not legally] to get ALL of their recordings from Universal and to mix 16 track recordings to be able to be released[or to pay for this]. We believe many 16 track session tapes were sent to Bob Gaudio, but only 13 mixes were done for release in the Snapper Box Set. It was at one stage seen by him as ‘not worth the trouble’ and was ‘financially’ challenging. I have read in the past that it is how it has always seemed from his perspective regarding the Motown Unreleased. If Bob Gaudio wanted a contractual arrangement to happen re this music then he only needs to make a call to Harry Weinger then Harry would find a way and then independent RC’s and fans would make it work financially. That is what ‘music industry’ insiders tell me.

Amid all of the confusion re such tracks, it is pretty clear that the FSP could rightly claim ownership of the UNRELEASED tracks at Universal Motown, and then they would be free to license them to a Record Company of their choosing including one set up by us or with one set up by our industry friends. That is a solution that needs ‘One Man’ to relate to fans like us. Some say he never will. I simply ask the question…..WHY?

 

Ken Charmer – Sound Engineer and Music Researcher

 

 

Footnote: If this subject is interesting to you well this ‘Sound On Sound’ article way back in 2007 may be of interest.

https://www.soundonsound.com/music-business/recording-contracts-explained

It may have been overtaken by changes in the copyright laws since then but as Universal have offices in the UK and the Gov.uk copyright site makes it clear that copyright ownership in the UK on such ‘unreleased’ recordings remains at 50 years with reversion to the artist at that point. Then the question arises…...Does the artist have the right to release such recording there?. That certainly happened in 2023 when Snapper Music [in London]released 13 approved tracks and 8 alternate versions they had in their own storage as Safety Copies. That ‘clearance’ happened smoothly…...so the question remains for both Bob and Frankie….what is the problem?…..we are here to help deliver the project. Today it appears clear from our industry feedback that they are the only problem!! ‘The Motown Project’ is clear…...and deliverable. The blame for lack of release or even a plan, appears to lie with Bob Gaudio.