Commodore Remix

Hi all, I dunno if you know about this, but I found a full remix album thats free and has some great mixes on there, at first I thought "21 mixes of Monty On The Run? that could be overkill." but its actually quite varied and different, here's the press release and website to grab it from >>>

http://www.escrec.com/category/escrec25

Poke 20 is the sequel of the C64 Orchestra project in which a classical orchestra played newly arranged C64 game music, such as International Karate, Monty On The Run and Myth. In Poke 20 we re-returned the C64 Orchestra version of the Monty On The Run track to contemporary electronic composers and musicians to create their own remix version.

The Download album:
Twenty-one musicians from around the globe have contributed their remix of Monty On The Run (the C64 Orchestra version) and agreed with a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA licensed Poke 20 release of their remix. You are therefore free to download, copy, distribute their remix versions but it would be nice to give them a big up if you enjoy their work.

This could be an interesting topic.

I caught this on twitter, although I haven't listen to them all yet (21 remixes of the same track in one sitting) what I have listen to so far has been of varying quality.

EDIT: I SPELL GUD, AND AM FAT.

vurtX wrote:Twenty-one musicians from around the globe have contributed their remix of Monty On The Run (the C64 Orchestra version) and agreed with a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA licensed Poke 20 release of their remix. You are therefore free to download, copy, distribute their remix versions but it would be nice to give them a big up if you enjoy their work.

Normally I'm all for Creative Commons, but you can't just slap a BY-NC-SA license on a piece of copyrighted music. I've mentioned this to the label and they claim that since the Poke 20 album is based on the C64 Orchestra version they're in the clear.

Jan Lund Thomsen wrote: Normally I'm all for Creative Commons, but you can't just slap a BY-NC-SA license on a piece of copyrighted music. I've mentioned this to the label and they claim that since the Poke 20 album is based on the C64 Orchestra version they're in the clear.

So if someone covers a U2 Song, and I make a remix based on that cover, I should be able to sell my remixes for profit.

That does not sound right at all.

I read the notes on the site and this is where they mention this.

"Poke 20 is the sequel of the C64 Orchestra project in which a classical orchestra played newly arranged C64 game music, such as International Karate, Monty On The Run and Myth. In Poke 20 we re-returned the C64 Orchestra version of the Monty On The Run track to contemporary electronic composers and musicians to create their own remix version."

So its a Sequel??

Jan Lund Thomsen wrote:

vurtX wrote:Twenty-one musicians from around the globe have contributed their remix of Monty On The Run (the C64 Orchestra version) and agreed with a Creative Commons BY-NC-SA licensed Poke 20 release of their remix. You are therefore free to download, copy, distribute their remix versions but it would be nice to give them a big up if you enjoy their work.

Normally I'm all for Creative Commons, but you can't just slap a BY-NC-SA license on a piece of copyrighted music. I've mentioned this to the label and they claim that since the Poke 20 album is based on the C64 Orchestra version they're in the clear.

The record label simply doesn't know its arse from its elbow. The abstract music "Monty on the Run" is not cleared for CC, since any remix of Monty on the Run is under the jurisdiction of GEMA/BIEM/STEMRA/NCB/MCPS/whatever, simply because of what it covers. They have no publishing rights, or permission, to create a derivative work of Monty on the Run (the C64 Orchestra arrangement) which has different ownership or rights to the original tune, as far as I'm aware.

The only reason I haven't made a big deal about it is (a) there's no point, and (b) the CC licence they're hawking is "non-commercial use". But I'm very annoyed at the record label's attitude. Actually, that's always been true. For some reason they also claimed 50% publishing credit on some of Rob Hubbard's tracks, something MCPS is (slowly) looking in to. It sounds to me as if they think they can make up the rules as they go along, but if a lawyer was ever consulted about any of this and gave his approval, he should be fired.

Let's add that in to the dishonesty shown by another record label, the one behind "Output 64" and "Input 64" who have absolutely no right to be selling the album on iTunes, their contract to use the material having run out over five years ago (for Input 64) and last year (for Output 64), and who were supposed to be paying sales royalties on third party licencing anyway. And have they? What do you think?

Honestly, these record labels are just all about "OK, what can I get away with today". And then they have the audacity to complain about the big labels' dishonesty. In my experience, small labels are a heck of a lot more rampantly dishonest than major ones.

Sorry for the rant...

Chris