On 15 Oct 2002 at 23:01, kakki wrote: > Ack - sorry for my typos - long day and strong antibiotics ;-) > > Had another thought wondering if the record companies may have to > change the way they keep their records to some extent (and maybe some > have already) because what I've seen in the past is that it is very > difficult to do an audit for an individual artist, especially one who > has been with a company for a long time. Audits are often made more > difficult when the company has gone through a number of ownership > changes over the years and records are lost or purged or hard to find > because of the constant change in database, filing, recording, storage > systems, etc. Some speculate that the record companies like having > such "logistical difficulties" on their side in royalty disputes. My > bottom line - I think a number of artists have been ripped off or > perhaps misled to some degree or another. >
I think any artist contemplating an audit has to take action immediately after a successful release and before the dust clears - like the Dixie Chicks did (a huge part of their fight was Sony's lack of disclosure on manufacturing, foreign distribution and record club sales). Coming back a few years later is hard, although I recall Janet Jackson doing it successfully. Brenda -------------------------------------------- "Radio has no future" - Lord Kelvin, 1897
