My MOTOWN Pictures! [Archive] - SoulfulDetroit Forums

paul_nixon

08-26-2010, 03:50 AM

A few more...........

Marv 2,

While I think you are obviously a dedicated Motown fan I also believe that you have let your enthusiasm run away with itself here, technically you cannot collect other peoples property and many of these pictures are obviously copyrighted by the owners. In fact the 'today' shot of the Velvelettes belongs to me, was taken by me and is my copyright. Just downloading them is technically an offence and republishing them without the owners consent is an action that you can be taekn to task by law for. I would consider versy seriously before publishing other peoples property again. You could get into an awful lot of trouble over it. I am interestested to know how you got hold of it.

grapevine

08-26-2010, 07:44 AM

jsmith

08-26-2010, 07:45 AM

............. Martha & the Vandellas ............
632
....... ex Velvelette Betty Kelly is in the middle.

jsmith

08-26-2010, 08:09 AM

633
..... Martha yet again [[1971) .....
this time without the Vandellas

jsmith

08-26-2010, 08:15 AM

Florence Ballard & George Kerr in ABC's NY studio ..........
634

markb

08-26-2010, 08:23 AM

Marv 2,
You could get into an awful lot of trouble over it.

If a person hasn't gained some financial advantage - what are they going to be sued or prosecuted for?

Just curious to know.

MB

ExGuyParis

08-26-2010, 08:30 AM

Cindy subs for Flo at the Steel Pier in Atlantic City, NJ, August 1967. I remember being totally freaked out, thinking "Who is that person pretending to be Flo?" There was no announcement about the substitution. See more of my Steel Pier photos in my album on this site.

637

Diana at the stage door

638

MissLish

08-26-2010, 09:24 AM

MAN! I loved that. I will post more later. Fantastic!!

marv2

08-26-2010, 09:29 AM

Paul, i know what you mean. I have seen several pictures and artwork I've taken or created used on websites like myspace, etc to promote artists and things. I am not taking these pics home or selling them, just moved them from one page to another. But I will delete the one of the Velvelettes in this thread if you do not want to share it here. I will put one up I took in it's place, cool? Thanks.

marv2

08-26-2010, 09:40 AM

Paul, look now. I think they are gone now if I did it right. Thanks.

marv2

08-26-2010, 09:46 AM

The Velvelettes everybody!

luke

08-26-2010, 10:01 AM

OMG thanks everyone. Is that Mary Wells below the one of Diana in a Supremes dress?Is Diana solo? Never saw that one of Flo putting make up on.

ExGuyParis

08-26-2010, 10:57 AM

I love the Flo make up one... I'll dig out the shots of M&D from the same NY Times article.
This one cracks me up. You'd think they could at least get the names right!

642

marv2

08-26-2010, 11:12 AM

Motown Yesterday, Today and Forever........

captainjames

08-26-2010, 11:26 AM

Love the one of Diana at the stage door -Now that's rare.

jsmith

08-26-2010, 12:29 PM

.............. Marvin & Tammi .............
652

jeff9nyc

08-26-2010, 12:56 PM

I saw the Supremes at the Steel Pier gig in August of '67 too. I was 13 at the time and had the same reaction as I ran down the isle with my instamatic camera [[complete with flash cube) "Who's that lady? That's not Florence!?" Unfortunately, I had my pictures and negatives stolen from my locker at school. Seeing these brings me right back. They wore the same gold brocade gowns in an afternoon performance and the 3-tiered purple chiffon ones in the evening. I was luck enough to find their hotel [[the Seaside Hotel/Motel) and camped out there the next day. That shot of Diana leaving the dressing room is what she was wearing the day I saw her leave. Those earrings were gold with a gold "gemstone" in the center. Where are the other shots posted Marv2? They're a gift from the gods for me :-)

marv2

08-26-2010, 12:58 PM

The Motortown Revue......

marv2

08-26-2010, 12:59 PM

Paul Nixon, just saw your last question. How I got a hold of it? It is on the internet.

marv2

08-26-2010, 01:01 PM

1963 Motown Christmas Party

ExGuyParis

08-26-2010, 01:01 PM

marv2

08-26-2010, 01:03 PM

Jeff69nyc, I have a TON of 'em. I will post more if you like when I can get around to it. Thanks

midnightman

08-26-2010, 01:17 PM

LOL @ the Supremes' comic.

nomis

08-26-2010, 01:29 PM

wonderful pictures and memories thanks to everybody for sharing...hey Marv I really respect the way you took that photo down- its rare to see people respecting copyright these days...you were a real gentleman...

markb

08-26-2010, 01:38 PM

Marv

Please, please, please can you tell me the source of the group photo in Post 34.

I have an inkling that it is not a Motortown Revue - but the first Tamla Motown tour of the U.K. in 1965.

The line-up is right - and I am sure on that banner in the background you can see the first T of Tamla Motown.

The only colour photos I have seen previously were from the T.V. special they did.

Would really appreciate your comments and any additional info.

Thanks

MarkB

paul_nixon

08-26-2010, 01:56 PM

...wasn't your Velvelettes pic featured on the cover of one of the Chatbusters magazines ...Paul ...and I'm sure I've seen it on other sites previously ...on one occasion put up by yourself?

Grape :)

Exactly it was put up by myself and given to Chatbusters by ME...there are two things common to that and they are both ME

paul_nixon

08-26-2010, 01:59 PM

Paul Nixon, just saw your last question. How I got a hold of it? It is on the internet.

Thnaks for taking it down - I get a real bee in my bonnet about copywrite - I make part of my living from photography and people just seem to think they can publish [[and that includes putting it up on the internet) anybodies pictures. This is not the case.
Sorry if I offended you in anyway that was not the intention.

ExGuyParis

08-26-2010, 02:13 PM

Luke: Here are the other two that go with the Flo putting on makeup photo. November 27, 1966 - NY Times Magazine

655

656

A program from a performance at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. Ticket price $3.00!

657

A Cindy-era souvenir program, 1968. Peek-a-boo, Diana!

658

motown_david

08-26-2010, 02:19 PM

I love that photo of Mary, Martha and Annette with Dick Clark but where is Roz? Has she been cruelly snipped off the image? [[LOL)

ExGuyParis

08-26-2010, 02:28 PM

You've Gotta Have Hart...

659

tomato tom

08-26-2010, 02:54 PM

Great Pics!! though I agree with the copywright issues....Paulo XXX

grapevine

08-26-2010, 03:05 PM

Marv 2,

While I think you are obviously a dedicated Motown fan I also believe that you have let your enthusiasm run away with itself here, technically you cannot collect other peoples property and many of these pictures are obviously copyrighted by the owners. In fact the 'today' shot of the Velvelettes belongs to me, was taken by me and is my copyright. Just downloading them is technically an offence and republishing them without the owners consent is an action that you can be taekn to task by law for. I would consider versy seriously before publishing other peoples property again. You could get into an awful lot of trouble over it. I am interestested to know how you got hold of it.

...wasn't your Velvelettes pic featured on the cover of one of the Chatbusters magazines ...Paul ...and I'm sure I've seen it on other sites previously ...on one occasion put up by yourself?

Grape :)

Exactly it was put up by myself and given to Chatbusters by ME...there are two things common to that and they are both ME

...Paul ...I'm a little confused ...?

...many Motown fans looking for images of their favourite artists online ...will surf the net ...take The Velvelettes as a good example ...let's try looking in Google Images ...

http://tinyurl.com/3352web

...they find an image they like ...right-click to save to their PC ...keep it for their own use ...or post here for all to see ...as below ...a perfectly innocent action I would have thought ...and not liable for the threatening stance you take above ...or maybe not...?

I often wonder ...if artists and photographers do not want their work sampled from the net ...then I would have thought ...they shouldn't put them up for all to see ...and download ...in the first place ...but then again ...as usual with these matters ...I am most probably 100% wrong...?

...as Brian Wilson sung ...I Just Wasn't Made For These Times

Grape :)

ExGuyParis

08-26-2010, 05:50 PM

More TV:

666

667

668

669

tamla617

08-26-2010, 06:27 PM

royb
i think you're right,that looks like the press shots taken before/after the atv/london redifusion show ready,steady go tamla motown special

tamla617

08-26-2010, 06:41 PM

on the copywrite thing.........copywrite is copywrite.if a person has copywrite he/she can do what they want with the stuff,thats the point.i paint [[airbrush)all i've got to do is the c in a circle and my name and i've nailed it for ever and at no cost to me.it isnt the property of anyone else to do what they want with it,even, i say again, even if i sell the picture i still have the copywright unless i sell the copywrite aswell and that would be more money.but with the way the net is its a nightmare,its all there to be found copied and redistributed.the only right way is to seek permision from the copywrite holder to use the image

luke

08-26-2010, 07:41 PM

Thanks ex guy! Who is next to Wanda at XMAS party? Wasnt that Steel Pier engagement when they tried the billing "The Supremes with Diana Ross"?

marv2

08-26-2010, 09:59 PM

Thanks ex guy! Who is next to Wanda at XMAS party? Wasnt that Steel Pier engagement when they tried the billing "The Supremes with Diana Ross"?

That's one I've had for a loooonnnnggg time, LOL! Left to right in that picture is Claudette Robinson, Diane Ross and Wanda Rogers. There are many other shots taken at that party at the Greystone Ballroom, one of which Diana Ross used in her video for the song "Missing You" in 1984.

pj1

08-26-2010, 10:02 PM

Marv

Please, please, please can you tell me the source of the group photo in Post 34.

Would really appreciate your comments and any additional info.

Thanks

MarkB

Mark,

One place to find that photo is on pg 13 of "The Motown Story' @ 1981, 1982, 1983 Orbis Publishing Ltd. First published in Great Britain by Orbis Publishing Limited, London 1985.
Editors: Ashley Brown & Michael Heatley
The caption beneath the photo merely states: " The array of Motown stars in a typical Sixties package tour". It then identifies groups [[not members) and Stevie Wonder by color of clothing worn.
Of course the yellow Tamla-Motown banner is a dead give-away, and one can see Earl Van Dyke in the back left corner behind the Temptations.

ExGuyParis

08-26-2010, 10:49 PM

Wasnt that Steel Pier engagement when they tried the billing "The Supremes with Diana Ross"?

Yes Luke, that's right.

680

681

My friend Colleen and I were not pleased about the name change!

ExGuyParis

08-26-2010, 11:55 PM

I wish this newspaper article had not been fiction!

686

ExGuyParis

08-27-2010, 12:09 AM

From Record World, August 12, 1967. [[I really wish they had invented invisible Scotch tape before I stared my Supremes scrapbook!)

687

nomis

08-27-2010, 12:16 AM

Exguy- your collection is wonderful thank you for sharing keep them coming..

ExGuyParis

08-27-2010, 12:19 AM

688

as opposed to "The Inhuman Side"?

ExGuyParis

08-27-2010, 12:56 AM

Tuesday, September 26, 1967:

689

690

It is fascinating to read the all the printed conflicting stories about Flo's departure. Examples:

"People are talking about the rumor about the Supremes really being true - Florence is gone."
[[September 1967) - "Illness Causes the Supremes to Split: Florence is under a doctor's care for exhaustion and will not be able to work for a long while. Whether Cindy will be permanent or not is as yet undecided."
[[September 1967) - "Florence has quit, possibly permanently, and gone home to Detroit for a rest. The trio's personal manager says she's simply worn out, that the grueling schedule mapped out for this fall and winter would be too much For Florence, the oldest member." [yeah, she was ancient - 23 or so?]
Hit Parader: "Recently Florence left the Supremes to go into the antique business. She will be replaced by Cindy Birdsong of Patty Labelle & The Blue Bells [sic]."
"Supreme Loss: Florence Ballard of the Supremes has quit the singing group for reasons of ill health. She has been hospitalized at Ford Medical Center in Detroit, but there has been no word as to the nature of her illness."
"The Supremes are now called 'Diana Ross and The Supremes'... Motown Records claims Miss Ballard left because she was tired of traveling. Others claim she did not like the new billing.

markb

08-27-2010, 03:51 AM

royb
i think you're right,that looks like the press shots taken before/after the atv/london redifusion show ready,steady go tamla motown special

Mark,

One place to find that photo is on pg 13 of "The Motown Story' @ 1981, 1982, 1983 Orbis Publishing Ltd. First published in Great Britain by Orbis Publishing Limited, London 1985.
Editors: Ashley Brown & Michael Heatley
The caption beneath the photo merely states: " The array of Motown stars in a typical Sixties package tour". It then identifies groups [[not members) and Stevie Wonder by color of clothing worn.
Of course the yellow Tamla-Motown banner is a dead give-away, and one can see Earl Van Dyke in the back left corner behind the Temptations.

Thanks very much for your comments & information.

I am very interested in this period when the Tamla Motown label was first set up in the U.K. But somehow I missed this picture up to now.

I don't think it was taken at the T.V. studios as the Supremes outfits are different.

For the T.V. special the Supremes wore those fantastic red fringed dresses [[see below). So I am guessing that this photo may have been taken at some other location.

Thanks again.

MarkB

http://www.soul-source.co.uk/soulforum/uploads/1235515609/gallery_6836_1066_189355.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7L_gsVbwUk

paul_nixon

08-27-2010, 05:25 AM

Grape I will answer your question with another example.
By your stance on this subject you obvioulsy condone bootlegging. For this is surely what goes on when an individual copies an author or artists work without permission and publishes it again themselves for or not for profit - there is no difference. As far as it being up there for all to see and take does that apply to everything, you can walk into a record store or any store and there are goods 'up there for all to see and take' are the store saying help yourself for free, use it as you will we don't care we are not in this to make a living? Of course they are not your reasoning is flawed and is protected by law. Any picture posted here or indeed piece of writing or music track if it is not owned by the poster/publisher could land them in an awful lot of trouble. I once heard of a newspaper who took a picture offline and used it without the owners consent and they settled out of court for several thousand pounds.

...Paul ...I'm a little confused ...?

...many Motown fans looking for images of their favourite artists online ...will surf the net ...take The Velvelettes as a good example ...let's try looking in Google Images ...

http://tinyurl.com/3352web

...they find an image they like ...right-click to save to their PC ...keep it for their own use ...or post here for all to see ...as below ...a perfectly innocent action I would have thought ...and not liable for the threatening stance you take above ...or maybe not...?

I often wonder ...if artists and photographers do not want their work sampled from the net ...then I would have thought ...they shouldn't put them up for all to see ...and download ...in the first place ...but then again ...as usual with these matters ...I am most probably 100% wrong...?

...as Brian Wilson sung ...I Just Wasn't Made For These Times

Grape :)

grapevine

08-27-2010, 06:38 AM

Paul ...I don't condone bootlegging ...but on this matter ...are we saying that every poster here is the 'author' or 'artist' of the pics they have posted ...and if not ...they may be persued in the courts...? ...I don't think so...!

...many of these pics here have been seen over and over ...and become after time 'public property' ...IMHO

...we obviously don't see eye to eye on this one...!

Grape :)

paul_nixon

08-27-2010, 07:22 AM

In 99 per cent of the cases here everyone is open to prosecution if the original owner/author [[ and I mean by that the photographer/writer) had sight of these postings and cared to proceed they would win every time. If I get a picture published in a magazine I cannot legally scan the cutting of that magazine and put it up on a website - I have to buy a license in order to do so and it's my work.
Helping yourself to soemone elses work and publishing/posting it is just like bootlegging - there is no difference it's theft.

snakepit

08-27-2010, 07:43 AM

How does affect me doing CDrs of my CDs?
Or cassette tapes ?

This is confusing to me......if SDF software allows posters to attach links to pictures, i.e album covers , label scans etc... then what can we download here?

What about all the good work done on MT?

paul_nixon

08-27-2010, 07:47 AM

In theory that is also an infringement of copyright but I believe there is a train of thought that allows you to make 'back up' copies of material you have bought for your own personal use

ExGuyParis

08-27-2010, 07:55 AM

http://rising.blackstar.com/heres-why-you-should-add-your-name-and-copyright-notice-when-posting-photos-o.html

A few interesting facts on photography copyright.

snakepit

08-27-2010, 08:07 AM

Just to clear my head.........have SDF cleared all the copyright with owners on each of the Bette Lavette pictures montage on the SDF main site?

ExGuyParis

08-27-2010, 08:08 AM

And as far as most of the photos here, which were taken in the US... I'm not a lawyer, but it sound like they would fall in the "public domain" arena.

http://www.llrx.com/features/bloggersbeware.htm

theboyfromxtown

08-27-2010, 08:15 AM

This thread has made it clear to us that the lines of legality are somewhat "blurred". If the source of the material can be identified, then the poster is potentially vulnerable to a law suit.

There may also be different rules for different territories as can be seen from the thread on the main forum discussing royalties from PPL.

Albeit I am biased towards my buddy, I have to say that he supports anything Motown. However, as a matter of courtesy, I always let him know before I suggest any of his pictures. But then that is easy for me because I can contact him easily.

Marv added his personal details to his NYC Velvelettes picture so it makes it clear that it is his picture - a view supported by Tamla617.

We need to get jobeterob to give a view....unremunerated, of course!

pj1

08-27-2010, 08:37 AM

[Thanks very much for your comments & information.

I am very interested in this period when the Tamla Motown label was first set up in the U.K. But somehow I missed this picture up to now.

I don't think it was taken at the T.V. studios as the Supremes outfits are different.

For the T.V. special the Supremes wore those fantastic red fringed dresses [[see below). So I am guessing that this photo may have been taken at some other location.

Thanks again.

MarkB

http://www.soul-source.co.uk/soulforum/uploads/1235515609/gallery_6836_1066_189355.jpg

Life sure is funny! The front cover of the book in question includes a pose in those dresses!
There the placement is Mary, Diana, Florence.

snakepit

08-27-2010, 08:43 AM

John Lester

Copyright issues...
Be careful ........you could be sued by the lawyers representing Eddie Holland & the estate of Norman Whitfield

theboyfromxtown

08-27-2010, 09:42 AM

Snakepit

I hope not...but you have a very valid point. I perhaps ought to ask Ralph what I should do about that.

Did you read my post on MT about those album mockups that were up for auction at the exhibition in Spetember 1990? I loaned my winning bid of the alternate cover for the David & Jimmy Ruffin for the recent release. Clearly, I'm probably one of the most "vulnerable" despite having no dishonourable intentions. This is gettting a bit scary for me now. The last thing I ever wanted to do is upset anyone or cause offence.

markb

08-27-2010, 10:25 AM

The last thing I ever wanted to do is upset anyone or cause offence.

Surely there is a bit of scaremongering going on here.

I would like to see some case law.

i.e. who, at the lower end of the food chain has been prosecuted, and in which country, and for what, and what punishment was meted out.

I would have thought that any lawyer in this field would be aiming far higher and for much bigger returns.

MarkB

marybrewster

08-27-2010, 10:48 AM

ExParisGuy: Thank you for sharing all of your wonderful pictures. Many of them I have never seen and it is a 'supreme' treat. Thank you.

Now, I'm not trying to stir up the pot and I'm not trying to call anyone out, but I am a little confused on this whole copyright issue, especially by what Paul Nixon is stating. I did a quick seach and came upon the following from "theboyfromxtown" regarding the Supremes Quad album, posted on the old SDF forum. Can someone explain what the difference is?

Anyway boys, we have talked about this album so many times over the years on SDF and you clever people might want to do a search through the archives. Now if you do that search, you will see that SDF posters wanted me to put my album on to a cd format and I did that [[well , I didn't do it Paul Nixon did it for me).

Who owns the rights to the Supremes Quad album?

theboyfromxtown

08-27-2010, 11:20 AM

Marybrewster

You've taken the basic argument and brought it down to an individual case involving me and Paul to potentially undermine our views. But that's OK. I'll answer you.

Certainly not me or Paul Nixon own the rights. And if either of us are guilty of doing wrong, then we will accept it and deal with the consequences. We are no different to anybody else.

theboyfromxtown

08-27-2010, 11:32 AM

MarkB. It's like with many issues, it's only when there are identifiably large monies at stake that it becomes AN issue. Over in the UK, one of those monthly glossies got real upset about pics of their latest Jordan aka Katie Price "private" extravaganza appearing in print in their chief rival's magazine at the same time.

As regards my user name, if anyone wants me to clear it with Eddie Holland and the Estate of Norman Whitfield, then help me with an address and I'll ask them. And if they say no, I'll stop immediately. Meanwhile, I have Ralph's confirmation to continue with my username.

snakepit

08-27-2010, 11:43 AM

John

I was only joking of course.....

I think Ralph should remove this thread.........

marybrewster

08-27-2010, 11:44 AM

aboyfromxtown:

As I mentioned, it's not my intention to stir up the pot or cause trouble. I certainly didn't mean to upset you, if I did, I apologize. I'm not trying to undermine anyone. But it's tough to read stuff like this when it's a case of "do what I say, and not as I do". Why is it that what's good for some isn't good for others?

Reread some of the posts and you'll know exactly what I'm talking about.

marybrewster

08-27-2010, 11:47 AM

And my apologies again, I mean THEboy, not Aboy.

Additionally, you are right. We ALL do it. So in essence, there really is no issue at all. Marv can snatch his pictures and Paul can burn his CD's.

Amen.

theboyfromxtown

08-27-2010, 12:00 PM

Marybrewster - This is the opinion that has just been given to me by a UK legal person who tells me this. I belong to a soul music club [[ie SDF) and since I offered those tracks to club members, there would be no problem. It's what is expected to happen in a specialised music club.

Not sure I am totally happpy with that response myself, to be honest. If I had Beatles unreleased masters, I'm sure Paul and Ringo wouldn't approve of anyone sharing them on youtube.....which is also members isn't it?

I hope that everyone understands that I try to be fair in any of my responses. But if I am wrong, please just tell me. I am more than happy to be put right.

theboyfromxtown

08-27-2010, 12:24 PM

Snake-You know me, I'm an accountant and I kind of feel that I have to be SEEN to be whiter than white. Yeah, I am human too and I do have a lot of grey days. And it is true that I make mountains out of molehills. My mum tells me it all the time. But that's me. I am too old to change now. I am glad you didn't mean anything untoward and I can only offer as an excuse, my OTT interpretation of accountancy training that makes me think, well I better do what's right and put it out in the open and face the consequences now before it gets any worse.

Marybrewster- I can honestly and truthfully say it didn't even occur to me that I was doing one thing and preaching another. But when you brought it to my attention, I realised you had a very valid point. I would hope that we can all agree that I had no bad intentions when I offered to send copies of the Supremes Japanese LP to a few of the guys in much the same way that there were no bad intentions when Marv set up this thread or when Grape does the business like only Grape can do. I will definitely take on board what you said, but I'm no angel and I do fail sometimes. Of course, I would hope it would stop me from ever doing it again.

jillfoster

08-27-2010, 12:30 PM

Grape I will answer your question with another example.
By your stance on this subject you obvioulsy condone bootlegging. For this is surely what goes on when an individual copies an author or artists work without permission and publishes it again themselves for or not for profit - there is no difference. As far as it being up there for all to see and take does that apply to everything, you can walk into a record store or any store and there are goods 'up there for all to see and take' are the store saying help yourself for free, use it as you will we don't care we are not in this to make a living? Of course they are not your reasoning is flawed and is protected by law. Any picture posted here or indeed piece of writing or music track if it is not owned by the poster/publisher could land them in an awful lot of trouble. I once heard of a newspaper who took a picture offline and used it without the owners consent and they settled out of court for several thousand pounds.

From a strict moral standpoint [[not legal) the difference is that when taking a photograph, you are capturing a moment in time using a machine, and not creating something from your own mind, or with your own hands, or with own voice. Does the cameraman on a TV show own the rights to such show? Of course not. All photography, IMO should be a "work for hire" proposition... but for some reason, many people want to do something once, and get paid for it for all eternity over and over again. Cal Street could be sued by you if SHE sold that photo, but of course, you wouldn't dare. It's my opinion that at the very least, copyright law should be changed so as to grant unlimited rights to use of a photograph by the people who are actually IN the photograph, but you won't see that happen anytime soon. So what he saying, Grape... is he want us to pay him to look at his pictures of the Velvelettes. I wonder if the gals get a cut. You can bet they don't.

paul_nixon

08-27-2010, 12:39 PM

Of course I see the point here - however I was doing soemone afavour by making them a back up copy of an album they had bought legally and I believe that I posted before that this was a grey area of copyright but believed to be allowed. I haven't posted soemone elses work anywhere as far as I am aware

paul_nixon

08-27-2010, 12:40 PM

But I wouldn't sue Cal - not only is she a friend but I took the picture for her and gave her permission to use it wherever she wanted but being a firiend she always ask if she can use it for promotion and that's the point she ASKS and please don't give the the bull that photography is pressing a button - tell that to Lord Snowdon will you.
And where have I mentioned paying for looking at a picture?

From a strict moral standpoint [[not legal) the difference is that when taking a photograph, you are capturing a moment in time using a machine, and not creating something from your own mind, or with your own hands, or with own voice. Does the cameraman on a TV show own the rights to such show? Of course not. All photography, IMO should be a "work for hire" proposition... but for some reason, many people want to do something once, and get paid for it for all eternity over and over again. Cal Street could be sued by you if SHE sold that photo, but of course, you wouldn't dare. It's my opinion that at the very least, copyright law should be changed so as to grant unlimited rights to use of a photograph by the people who are actually IN the photograph, but you won't see that happen anytime soon. So what he saying, Grape... is he want us to pay him to look at his pictures of the Velvelettes. I wonder if the gals get a cut. You can bet they don't.

jillfoster

08-27-2010, 12:56 PM

But I wouldn't sue Cal - not only is she a friend but I took the picture for her and gave her permission to use it wherever she wanted but being a firiend she always ask if she can use it for promotion and that's the point she ASKS and please don't give the the bull that photography is pressing a button - tell that to Lord Snowdon will you.
And where have I mentioned paying for looking at a picture?

Ah, I see... she can use it for promotion, but nobody else can. Since these are elderly women with only two hit records under their belt [[more than 40 years ago), I'd think they'd need all the exposure they can get. A "friend" might realize that and be glad their work is being admired and helping to promote the career of said friend. When I design a landscape, if someone copies a design I've done in their own yard, I'm flattered they think my taste is something to be emulated. I don't ask for royalties..... and I have no legal basis to, because landscape designers don't have lobbying power in congress to get laws passed. But I wouldn't care if there were laws, as I'm a generous spirit. I believe when you are generous to others, it comes back to you.

theboyfromxtown

08-27-2010, 12:59 PM

jillfoster

I love your posts so I dont want you to think me being unfair or unkind. But I have to say that of all people, Paul has been one who has given more than anybody, to the Velvelettes. I can assure you that Paul hasn't made one penny from any of his photographs on the ladies and has even paid out for stuff for them with his own money. He put together some wonderful flyers which the ladies were able to offer to fans and all those proceeds went to the ladies. With Paul, I hope it can be accepted that it was an example which was the exception to the rule.

How fitting is that for a Big Velvelette fan to end one of his testimonies for the day!

paul_nixon

08-27-2010, 01:05 PM

Ah, I see... she can use it for promotion, but nobody else can. Since these are elderly women with only two hit records under their belt [[more than 40 years ago), I'd think they'd need all the exposure they can get. A "friend" might realize that and be glad their work is being admired and helping to promote the career of said friend. When I design a landscape, if someone copies a design I've done in their own yard, I'm flattered they think my taste is something to be emulated. I don't ask for royalties..... and I have no legal basis to, because landscape designers don't have lobbying power in congress to get laws passed. But I wouldn't care if there were laws, as I'm a generous spirit. I believe when you are generous to others, it comes back to you.

Exactly you have proved my point and I'm sure is she is reading this she will be pleased to be described as elderly

theboyfromxtown

08-27-2010, 01:05 PM

Now hang on you two, I know you both think quicker than me....and I can't keep up!

marybrewster

08-27-2010, 01:11 PM

theboy and Paul:

Thanks for your responses. It's wonderful to have an intelligent, constructful conversation. We all can learn from one another; I ceratinly appreciate your thoughts. I know this got way off topic, but it is a valid "argument" to the music business.

Cheers to both of you.

theboyfromxtown

08-27-2010, 01:14 PM

.....these are elderly women with only two hit records under their belt........

jillfoster....would you allow an extra half for a "There He Goes" as it was a local hit in Michigan and Chicago.

Plus, none of the ladies are elderly. In fact, they all freely admit to being "39 and still holding" !!

paul_nixon

08-27-2010, 01:16 PM

You are more than welcome - fun isn't it?

theboy and Paul:

Thanks for your responses. It's wonderful to have an intelligent, constructful conversation. We all can learn from one another; I ceratinly appreciate your thoughts. I know this got way off topic, but it is a valid "argument" to the music business.

Cheers to both of you.

theboyfromxtown

08-27-2010, 01:17 PM

Marybrewster

I am very humbled by your response....in fact, for some unknown reason, I have got water in my eyes....you've made me feel really good about myself. Thank you most sincerely.

marybrewster

08-27-2010, 01:23 PM

Paul:

Maybe jillfoster meant "elderly women who are still out there, pleasing audiences, doing what they love and do best"? When you think of it, it's pretty remarkable that you have all original group members from a group that started 6 decades ago. These women found time to record, tour, marry, have children, have careers.....whew! You'd think Cal and Co. would just want to put their feet up and wait on their Social Security checks? They certainly deserve it. But nope, they get out there and do their thang. Good on them. I hope when I'm their age that I can still cut it up.

paul_nixon

08-27-2010, 01:38 PM

Hey MaryB I'm up here with you with every admiration for these gorgeous gals BUT they are only a few years older than me and if you called me elderly I'd be really tee - d off

marybrewster

08-27-2010, 02:10 PM

How about "seasoned"?

;)

jillfoster

08-27-2010, 04:09 PM

I said elderly, sweeties... not feeble. What would you call them? Middle aged? My elderly mother helped me pour some concrete this spring, and those Velvelettes are impressive for singing and boogeying their butts off at their age. But it don't change the fact that they are old. It happens to everybody, you know. I remember when Martha was rehearsing and they were playing a song too fast, she stopped them and told them to slow it down some... she said "I'm an old woman, don't rush me"... right out loud. that's what I like, someone to tell it like it is. Gettin old ain't no picnic, but denying it's happening don't change anything.

theboyfromxtown

08-27-2010, 04:25 PM

Jillfoster

I guess you won't let me have the extra half a point for "There He Goes"! So how about a quarter of a point for the Battle of the Bands concert? LOL

Milly is a bit like Martha in that respect! That can be interesting because Milly is a stunning looking woman, by any one's standards. However, Cal insists on being "39 and still holding". What a contrast. I honestly don't have a clue of Cal's real age and I just would never dream of asking her either.

Tell your mum, there's a few holes on my estate that could use her talents if she has an hour to spare!

honest man

08-27-2010, 05:24 PM

does a colour picture exist of the supremes with ed sullivan, please been searching for years. any offers cheers.

ExGuyParis

08-27-2010, 05:59 PM

Amazing photos by Francesco Carli of Diana performing in October 2009. Track Francesco down on facebook to see more!

704

705

706

jillfoster

08-27-2010, 06:26 PM

Yes, John.. you get your extra half a point!! LOL I'll give you two if you can come up with any pictures of Lou Christie in his underwear.

theboyfromxtown

08-27-2010, 06:35 PM

Jillfoster

Did you see those 72 pictures for sale on ebay? Well guess what stalker went for them...and I'm told there's a further 14 there!

I know why you say TWO points, cos it's said Lou don't wear them!

Just the thought of it *swoons and falls flat on floor*

theboyfromxtown

08-27-2010, 06:39 PM

This is from another group that I am a member of..

http://www.spectropop.com/gallery/v/Boys/Various/Lou+Christie.jpg.html

Please help me...give me strength! And I don't care if I do die!

MissLish

08-27-2010, 07:12 PM

Not only does it happen to everyone, Miss JillFoster; it's kinda the goal; ain't it? Miss Lish has never understood folks being all sensitive about their age; folks should embrace their age, and we should all celebrate their durability; no? Just sayin'.

jillfoster

08-27-2010, 09:01 PM

No, I DIDN'T see them!! holy crap, WE'll have to discuss this!

juicefree20

08-27-2010, 10:09 PM

Very, VERY nice!!!

Thanks for sharing!

marv2

08-28-2010, 01:42 AM

You're welcome Juice! Hey, I have this great pic of you and LadyV, you want me to email you?

juicefree20

08-28-2010, 03:01 AM

Marv

Anytime. keep 'em coming. As for the pic of my mug, while not as wonderful as the pictures you've been posting, I'd appreciate it.

marv2

08-28-2010, 05:57 PM

I will keep the hits coming! That pic of you and V is great. I'll send it buddy.

marv2

08-28-2010, 07:30 PM

Motown Allstars.....

marv2

08-28-2010, 10:12 PM

More, more, more of my favorites!

marv2

08-29-2010, 02:58 AM

More Motown Memories........

ExGuyParis

08-29-2010, 03:18 AM

A few more of Francesco Carli's photos from October 2009 at the at the Symphonica in Rosso concert. Gorgeous!

775

776

777

marv2

08-29-2010, 09:28 AM

Motown Legends........

marv2

08-29-2010, 09:49 AM

Still more y'all..........

jonc

08-29-2010, 12:28 PM

Great photos Marv2. Those Getty Images pictures must have cost you a fortune to license. Thanks for sharing.

marv2

08-30-2010, 11:26 PM

Would you all like to see more of My MOTOWM Pictures? Sure you would.........LOL!

kalisa

08-31-2010, 10:39 AM

marv2... thanks for sharing all these great pictures!!

re: the copyright issue on them. Since most of them were gotten from the internet, would it be more acceptable to post a link to the actual site than to post the picture in question? Just wondering. I've heard in the past that it wasn't good to post a link, causing too much traffic on a site. So many pictures that I've saved from the 'net over the years are like 3rd generation or more [[gotten from someplace who got them somewhere else who 'stole' them from the original site etc.) I'm also wondering when "public domain" comes into play.

re: the picture [[one of my favorites!) of the Tempts that is "Hitsville Rehearsal 1966") [[with David in forefront with pink plaid pants and dark blue shirt), could you or someone please name all the NON-Tempts in the photo? I'm sorry, I haven't figured out how to post actual images here yet.

marv2

08-31-2010, 01:14 PM

Hi Kalisa and thanks. I am guessing here but the big man standing looks like Maurice King. The guy kneeling in the black shirt looks like Harvey. The guy standing next to Otis, no clue. Way in the back the woman looks like either Tammi Terrell or Mrs. Edwards [[Esther Gordy). The kid sitting, no clue.

marv2

09-01-2010, 09:48 AM

We remember.........

topdiva1

09-01-2010, 01:31 PM

Marv, Marv, Marv - GREAT SHOOTS THANKS FOR SHARING - Why are these fans talking about copyrights???? Just enjoy the pics!!!!!!

marv2

09-01-2010, 03:29 PM

You are welcome Topdiva! Where have you been? I would add more if people want to see them.

topdiva1

09-01-2010, 05:43 PM

Great pictures - even greater memories. Thanks Marv!!!

marv2

09-02-2010, 01:09 AM

You know what time it is........ It's time for more pictures!!!!

motown_david

09-02-2010, 06:37 AM

Love the pix of the Original Vandellas - Annette and Roz. Many thanks for those and also for the Kim piccie with the outrageous wig!! [[LOL)

theboyfromxtown

09-02-2010, 08:26 AM

David...a wig! Well, I never..I thought it was a bird's nest!

motown_david

09-02-2010, 11:56 AM

LOL, Mr Lester. I've heard that the wig was made from Lou Christie's surplus chest hair - of which there was plenty!! My favourite Kim wig is the one she wore on Ready Steady Go as she glided down that staircase. Great memory.

marv2

11-09-2010, 10:06 PM

Hey remember.......

midnightman

11-09-2010, 10:26 PM

Great pics of the Motown greats. Hope more come through especially from Mr. Wonder, Marvin, the Marvelettes and the Vandellas.

marv2

11-09-2010, 11:23 PM

Great pics of the Motown greats. Hope more come through especially from Mr. Wonder, Marvin, the Marvelettes and the Vandellas.

Midnightman, stayed tuned. We may even able to get a "Platinum Thread" designation for this one! LOL!

luke

11-09-2010, 11:25 PM

Wow great pics Marv!Love pic of Kim in mink coat! Whos in one that looks recent, maybe some sort of MJ tribute?

marv2

11-09-2010, 11:41 PM

Luke do you mean the pic of Kim in a blue dress, turban and sunglasses? She is pictured with Freddie Gorman [[of the Originals) and Annette Helton [[of the Vandellas). I believe they were attending the HAL Awards.

marv2

11-10-2010, 12:25 AM

Here are few more for tonight.......

midnightman

11-10-2010, 01:09 AM

Midnightman, stayed tuned. We may even able to get a "Platinum Thread" designation for this one! LOL!

Lol cool. :)

REDHOT

11-10-2010, 09:17 AM

GREAT PICTURES, MORE,MORE,MORE
Thanks
Please stay oisitive

arrr&bee

11-10-2010, 03:09 PM

Wow great shots[the one of eddie and melvin is priceless]one of the best collections of motown pics i've seen....more,more!!!!

marv2

11-29-2010, 08:47 PM

Always more.......

marv2

11-29-2010, 09:02 PM

More of your favorites.....

drlorne

11-30-2010, 12:03 AM

Thanks Marv2-- what a treasure trove. The Diana Ross from the Symphonica in Rosso, in the blue gown with the spot light on her would make a great album cover. Is that Diana Ross and Berry Gordy as a young couple? My partner says not, wrong nose. I'll hate it if he's right --- I'm the DR expert in the house.
Thanks again, and keep them coming.
Lorne

marv2

11-30-2010, 12:09 AM

drlorne

11-30-2010, 12:45 AM

Thanks Marv2
Lorne

jobeterob

11-30-2010, 12:53 AM

Didn't see this before.

I'd just make a couple of comments. One is using pictures belonging to other people and passing them off as your own or as your property. That is essentially a moral and ethical issue. C'mon............this is Marv. He's the guy who was reporting half of the Soulful Detroit forum to Mary Wilson for years; someone he doesn't even know; he wrote on here that Berry Gordy killed Florence Ballard; he called me an asshole on Youtube. So, c'mon..........don't expect anything different now.

But secondly.........this is the age of downloading, youtube, napster, file sharing. I can get as far as questioning Marv's ethics and morals. But are we suggesting someone is going to sue Marv for publishing a picture on Soulful Detroit? Are we going to sue Soulful Detroit for publishing such a picture? As I believe Marv asked: What are the damages? You need to prove damages. These are heritage acts that 99% of the public does not even know. There are no damages. But there is a wrong being done that might warrant an injunction if somebody spent $30,000.00 to obtain it.

And then there is ethics and morals; Marv did the right thing in removing the picture or pictures. A complaint should have been made to the Forum Owner and Moderator to remove it.

marv2

11-30-2010, 09:10 PM

Motown, Yesterday, Today and Forever.........

jonc

11-30-2010, 09:19 PM

Motown, Yesterday, Today and Forever.........

Oh thank you so much for sharing theses gems with us Marv but it must cost you a fortune in royalty rights.

Getty and Wire Image are very costly stock photography houses and charge exorbitant fees. A loyal customer like you should insist that they remove their water mark logos next time you purchase from them.

jobeterob

12-01-2010, 06:17 PM

jonc

12-01-2010, 06:24 PM

Those WireImage and Getty Image shots are not cheap jobeterob. Marv2 seems to have a lot of rights managed photography in his collection. I'm only surprised they didn't remove their watermark logos after marv2 purchased them.

jobeterob

12-02-2010, 01:28 AM

Who are the guys with Berry?

Marv owns part of Getty; he's a wheel and can do as he wants cuz he's such a wheel.

reese

12-02-2010, 08:30 AM

Loved the pictures but I understand the complaints of those that have slower computers who say the loading goes on forever; they would open the thread and click out of it.

Who are the guys with Berry? One son??

How much does it cost for these pictures?

I think the one with the facial hair is Berry's son with Raynoma, Kerry Gordy. I don't recognize the other gentleman.