Houston '75



L. Bird pkeets at hotmail.com
Mon Jan 17 23:11:44 CST 2005


>The Who had nothing to do with making the video it was done by the venue,
hence the term "in-house video".  The venue owned the equipment and filmed
it themselves to use as a back projection.  It was no use to them afterwards
and it was soon forgotten about.

This would be an interesting court case.  These days The Who handle the 
filming for the projections screens, right?  So the video reels definitely 
belong to them.

If you're right about the venue paying to have the film made, then the venue 
owner would be the owner of the film and would be the one injured by the 
theft and sale of the tape.  However, I would suspect they might have 
charged The Who for the service, and in that case The Who would have paid 
for it, right?  Better go back through the books.  It might be necessary to 
prove ownership.


>Case in point, when the Who's Next outtakes showed up on the "Lifehouse to
Leeds" bootleg all kinds of wild tales  abound.  The story went that a
bootlegger paid someone $10,000 in a cloak & dagger deal right out of the
cold war for the tapes.  The truth is the tapes were sold at a "public"
Sothebys auction in London for $1,000, barely making the bottom end of the
estimated 500-700 pound value.

Hmmm.  But I gather The Who didn't sell them, right?  It seems like you 
could recover lost or stolen music recordings the same way you can lost or 
stolen art.  Isn't there a database these days that records these?


keets





More information about the TheWho mailing list