Sousa, the Phonograph, and Who Gets Paid
Got something to say to this podcast? Send a voicemail, and you might hear yourself on the next episode! Sousa’s recording-business paradox: Arthur Pryor’s conductor credit, a disputed definition of copying, the 1909 mechanical-license compromise, and Victor’s later use of the Sousa band name. AI-narrated; no archival audio. Sources and the Celibidache continuation are linked below. Recording credit: https://blogs.loc.gov/now-see-hear/2022/10/good-times-are-here-new-to-the-national-jukebox/ 1906 essay, modern transcription: https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/21m-380-music-and-technology-contemporary-history-and-aesthetics-fall-2009/18ab3aba9fe7aa1502a55cd049333659_MIT21M_380F09_read02_sousa.pdf 1908 Supreme Court opinion: https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/209/1 1906 testimony reproduced on p. 547: https://www.copyright.gov/about/office-register/ascap100.pdf 1909 Act: https://www.copyright.gov/history/1909act.pdf Victor correspondence reproduced by LOC: https://blogs.loc.gov/now-see-hear/2020/05/sousa-and-the-talking-machine/ Continue with Celibidache: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6PT7idX_N6M Historical law, not current royalty guidance. Cover: E. Chickering, Boston / 1900 / Library of Congress. Faithful inset and resize; portrait, not a recording session. https://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/94503159/
