Squeeze attemps to re-record its own songs were mentioned previously. Now we have more details:
If you are an artist or a writer, you’ll understand. Think about this: in 1994, John Fogerty of the legendary Creedence Clearwater Revival was taken to court by the publishers of his back catalogue (who were also his manager and label back in the day) on the grounds that one of his new songs sounded like an old one. What, an artist who sounds like himself? Luckily, he won (though he had to pay his own legal fees). That the case ever came to court effectively suggests a song becomes nothing more than a piece of property to those who own it, while the person who wrote it or recorded it becomes a small inconvenience.
The copyright debate is a valid one, and it has to be said that the lobbyists from the record companies are doing a fairly good job of trying to get music copyrights more universally recognised and respected – albeit for reasons of greed. However, the fact we do not (and never will) own the recordings of some of our best work is simply not fair. This is our small contribution to the copyright debate.
We can’t own the original recordings, but we can own flawless re-recordings that are the next best thing. We’re fortunate in that our songs have outlived both the original recordings and the restriction on re-recording them – and that we were financially able to have another go. Most bands don’t get that lucky.
via How Squeeze seized the keys to their back catalogue | Music | guardian.co.uk. (via Hypebot)