Subject: [removed] Digest V01 #194
From: <[removed]@[removed]>
Date: 6/17/2001 3:00 PM
To: <[removed]@[removed];

------------------------------


                      The Old-Time Radio Digest!
                         Volume 01 : Issue 194
                   A Part of the [removed]!
                           ISSN: 1533-9289


                           Today's Topics:

 shadow                               ["Harold Zeigler" <hzeigler@charter-]
 Gunsmoke - Radio v. TV               ["Mike Kerezman" <philipmarlowe@eart]
 Am or Are I?                         ["Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@]
 TV Comparison Have Gun, Will Travel  ["Mike Kerezman" <philipmarlowe@eart]
 Re: An easier approach to copyright  ["Doug Leary" <dleary@[removed];    ]
 Sorry Wrong Number Response          [OTRChris@[removed]                   ]
 Gunsmoke                             [Harry Bartell <bartell@[removed]]
 Carl Amari and OTR                   ["A. Joseph Ross" <lawyer@[removed].]
 Gunsmoke radio scripts on tv         ["Ryan Osentowski" <rosentowski@neb.]
 Re: Baby Snooks                      [Fred Berney <berney@[removed];      ]

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 18:39:48 -0400
From: "Harold Zeigler" <hzeigler@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject:  shadow

	Hi gang,
   I think the actor in question who played villains on the"Shadow" was a
ex-movie actor from the early thirtys who must have left hollywood for New
York radio work . He had a kind of raspy voice which made him a good villian
for radio.
   His name was Arthur Venton. We saw him last night in a movie with Sybil
Jason and Robert Armstrong. Guess what kind of part he played? I have never
read or heard anything about him all the years he was in New York radio.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 19:21:32 -0400
From: "Mike Kerezman" <philipmarlowe@[removed];
To: "Old Time Digest" <[removed]@[removed];
Subject:  Gunsmoke - Radio v. TV

bruce dettman wrote:

I do recall, however, that even on TV Matt didn't always give the other
guy(s) a fair chance when he thought the odds didn't favor it. In one
episode Chester and he hide outside a shack where Kitty has been
kidnapped by a trio of bad guys. When they wander outside Matt and
Chester, having given no warning,  simply mow them down. This probably
would never have happened in its later television history

The episode you refer to is a favorite of mine entitled "Kitty Caught"
originally broadcast on radio on October 16, 1954 almost a year before the
TV show premiered. What I've always disliked is TV's Dillion always seemed
too infallible Consider the Radio episode "The [removed]" from 1954 in which the
Bad buys get away. Another really gritty episode which shows Conrad's depth
is the episode "Bloody Hands" or "The Roundup" from the first season of the
Radio show.

A good example of this is detailed in the Gunsmoke: A Complete History by
Barabas (McFarland: 1990) where the 1954 radio episode "Helping Hand" was
changed when aired on  television. In the radio show Mr. Dillion tried help
a kid "Steve Elser from becoming an outlaw" (RSI Collection I own) by
encouraging him to find a job, while everyone including Ms. Kitty thinks he
making mistake and ultimately Elser does "go bad" even though Mr. Dillion
tried his best prevent it. In the TV version, Mr Dillion  doesn't want to
help him, but Kitty and others think Matt ought give kid a chance. When
Elser does go bad, Mr Dillion was in fact right about him and veryone else
was wrong. To me this give the appearance an infalliable Mr. Dillion instead
of Conrad portrayal of man with more character depth including making
mistakes.

sincerely,
Mike Kerezman
Oklahoma

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 19:21:29 -0400
From: "Stephen A Kallis, Jr." <skallisjr@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject:  Am or Are I?

Dan Panke, speaking of the RSI business and Mr. Amari, remarks,

If a person were to 'really' care about Old Time Radio, why would they
gain control of the rights and stop the 'free' circulation of said
material?<<

I can think of a lot of reasons that someone who might care about
something might find it desirable to gain control of program series.  I
have no idea whether RSI or Mr. Amari is motivated by any of these, but
as an example, suppose someone loves OTR and wants to make sure that any
talent involved is compensated for his or her efforts.  By gaining
control of a program, if funds are derived from their sale, a percentage
could be assigned to the talent.  _If that is the case_, then preventing
a no-cost exchange of programs would ensure that the talent would be
rewarded.

The person who cares is the person who digs through their archives,
pulls out an old broadcast,
digitizes it and posts it so the recording lives on.  Not someone who
claims rights to a product and sells it to you for [removed];<

Yes, but ... again ... if the person posting the broadcast is infringing
on someone's legitimate rights, then that's not right either, IMHO.

John Mayer observes,

I would suggest that acting first and waiting for copyright holders to
make themselves and their rights known may have proven to be the most
expedient way to acquire this [removed];<

There's a "yes, but" here too.  The postings in this Digest have
repeatedly claimed that dealers have received cease and desist letters
that are sufficiently vague so that the recipients had no idea which of
what shows they were offering were the protected ones.  This brings us
back to the original dilemma.  Such a situation places an intolerable
burden on a small dealer.  I'd noted,

"...the dealer is in the position of having to shut down completely to
comply, with no further input from the lawyers -- unless that dealer went
through a lengthy and not inexpensive procedure of doing the same kind of
copyright search that [Mr.] Amari did to be able to acquire the rights in
the first place."

If RSI or any other company or person holding rights to a program series
(or even individual show) provides the relevant information to a specific
dealer on a one-to-one basis, this is not the same as publishing a
complete listing of copyright holdings for public dissemination.  It does
not compromise corporate confidentiality since one dealer may have a
significantly different program inventory than another.  Thus, there is
no real reason involved with specific rights why a dealer shouldn't
receive a detailed list from MediaBay.

Stephen A. Kallis, Jr.

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 19:21:27 -0400
From: "Mike Kerezman" <philipmarlowe@[removed];
To: "Old Time Digest" <[removed]@[removed];
Subject:  TV Comparison Have Gun, Will Travel

I often have this discussion with my Dad regarding Radio and TV versions of
Have Gun, Will Travel. John Dehner (radio) vs. Richard Boone (TV)
respectively. My Dad who saw when it was originally on TV favors It while I,
having heard Dehner who is one of my favorite radio actors, for years. .

Yesterday I came across the following information on John Dehner on the web
about the show. It was mini-biography of John Dehner at a film site
[removed],+John which said Dehner was original choice
for the TV show but he had contract conflict with WB that prevented, but
nevertheless got to play it later on the radio. Anyway out there that knows,
could possibly verify this?

Sincerely,

Mike Kerezman

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 20:50:00 -0400
From: "Doug Leary" <dleary@[removed];
To: <[removed]@[removed];
Subject:  Re: An easier approach to copyright research?

John Mayer wrote,

...I would suggest that acting first and waiting for copyright holders to
make themselves and
their rights known may have proven to be the most expedient way to acquire
this information.

Well said! To put it another way, a person shouldn't be shot (or even shot
AT) for walking across unfenced property.

Hiding your rights is like hiding your fences. You are going to get
trespassers. And if you simply walk up to them on seemingly open land and
say, "I own this land, and most of the other land around here, but I'm not
going to tell you where, so to be on the safe side just go home and stay
there," it's not unreasonable to expect some of them to tell you EXACTLY
where you can stick it.

Doug Leary

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 22:21:51 -0400
From: OTRChris@[removed]
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject:  Sorry Wrong Number Response

Martin Grams, Jr.   writes:

The early broadcasts were actually done twice,
once for the East Coast, and a second time (usually about two hours later)
for the West Coast.

When SUSPESE aired in it's initial Wednesday night and then subsequent 
Tuesday Night  at 9:30PM EWT  slot 1942-43 I haven't found any evidence that 
there was in fact  a seperate  West Coast [removed] have provided evidence from 
radio logs as proof . At this time all the western stations were airing 
SUSPENSE at 6:30 PM PWT. 
What information can you offer that would suggest otherwise?
 
The initial airing is the one that had an error in it.
On the May 25, 1943 East Coast version

I maintain that this fluff was heard  coast to coast and not just in the EAST.
You only surmise that the  SUSPENSE announcer was referring only to an   
East Coast performance. He never once makes that claim . 

There does exist both the East Coast and West Coast version of
the May 1943 broadcasts, which feature the different endings.

I and others have suggested that someone has corrected the ending on one 
version by cleverly editing the ending . And unfortunately this has been 
passed off as a west coast version . Where there really isn't one.  
 
You had mentioned  that if we  listen to the 1957 and 1960 versions that iwe 
will discover that it is the exact same  show.
If you do the same with the East and supposed West Coast versions of the May 
25, 1943 versions you will discover the exact same thing.

I suppose I better rest my case before this runs as long as the copyright 
issue:   ) 


-Chris 

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2001 22:48:50 -0400
From: Harry Bartell <bartell@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject:  Gunsmoke

A key to the difference between the radio and TV versions of Gunsmoke
might be explained in a complaint by Jim Arness and Milburn Stone. The
earlier black -and-white   1/2 hour versions of the TV show were almost
all rewrites of the the radio scripts. Jim and Milburn were griping that
the writer didn't understand the characters. The writer was John Meston
who created the series.

One thing is for sure. It was a lot more fun to do the radio shows.

Harry Bartell

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 13:37:04 -0400
From: "A. Joseph Ross" <lawyer@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject:  Carl Amari and OTR

Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 16:58:54 -0400
From: "Dan Panke" <dpanke@[removed];

The person who cares
is the person who digs through their archives, pulls out an old broadcast,
digitizes it and posts it so the recording lives on.

And violates the rights of the people who own the intellectual property
involved.  Copyright infringement is theft.

Not someone who claims
rights to a product and sells it to you for profit.  I'm sure Wal-Mart
'cares' about all the products they sell as well.

Since he has to pay for the rights, and he spends money producing a
quality product, why shouldn't he be paid for his costs?  And since he
puts a lot of labor into it, why shouldn't he be paid for his work?  Why
shouldn't someone be able to make a career out of what he enjoys?

As George Burns said, "When you get up in the morning, it's very important
to love what you're going to do that day.  I never could make any money in
bed.  And I always envied my sister Goldie because she could."

Come to think of it, do you begrudge the fact that George Burns made large
sums of money doing what he liked to do?  Should the stars perform for
free?

I care about my clients, but that doesn't mean I'm not entitled to be paid
for representing them.

Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 20:29:34 -0400
From: "John <ayer" <mayer@[removed];

I would suggest that acting first and waiting for copyright holders to
make themselves and their rights known may have proven to be the most
expedient way to acquire this information.

It's also a good way to get into a lot of costly legal trouble.


 A. Joseph Ross, [removed]                        [removed]
 15 Court Square                     lawyer@[removed]
 Boston, MA 02108-2503      [removed]~lawyer/

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 13:37:06 -0400
From: "Ryan Osentowski" <rosentowski@[removed];
To: "old time radio" <[removed]@[removed];
Subject:  Gunsmoke radio scripts on tv

HI all:
Bruce commented on the early, black and white half-hour versions of Gunsmoke
on television.  Actually, many of these scripts were recycled from John
Meston's radio scripts.  The episode you mentioned about Kitty being
kidnapped was called, "Kitty Caught," and was broadcast in late 1954 on
radio Gunsmoke.  It was the episode where Chester spits at a rattlesnake to
make it go away.
RyanO


"It don't matter how a man [removed]'s how he lives that's important."
CPT. Augustus McCrae "Lonesome Dove"

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2001 16:54:56 -0400
From: Fred Berney <berney@[removed];
To: [removed]@[removed]
Subject:  Re: Baby Snooks

Tomorrow morning, Monday, I'm helping at a school that is teaching what OTR
is all about. I have the script of Baby Snooks dated November 1, 1946. It
is the Halloween story where Snooks and Daddy go out trick or treating
together.

At this late moment in time, I just thought it would be nice if I could
play a portion of the show for the students to hear. We are then going to
have them put on the show. This is a day program for kids. The course is a
week long and the class is only about an hour. So, this is very short and
sweet.

By any chance does anyone have that show? If so, could you convert it to
MP3 and email it to me, or if it is already on the net, just direct me to
its location. Thanks.
Fred
For the best in Old Time Radio Shows [removed]
New e-commerce page [removed]

--------------------------------
End of [removed] Digest V01 Issue #194
*******************************************

Copyright [removed] Communications, York, PA; All Rights Reserved,
  including republication in any form.

If you enjoy this list, please consider financially supporting it:
   [removed]

For Help: [removed]@[removed]
To Unsubscribe: [removed]@[removed]

For Help with the Archive Server, send the command ARCHIVE HELP
  in the SUBJECT of a message to [removed]@[removed]

To contact the listmaster, mail to listmaster@[removed]

To Send Mail to the list, simply send to [removed]@[removed]