Concert recordings.. - Page 2

CarylB · 25 Jul 2003, 16:44

FM I know you said you'd like to see more official releases .. although surely the reality, given what has been released in the last 25 years, and that this is Meat's last world tour, is that you won't. And I quoted one piece of your post to make a point, albeit a humourous one, about what you seemed to be saying .. ie people will make bootlegs if they want live recordings and these are not released officially.

This thread started because someone was asking others to tape Meat's concerts .. R has pointed out that Meat does not give permission for people to do this, and however much one might like to have records of live concerts, given they are not made available, it is only inevitable that a market in bootlegs opens up if people are prepared to go against this particular performer's wishes and carry this out.

It is inevitable sadly that we will have muggers of old people .. but it doesn't make it right. Who was it said that for evil to flourish all that is required is for good men to stand back and do nothing? So I tend to think on a board whichthis performer comes to, those of us who support and respect him should stand up and say this is wrong if we believe it to be so.

original sin · 26 Jul 2003, 21:55

uumm I don´t know what Meat´s views are on Bootlegs but I don't like the idea personally I think apart from poor quailty it is taking something away from the live venue experience and obviously money from both artist and venues which I doubt either would like.
ooohhhh hang on a moment thou´ its a bit like the only front row tickets going for 200quid+

plymboy · 27 Jul 2003, 09:06

how can the venue be losing money when we all paid £30 for a ticket,id say they made a lot of money from it.as has been said if trading bootlegs then money is not made,it is not selling or buying ( not a single penny changing hands.lets face some people agree with bootlegs some of us dont,at the end of the day trading is trading and that is not a money making business if no one is parting with cash.as ive also said im not here defending bootlegs i can just see both sides of the story.i would like to know how the venue itself loses money by people taping concerts.also how artists can be losing money via trading .

Tim · 27 Jul 2003, 11:21

Trading bootlegs is not wrong. Then you are not making money, and if you sell bootlegs well... it is possible, if you only count the money of the recordable disks and porto costs.

Think the site that Michel and I have is the most complete bootleg site at this moment. (but that is my opinion.)

The Butcher.

plymboy · 27 Jul 2003, 12:15

well said tim trading itself is not illegal as much as peoiple would like to think its a criminal act.selling is illegal beacuse thats when money comes into it( bootleggers are making the money while the artist loses out).i know people are still going to say trading is illegal( why is it) but its not.the dirty word in bootlegs is money,and that is far seperated from trading.

CarylB · 27 Jul 2003, 12:17

Tim wrote:

Quote:

Trading bootlegs is not wrong .....

As R has pointed out, the artist holds the copyright of any particular show, and unless he/she has given explicit permission to use the recorded material (radio broadcast as an example), the activity is illegal. He also pointed out that Meat has not given his permission for this. This would suggest to me that Meat does NOT endorse this activity, so a Meat Loaf fan would imo not consider the making of bootlegs at his concerts either legal or respectful of his wishes, nor would the trading of them be considered fair.

And once a bootleg leaves your hands "in trade" you have no control over whether it will be offered for sale, so trying to justify the activity by claiming it is for trade only is a specious argument frankly, and may well explain why those artists who withold permission do this. They have no control over the quality, and thus no control over something which may well be offered for public sale down the line, and often is. Just check eBay .. it abounds with these things.

Bootleg recordings of concerts are generally either
1) of a reasonable quality because they have been made by someone involved with the sound on stage, in which case this theft from the artist is a betrayal of trust
2) amateur and of poor sound quality, made by someone taking a portable recoding device into the audience, which is not only illegal without the artist's permission, but which in Meat's case will also be of a standard that will fall far short of that which he strives to deliver, and imo is a betrayal of loyalty

Bootleg copies of released material available for sale are also illegal

Tim then continued:

Quote:

Think the site that Michel and I have is the most complete bootleg site at this moment. (but that is my opinion.)

Does this not fly in the face of R's request?:

Quote:

Having said that, please respect that I do not want to see any direct or indirect links to bootlegged, ripped or any other copyrighted material in this or any other thread.

If it looks like an indirect link, walks like an indirect link, and quacks like an indirect link .. it probably IS an indirect link

CarylB · 27 Jul 2003, 12:23

plymboy wrote:

Quote:

well said tim trading itself is not illegal as much as peoiple would like to think its a criminal act.selling is illegal beacuse thats when money comes into it( bootleggers are making the money while the artist loses out).i know people are still going to say trading is illegal( why is it) but its not.the dirty word in bootlegs is money,and that is far seperated from trading.

The word "bootlegging" itself implies an illicit activity, and without the artist's permission you are stealing a performance to which he or she has copyright. Your illicitly obtained recording is therefore illegal.

And how can you say that once a "trade" has left your hands you have any control over whether it will be sold or not? Quite simply you can't .. well I suppose you can SAY that, but it is without any real basis of knowledge or certainty.

plymboy · 27 Jul 2003, 15:37

very verybtrue.once you have traded a bootleg tape/cd you have no control whatsoever.yes bootlegging is wrong,its illegal,its also too big a thing to stop ( altogether).whatever people think of bootlegging it wont be stopped( i dont think it can be).until record companies can give fans of meat( or any other recording artist) enough live material on cd then bootlegging will continue.going back to what i said you do not have any control over what happens to a recording once it has been traded with another person.

CarylB · 27 Jul 2003, 15:46

Which is why I would never illicitly record a concert, nor trade in or buy bootlegs.

I'm sure it won't be stopped completely, any more than car theft or muggings. But if no-one would buy stolen car radios there would be less incentive for thieves to steal them. And if Meat's fans refused to bootleg concerts, and to trade in or buy these, the market would take a knock!

plymboy · 27 Jul 2003, 19:18

yes youre right it wont be stopped completly( like any other crime) unfortunatley.there will always be a few fans that wont take any notice and bootleg a gig regardless of what is printed on a ticket.bootlegging will never go away so it is silly to think otherwise.

CarylB · 27 Jul 2003, 19:42

plymboy wrote:

Quote:

yes youre right it wont be stopped completly( like any other crime) unfortunatley.there will always be a few fans that wont take any notice and bootleg a gig regardless of what is printed on a ticket.bootlegging will never go away so it is silly to think otherwise.

Far be it from me to be silly .. however .. it would be nice to think that in a fan club forum which Meat takes the time, trouble and interest to visit, the fans in such a forum condemned the practice and disassociated themselves from it don't you think?

Bit of a slap in the face with a wet turbot if they don't imo

plymboy · 27 Jul 2003, 19:57

i agree with you .

Vickip · 27 Jul 2003, 20:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarylB

plymboy wrote:

Quote:

yes youre right it wont be stopped completly( like any other crime) unfortunatley.there will always be a few fans that wont take any notice and bootleg a gig regardless of what is printed on a ticket.bootlegging will never go away so it is silly to think otherwise.

Far be it from me to be silly .. however .. it would be nice to think that in a fan club forum which Meat takes the time, trouble and interest to visit, the fans in such a forum condemned the practice and disassociated themselves from it don't you think?

Bit of a slap in the face with a wet turbot if they don't imo

You're exactly right Caryl

Vicki

plymboy · 22 Nov 2003, 12:08

what do we all think of them ,good, bad .do they serve any real purpose to the fans.whay do you think meat would think of them.i know this may be a bit of a taboo subject but im just curious

original sin · 22 Nov 2003, 12:12

I think you'll find this subject has been discussed - you may find more if you try the the search function

Jayd · 22 Nov 2003, 12:14

I don't agree with the copying of original albums, but I do download and copy Live performances that I can't find on cd, as some are not available to buy.

evil nickname · 22 Nov 2003, 14:28

Whenever these kind of discussions come around, a lot of people seem not to understand what a bootleg is.
A bootleg is in the most accepted use of the word a not endorsed/'illegal' live recording or collection of unreleased tracks (demos, outtakes, etc).
A bootleg is not, or at least, not in these kind of discussions, a 'pirate' copy of a legal, commonly available album.

Whereas I find selling copies of albums morally questionable, I think that there is no harm in trading bootlegs. The content is not commercially available, and in most cases, only the die hard fans are interested. Selling bootlegs on the other hand, is an absolute no-no.

Tim · 22 Nov 2003, 16:06

Then i hope that people who don't like bootlegs don't go to the site that Michel and I have made!!!

Dave · 22 Nov 2003, 19:11

Well, again, I say Meat Loaf fans would all benefit from LiveDisc. I have heard them, I love them, they are awesome, and are what the fans who really appreciate the music want to have!!!

'Nuff Said!

ROCK ON LIVE DISC!!!

meatfan · 23 Nov 2003, 00:36

(Posted on "Favourite live songs" before I saw these posts)

Hear! Hear!

(I have a few very treasured Roy Orbison bootlegs in my possession!)

Most songs I have are on CD bought from shops/ebay/ etc. Bootlegs just enhance my collection! For every bootleg I probably have 20 or thirty of the genuine article!

I think there are likely to be NO fans of any artist who ONLY have bootlegs in their collection! Most bootlegs are inferior to the genuine article, and we get them to get a different slant on a song, or they are precious to us because we were at the concert where they were recorded.

I don't honestly think any artist is worse off because fans have bootlegs - they are an addition to, not a replacement for genuine songs.

Just my thoughts.

Heather.

plymboy · 23 Nov 2003, 21:52

well what aturn around not so long ago it was quite the opposite.some ppl were saying that they shouldnt exist basically,and that it affects record sales.now all of a sudden we seem to be almost supporting them.i have quite a few and have been collecting for a few years now.anyone intrested om me.

plymboy · 23 Nov 2003, 22:04

does anyone know how many ( im sure some exist) boots of this tour are out there .il get thrown off here for saying that but its the chance il take.

R. · 23 Nov 2003, 22:08

I'm pretty sure you won't get an answer in this thread.

27 Jul 2003, 09:06	#28
plymboy Loafer Join Date: 18.07.2003 Posts: 79	bootlegs how can the venue be losing money when we all paid £30 for a ticket,id say they made a lot of money from it.as has been said if trading bootlegs then money is not made,it is not selling or buying ( not a single penny changing hands.lets face some people agree with bootlegs some of us dont,at the end of the day trading is trading and that is not a money making business if no one is parting with cash.as ive also said im not here defending bootlegs i can just see both sides of the story.i would like to know how the venue itself loses money by people taping concerts.also how artists can be losing money via trading .

22 Nov 2003, 12:08	#39
plymboy Loafer Join Date: 18.07.2003 Posts: 79	bootlegs what do we all think of them ,good, bad .do they serve any real purpose to the fans.whay do you think meat would think of them.i know this may be a bit of a taboo subject but im just curious

25 Jul 2003, 16:44	#26
CarylB Mega Loafer Join Date: 16.04.2003 Location: Sheffield UK Posts: 5,910	FM I know you said you'd like to see more official releases .. although surely the reality, given what has been released in the last 25 years, and that this is Meat's last world tour, is that you won't. And I quoted one piece of your post to make a point, albeit a humourous one, about what you seemed to be saying .. ie people will make bootlegs if they want live recordings and these are not released officially. This thread started because someone was asking others to tape Meat's concerts .. R has pointed out that Meat does not give permission for people to do this, and however much one might like to have records of live concerts, given they are not made available, it is only inevitable that a market in bootlegs opens up if people are prepared to go against this particular performer's wishes and carry this out. It is inevitable sadly that we will have muggers of old people .. but it doesn't make it right. Who was it said that for evil to flourish all that is required is for good men to stand back and do nothing? So I tend to think on a board whichthis performer comes to, those of us who support and respect him should stand up and say this is wrong if we believe it to be so.

26 Jul 2003, 21:55	#27
original sin Sinner Join Date: 15.04.2003 Location: cyber space Posts: 2,457	uumm I don´t know what Meat´s views are on Bootlegs but I don't like the idea personally I think apart from poor quailty it is taking something away from the live venue experience and obviously money from both artist and venues which I doubt either would like. ooohhhh hang on a moment thou´ its a bit like the only front row tickets going for 200quid+

27 Jul 2003, 11:21	#29
Tim The Butcher Join Date: 14.04.2002 Location: Westervoort, The Netherlands Posts: 10,321	Trading bootlegs is not wrong. Then you are not making money, and if you sell bootlegs well... it is possible, if you only count the money of the recordable disks and porto costs. Think the site that Michel and I have is the most complete bootleg site at this moment. (but that is my opinion.) The Butcher.

27 Jul 2003, 12:15	#30
plymboy Loafer Join Date: 18.07.2003 Posts: 79	well said tim trading itself is not illegal as much as peoiple would like to think its a criminal act.selling is illegal beacuse thats when money comes into it( bootleggers are making the money while the artist loses out).i know people are still going to say trading is illegal( why is it) but its not.the dirty word in bootlegs is money,and that is far seperated from trading.

27 Jul 2003, 15:37	#33
plymboy Loafer Join Date: 18.07.2003 Posts: 79	very verybtrue.once you have traded a bootleg tape/cd you have no control whatsoever.yes bootlegging is wrong,its illegal,its also too big a thing to stop ( altogether).whatever people think of bootlegging it wont be stopped( i dont think it can be).until record companies can give fans of meat( or any other recording artist) enough live material on cd then bootlegging will continue.going back to what i said you do not have any control over what happens to a recording once it has been traded with another person.

27 Jul 2003, 15:46	#34
CarylB Mega Loafer Join Date: 16.04.2003 Location: Sheffield UK Posts: 5,910	Which is why I would never illicitly record a concert, nor trade in or buy bootlegs. I'm sure it won't be stopped completely, any more than car theft or muggings. But if no-one would buy stolen car radios there would be less incentive for thieves to steal them. And if Meat's fans refused to bootleg concerts, and to trade in or buy these, the market would take a knock!

27 Jul 2003, 19:18	#35
plymboy Loafer Join Date: 18.07.2003 Posts: 79	yes youre right it wont be stopped completly( like any other crime) unfortunatley.there will always be a few fans that wont take any notice and bootleg a gig regardless of what is printed on a ticket.bootlegging will never go away so it is silly to think otherwise.

27 Jul 2003, 19:57	#37
plymboy Loafer Join Date: 18.07.2003 Posts: 79	i agree with you .

22 Nov 2003, 12:12	#40
original sin Sinner Join Date: 15.04.2003 Location: cyber space Posts: 2,457	I think you'll find this subject has been discussed - you may find more if you try the the search function

22 Nov 2003, 12:14	#41
Jayd If I could bust into hell....... I would Join Date: 13.06.2003 Location: Montclair, New Jersey Posts: 1,314	I don't agree with the copying of original albums, but I do download and copy Live performances that I can't find on cd, as some are not available to buy.

22 Nov 2003, 14:28	#42
evil nickname Guest Join Date: 19.04.2003 Posts: 2,238	Whenever these kind of discussions come around, a lot of people seem not to understand what a bootleg is. A bootleg is in the most accepted use of the word a not endorsed/'illegal' live recording or collection of unreleased tracks (demos, outtakes, etc). A bootleg is not, or at least, not in these kind of discussions, a 'pirate' copy of a legal, commonly available album. Whereas I find selling copies of albums morally questionable, I think that there is no harm in trading bootlegs. The content is not commercially available, and in most cases, only the die hard fans are interested. Selling bootlegs on the other hand, is an absolute no-no.

22 Nov 2003, 16:06	#43
Tim The Butcher Join Date: 14.04.2002 Location: Westervoort, The Netherlands Posts: 10,321	Then i hope that people who don't like bootlegs don't go to the site that Michel and I have made!!!

22 Nov 2003, 19:11	#44
Dave Mega Loafer Join Date: 12.04.2002 Location: Southern Ohio - United States of America Posts: 2,564	Well, again, I say Meat Loaf fans would all benefit from LiveDisc. I have heard them, I love them, they are awesome, and are what the fans who really appreciate the music want to have!!! 'Nuff Said! ROCK ON LIVE DISC!!!

23 Nov 2003, 00:36	#45
meatfan Super Loafer Join Date: 16.04.2003 Posts: 251	(Posted on "Favourite live songs" before I saw these posts) Hear! Hear! (I have a few very treasured Roy Orbison bootlegs in my possession!) Most songs I have are on CD bought from shops/ebay/ etc. Bootlegs just enhance my collection! For every bootleg I probably have 20 or thirty of the genuine article! I think there are likely to be NO fans of any artist who ONLY have bootlegs in their collection! Most bootlegs are inferior to the genuine article, and we get them to get a different slant on a song, or they are precious to us because we were at the concert where they were recorded. I don't honestly think any artist is worse off because fans have bootlegs - they are an addition to, not a replacement for genuine songs. Just my thoughts. Heather.

23 Nov 2003, 21:52	#46
plymboy Loafer Join Date: 18.07.2003 Posts: 79	well what aturn around not so long ago it was quite the opposite.some ppl were saying that they shouldnt exist basically,and that it affects record sales.now all of a sudden we seem to be almost supporting them.i have quite a few and have been collecting for a few years now.anyone intrested om me.

23 Nov 2003, 22:04	#47
plymboy Loafer Join Date: 18.07.2003 Posts: 79	does anyone know how many ( im sure some exist) boots of this tour are out there .il get thrown off here for saying that but its the chance il take.

23 Nov 2003, 22:08	#48
R. You dig. Join Date: 02.04.2002 Location: On the fothermucker Posts: 7,179	I'm pretty sure you won't get an answer in this thread.