The no digital camera rule.....

Barking Pumpkin said:
Even giving you the biggest benefit of the doubt, you're looking at......"depriving someone of money they might have had, not taking money from them." So I think your analogy is faulty.

:loco: :tickled: :loco: :tickled: :loco: :tickled: :loco: :tickled:

When a band performs, it's performance is copyrighted. It cannot be taped or recorded without their consent. They own all rights to the performance and the money the performance generates in future sales. So yes, they are entitled to any money generated from the performance even if they don't "own it" yet - they "MADE" the show and own rights. If there was no show, there would be no bootleg to sell.
 
Barking Pumpkin said:
No, because I already had the money. It was in my pocket, and you took it from me. Not the same.

If I rob your parents next week so that they cannot afford to give their 15-year old his weekly allowance (that's you), does it mean I'm not stealing from you?

You earned the money, but you didn't receive it yet. According to your logic, I'm not stealing from you because your folks didn't give you the money yet - even though you earned it.
:loco: :loco: :loco: :loco:
 
rockyracoon said:
BP, do you represent some large consortium of bootleggers that you are this concerned about it? I'm just curious as to why this topic is so important to you.

Anyone who makes 2,837 posts in 14 months has waaaaay too much time on their hands. When I was 15 years old living at home and had everything provided to me by my parents, I had a lot of extra time too. I didn't have to earn anything and expected that things should be given to me for free or, at most, for just cleaning the toilet once a week.

BP should join the debate club at his high-school if he hasn't already. He'd be awesome and would earn professional recognition for it that means lots more than the mixed recognition he's getting here. BP will make a great defense lawyer some day (for the mob).
 
The Fiddler said:
:loco: :tickled: :loco: :tickled: :loco: :tickled: :loco: :tickled:

When a band performs, it's performance is copyrighted. It cannot be taped or recorded without their consent. They own all rights to the performance and the money the performance generates in future sales. So yes, they are entitled to any money generated from the performance even if they don't "own it" yet - they "MADE" the show and own rights. If there was no show, there would be no bootleg to sell.

You're still arguing on the basis of seedy people taping the show and selling it on the street. That's not what I'm talking about. The majority of taping has no profit/spending involved in it. Someone tapes the show, and trades/gives the show to other people. There's no selling, no money, and therefore, no money directly stolen from the band. Only hardcore fans want these kind of things, no one is going to be distracted from buying an album by some tape trading group. We're on the same page with that people who sell bootlegs ARE stealing from the band AND the fans of the band. That's stupid stuff. However, you're labelling any taping as selling bootlegs, which is simply not the case.

Edit: We're not going to get anywhere until you understand that I'm not talking about people selling bootlegs. Yes, if someone buys a $25 bootleg, that's money "stolen" from the band, because it should have gone to the band, but it went to a seedy bootlegger. That's not what I'm talking about though.
 
Barking Pumpkin said:
The majority of taping has no profit/spending involved in it.

I understand that there are honest guys like you would keep the video to themselves. So, if you feel strongly about your right to videotape, then your challenge is this:

How do you convince a band, label, or agent that you are an honest guy and won't sell your video of the concert, and how do you convince them that all of your friends that you trade with won't sell the video, either after the show or one, five, or ten years from now?
 
BP has a point. Face it, this music has such a small demographic that most of these bands should use this to their advantage. Remember tape trade (i.e. Metallica)??? Where would any of this metal scene be without tape trading (bootlegging)? The NWOBHM which was one of the largest "scenes" was created by trading tapes. Am I wrong?

I agree with Pumpkin. These bands need to embrace what is going on and use it their advantage. Most of these bands will be over and done with before this discussion will be done with.

Right or wrong, it is a fact and like me, if I want to listen to a band, I will purchase their disc, and DVD, and buy a shirt and go see them play. If they want to be like Metallica, I will forget they exist and no longer shell out any of my hard earned cash (which I work for), for the cause.
 
WTF is wrong with the people bitching about what type of cameras they can or can't use?! If some of those people went to more than one Metal show a year, then they'd realize that MOST venues DON'T allow ANY PICTURES. This is a priviledge that the Promoter lets the fans do.

So you have to use a regular 35mm camera. Get over it, you twats.
 
Barking Pumpkin said:
No, because I already had the money. It was in my pocket, and you took it from me. Not the same.

Oh for Chrissakes...this is semantics now...regardless of the bullshit that is spewed in the bottom.

Ya know...I thought I knew it all at 15 (I really did)...but BP just needs to shut his high-minded mouth...

Good god, kid...get a sense of the real world...get laid...fall in love...get really fucked over...get an education...form more idealisms for your life (if that's possible, in your case),....get some shitty entry level job that shatters all your illusions....get promoted into a better job that's somehow worse...come to realize that you're just an average dickhead and that you're not really as smart as you originally thought...

Then...you MIGHT have some experience under your belt...and enough to express a valid opinion...
 
Oh, God, I never thought I'd say this... but... I don't think you should be denigrating BP's opinion because of his age. Hell, you shouldn't even be denigrating his opinion on this because most of his other opinions suck. :b Argue with what he goddamn _says_ or don't pretend to argue.

Anyone who thinks that most ProgPower-type bands are losing anything close to "serious" money (and in many cases, money at all) because of bootlegging of concert vids needs to get a grip, and that includes the bands themselves.

That notwithstanding... Glenn's rules are Glenn's rules, no doubt, but anyone can complain or bitch or argue about them all they want. This is a *discussion* forum last I checked, and last I checked, Glenn is very open to listening to valid points, and sometimes even not-so-valid points. Sheesh.

Shaye
 
King Lek said:
I missed the Angrafan quote...too funny..."bootlegs do not affect a bands finances almost at all".....

Define: "almost at all"

Now, if i take that way from you....have it deducted from your paycheck....Ummm....it that ok?

Sheesh......


LOL.It doesn't deduct almost ANYTHING from the bands's pay.... BP and some others already defended the point well enough... I will not even waste my time explaining it...

The only argument I think is valid is that the low quality of the recording (or a bad performance by the band) might misrepresent how the band really sounds like live...
But the money argument is total non-sense...
 
On what product? There is no competition! It does not substitute anything! Granted, they are not getting any royalties on it... BUT it does not keep them from making any money at all..
 
Firehead said:
If some of those people went to more than one Metal show a year, then they'd realize that MOST venues DON'T allow ANY PICTURES.

That's not really how it happens around here. I've been to almost every single metal show in the NY area and I haven't had a problem with the camera...


Unless it was that old leather-speedo-wearing-who-think-they're-hot-shit band Manowar... ugh:tickled:
 
Having a bootleg making circulation does not in any way prevent an artist from officially releasing the same material, and quite frankly, not only is official material vastly more accessible but is usually cheaper. Furthermore, you'd have to be a fucking idiot to buy a bootleg over the real thing.
 
Definition of Bootleg......

Something made or used illegally or without authorization.....

Unofficial and illegally copied or distributed......


What part of this do you people not understand?
Just becasue it is not sold, does not make it legal.
This is not opinion, this is not debatable, this is fact!.....stop justifying theft.