OFF: Bootleg CD's

[P Worley]

On Mon, 12 Jan 1998, John A Swartz wrote:

> I have lots of thoughts on bootlegs, but I'll just post a few now.  In
> terms of people putting live recordings on CD that aren't available
> commercially, I like the idea - the quality is at times questionable,
> but for artists that I like and collect everything they put out, it can
> be nice to have other stuff available on them - usually the casual fan
> probably wouldn't be as interested, but for the die-hard, they fill a
> need.

What about editing the recordings (taking out artifacts, reducing hiss,
etc.)?  I imagine some collectors (those in it for completeness) would
prefer to have the 'pure' recording, noise and all, but I imagine most
would rather have a cleaner recording.

> As for making copies of released material (ie. recording Imaginos from
> the BOC CD), unless its strictly an archive copy for the person recording
> it, I have a problem.  And, that's not bootlegging, that's pirating, and
> is really stealing from the artist.

So do you see any difference between making a 'custom mix' on cassette and
making one on a CD?  I've recorded a lot of music in various mixes on
cassettes, for myself, for gifts, received them as gifts, etc.
'Everybody's doing it', which doesn't make it legal or right, but what I'm
wondering is if there is a perceived difference in the legal or moral
implications between doing it on  CD vs. a cassette.

> If someone is planning on recording from released material and distributing
> it (regardless of what they might be charging people - even if they are
> giving them away), that is illegal, and takes money out of the artist's
> pocket, and I don't support it.  If they are taking otherwise unavailable
> material and putting it out, well, that is as far as I know also illegal
> (at least in the U.S.), although I don't really see that as the same
> thing.  But, others might differ with me on that.
>
> John

I'd have to agree with you that the distribution of re-recorded material
in general is going to be depriving the artist, but what about specific
cases?  (I'm being the Devil's advocate here, these opinions do not
necessarily reflect my own.)  If I were to make a 'custom' Imaginos CD
(which I probably will), and distribute it (which I probably won't) to a
select small group of interested people (perhaps members of a certain
mailing list), wouldn't that just increase interest in the album itself?

If I had the power, I'd push everyone involved in the Imaginos project to
complete it, perfect it, and release it.  If there were 'bootleg' or
'pirate' (the two terms are, I think, legally similar, but have very
different implications) CDs running around, I'd think that would only put
a little pressure on the involved parties (record companies, artists,
etc.) to put out something that there was obviously an interest in.

The uniqueness of the Imaginos situation is what makes this argument
tempting.  I _know_ there's more out there, I _know_ that there's a
certain *order* to things, and I want to see it all done.  If I know I
won't be able to go out and buy "Imaginos vols. 1, 2, and 3 Boxed Set"
anytime soon, I'm going to try and Imaginit (sorry, I couldn't resist) on
my own.  And if I (being the philanthropist I am) wish to share my
creation/piracy with others, where's the harm?

Ok, I know there are flaws in my argument, but again, I'm playing the
Devil's advocate.

On a Not Quite But Almost Related note, does anybody have any idea how
much the BOC band members get in royalties each time Sony comes out with
another BOC compilation?  And do the royalties go to current band members,
or original band members, or members of the band when the songs were
originally released, or some/all/none of the above?  Just wondering.

-Pete the Inhaler

--
Peter William Worley
inhaler at u.washington.edu