care to explain to me how a recording of a live show(that has already occured) costs you or anyone else money? like andy said, if they (Rush) decide to make a DVD/Cd of their 30th anniversary tour, I would gladly buy it...so that blows that part out...me possessing a recording of a live concert(that was recorded with the band's/crew's permission since it is a soundboard recording) is not costing anyone anything. It isnt like this recording was copyed off of a cd that is for sale...it was recorded at the show, probably with a consumer level recorder.... if it was illegal to record live shows, why do some bands explicitly encourage/permitt it? the rule(if it is indeed a written rule) about not bringing recording devices to shows is rarely enforced cause they know that any fan would rather buy a official live album if they had the chance to instead of having to listen to a crappy bootleg. anyway...enough of my rambling....Im eagerly awaiting your explanation of how a recording of something that isnt officially released for sale is hurting anyone, and how does it cost the artists money?
And knowing that you would write something inane like this, I gave you a . See Rockets2K's response. He said exactly what I would have.
it is against the law, as i understand it. certain bands/performers say it's ok and give permission for people to do so..and to share files, even. but absent that permission, i believe it is against the law. for the same reasons you can't go into a movie and record it, Kramer!
Back then, and before, the HPD didn't hire officers who couldn't pass muster with police chief Herman Short, who was a proud, card carrying member of the KKK. That resulted in the HPD being understaffed for years. It was very common for cops to carry "throwdowns" in their trunk. For those who don't know, that's an untraceable pistol, used when an overly excited cop blew the brains out of a citizen on the street, and needed an excuse. There was a white young man who had this happen in Southeast Houston, driving down the Gulf Freeway and getting pulled over, and it came out that a throwdown was used. The fact that a white boy had this happen to him, and not a Black or Latino, got the public's attention, which got the "powers that be" to finally begin to start thinking about reform of the HPD. Mulder, I'm not the least bit surprised that your family was a victim of this, and I'm sorry. It was more common than most of you would believe, and by it's very nature, being based on corruption, hard to prove. I have very strong feelings about the HPD back then, all of them venomous. Like I said, some of you don't realize how lucky you are to have the HPD of today. I sure was lucky to make it through that period in one piece. The color of my skin had a hell of a lot to do with it. What's Porky's? A rib place?? Could have seen me in there if it was. Keep D&D Civil!!
Deckard: HPD may be better than what it was in the 70's, but not by much. Back to my original topic. The system is corrupted from the State level to the Local level. It needs a major overhaul. Beat Cops should be reinstated and responsible for their actions. Prosecutors should be held responsible for slanderous comments they make during a trial. Judges need to lose there Gestapo-immunity immediately. The whole system's ready for a coup.
And MadMax: Just back on us not seeing eye to eye. My political slants are roughly 70% Republican to 30% democratic. I vote Republican on the National and State level. I vote Democratic on the local level. This is how I'm able to literally piss off everyone on this board so often.
come on Max, the answer to that one is so obvious Im surprised you even used that tactic in your response. Film = bootleggers = reduced dvd\video sales concert = bootleggers = no loss of income to the bands(unless they want to release a live dvd\video\cd of that tour)(as explained better above) I totally realize that some hear the term bootleg and assume it is a ripoff of a copywritten work, but live shows are different in that the fans go to the shows for the experience of watching the band play the music , they buy the albums for the pleasure of listening to the music. I agree, dont bootleg legitimate music products that are for sale.....a live bootleg(of dubious quality most of the time) is hurting no one...
ummm...bootlegged live music means i don't buy the studio album...and neither do my friends who recorded my bootlegged live music, as well. the law is the law. it exists. i didn't comment on the worth or merit of the law...simply that it was the law.
i think if your using a bootlegged concert as your only recording of an artist, I think it is safe to say you would of never bought the studio CD in the first place - you would of just gone without any music from that artist
i have no idea. i don't know. i'm simply stating what my understanding of the law is. you can't go in and record a live baseball game, either. you can't go to a concert and record it without the artist's permission, as i understand it.
Actually, with Sporting events, you need expressed and written consent. At concerts, you only need implied and thumbs up consent...
As I mentioned, I ALREADY have every single album Rush has produced and would buy this particular concert if they produced a live version (they played a couple of my favorites that I haven't heard them play live before). In these circumstances, I don't have any problem taking a bootleg (particularly one that was taken off the soundboard, meaning that it had the approval of someone associated with the band) from a friend. I am not taking money out of their bank accounts, I am just enjoying the music of one of my favorite bands, music that would not otherwise be available.
jimeny Christmas!!! i'm not arguing with you!!!!! i'm just stating what my understanding of the law is. that's it. you can justify whatever you want. that's fine! i'm not turning you in! the law is what it is.
