i know for a fact that people on here who own small electronic labels have bought bootlegs. how do you explain that? are they just assh*les?
tom ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Klaas-Jan Jongsma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 13:54:40 +0200 >No it's not... it is not OK to bootleg records in the first place. >The music is the intellectual property of the writer/producer, they >have the rights to decide what is going to happen with there music, >not someone who has absolutely no involvement in his music whatsoever. > >Excuses like 'well he released the record once but i can't find it so >bootlegs are ok' are not valid...ever. All of the artists on Virtual >Sex are still very much alive but guess what... no one asked them and >no-one will pay them sh*t. If you think you want to release a track >from an artist go and ask his permission to do so, if he says no, >respect that choice because it is his music, he made it and it is not >some public property. But guess what bootleggers don't do that >because a) they are way to lazy for this or b) to greedy or probably >a combination of these 2. > >Also don't come-up with excuses like well they should have taken care >that there records are still available but apparentlyyou never tried >to run a small independent record label. Most record labels are very >short on cash, and taking a gamble on releasing a record is a big >one, they might loose lots of money if they sell just 200 instead of >500 or whatever you invested. So picture this you are an artist and >you have to choose between releasing some exciting new material or >some classic you made 10 years ago... what would you do? > >So now can we quit this discussion on bootlegs and stop making up >excuses to tell that bootlegs are good because they aren't. >Bootlegging it just greedy... if you really want to buy them that is >fine but don't come to me telling me that bootlegging is a good thing. > >KJ > > > >On 4-jun-2005, at 13:26, Annie Wiggins wrote: > > > >> Hi >> >> This is my first message so go easy on me ;) >> >> I think its ok to bootleg tunes as long as they are sold as >> bootlegs are not >> made to look like the originals. Supplying to demand is fine - >> many people >> didnt get or werent around when gems like virtual sex was released. >> Therefore giving people the chance to hear / play some of these >> tracks is >> fine by me - but blatantly ripping off the artwork or label is >> wrong. The >> 'new' pheerce citi 004 which htfr have been selling on their site >> is one of >> the examples where bootlegging has gone to new extremes - putting out >> releases on labels that dont even exist. >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: z66 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: 04 June 2005 03:05 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: (313) virtual sex lp repressed! ACTUALLY IT'S BEEN >> BOOTLEGGED,BURN THE BOOTLEGGERS >> >> >> different musik, different qualities.. >> >> well, at least it makes these producers even with other producers of >> today [who might not been around that time]. in any case, i'm still >> being amazed, how much of good musik is being released every year.. >> just >> like others, i use labels and names as a reference point, but it >> always >> leads me to new, unknown names + every year i keep discovering gems >> i've >> missed >> >> i can well understand hunting classics which are unique for both that >> and this time, yet what i'm trying to say is: there's a supply but the >> demand seems to be lost in time >> >> >> ///Z >> >> >> >> Thomas D. Cox, Jr. wrote: >> >> >> >>> ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- >>> From: z66 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> ..and maybe they want *you* to move forward too:: to catch more new >>>> musik rather than being stick to your defined classics >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> if thats the case, maybe they should work on making better new music! >>> >>> tom >>> >>> ________________________________________________________________ >>> andythepooh.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.1 - Release Date: 03/06/2005 >> >> >> -- >> No virus found in this outgoing message. >> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. >> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.6.1 - Release Date: 03/06/2005 >> >> >> >> >> > > > > ________________________________________________________________ andythepooh.com
