The no digital camera rule.....
- Thread starter Bryant
- Start date
Barking Pumpkin
Member
- Aug 31, 2004
- 2,942
- 3
- 36
- 34
It's not really illegal for the bands that allow/support taping though. Or it might as well not be.
cantharsis
Member
The ironic thing about this is that some bands 10 or 20 years later actually ask to fans if they have any kind of videos,or bootleg concerts clips, for their upcoming dvd or material to help them ,everything is ironic.
If there is any band that can provide data they actually lost money through bootlegging please let me know !!! They sell not a f*****g record less becouse of bootlegging !! I dare to claim that bootlegging builds out a much stronger fanbase , and following that a better record sale overall... Same goes for MP3 swapping. Just gave a copy of a Dream Theater CD to a friend last week, yesterday he bought 2 original DT CD's...now was it a good thing from me to copy him that CD or not ??
If you see bootlegs for sale , go to court and get big money out of it ! Bands don't need to come up with "we have no time for that" excuses. Give me one day internet and I'll catch you dozens of bootleg sellers. Bootlegs are ment to be swapped among fans, not to be sold.
If you see bootlegs for sale , go to court and get big money out of it ! Bands don't need to come up with "we have no time for that" excuses. Give me one day internet and I'll catch you dozens of bootleg sellers. Bootlegs are ment to be swapped among fans, not to be sold.
rockyracoon
...
I know that plenty of former and potential future PP musicians frequent this forum. I'd love to hear from a few of them on this topic.
carnut said:
I gotta disagree on the MP3 part... That can be positive for sure, as a promotional tool.. But for the most part, it affects sales negatively... I know a lot of people who simply don't buy CDs anymore!! Not only they don't buy CDs, but they also think that CD-buyers are stupid! "Why would you spend money on something you could get for free?"....
skeptik
Member
- Feb 7, 2003
- 24,413
- 71
- 48
That may be true for music fans in general. However, I've noticed among the Metal community just the opposite. They tend to download an album and if they like it, they buy the album, if not, they delete the mp3s, because there's no point in having shitty music on your harddrive. I can only speak for myself, but I used to download quite a bit, and I have nearly 700 CDs. Now I am prevented from downloading, but I would definitely still be doing it if I could, because I hate making blind purchases and it turns out that my purchase is complete feces like say, Circus Maximus or something of that calibre. Anyway, to get to the point, I think that in the Metal community at least, trading (and selling) mp3s and videos actually promotes sales.
Kenneth R.
Cináed
My eyes bootleg every show I go to. best wipe my memory and blind me cause i'm a criminal!King Lek said:
booB
Señor Member
That may be true for music fans in general. However, I've noticed among the Metal community just the opposite. They tend to download an album and if they like it, they buy the album
I know tons of metal fans who download and don't buy cds anymore. I also know metal fans who download, and only buy SOME of the cds they like.
I'm not arguing for or against MP3s... I'm just bringing some perspective, so that you don't think metal fans are all perfect angels.
I know tons of metal fans who download and don't buy cds anymore. I also know metal fans who download, and only buy SOME of the cds they like.
I'm not arguing for or against MP3s... I'm just bringing some perspective, so that you don't think metal fans are all perfect angels.
skeptik
Member
- Feb 7, 2003
- 24,413
- 71
- 48
I never said that. I just said that the average Metal fan that's not a 14 year old idiot that listens to the music in order to be cool tends to like supporting the bands that he listens to. That has certainly been the norm in my experiences over the years. Also, consider the fact that the people that download and don't buy wouldn't be buying the CDs anyway. 
The only thing they can do is spread the news of the band to other people, who may in turn buy the CDs themselves.
The only thing they can do is spread the news of the band to other people, who may in turn buy the CDs themselves.
Yngvai X
Dark Emperor
rockyracoon said:
Well, Im not a former PP musician, and who knows if I'll ever be a potential future one, but being a musician nonetheless, I'll chime in:
The only bootlegs I'd care about are those of official released material (which I have heard is somewhat of a problem in some eastern european countries)...but since Atlanta is in the US and not Eastern Europe, lets bypass that thought for now
. I don't give a shit if anyone bootlegs a performance. I've honestly never been big on listening to bootlegs myself, but I know a lot of people are, and like its been said already, its not like it detracts sales from official releases cause these are just bootlegs of concerts, not studio albums. And if bands are afraid of a bad performance being caught on tape...well...more incentive to make sure you don't fuck up live . I'm actually more concerned about mp3 trading of studio albums than I am of live bootlegs.
skeptik
Member
- Feb 7, 2003
- 24,413
- 71
- 48
Oh absolutely, studio material being traded is much more problematic than a live bootleg video. Also, from my experience, the only times official material is bootlegged is when the official material is long out of print (GENERALLY. Of course there are exceptions).
MadeInNewJersey
nursing my wounds
Matt Crooks said:
You're completely clueless about "bootlegs," aren't you?
Do yourself a favor, go back through this thread and read some of the posts that explain how MOST live recordings are made & circulate. Hint: it's not by being sold. :Smug:
MadeInNewJersey
nursing my wounds
The Fiddler said:
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.
What part of THE BOOTLEGS ARE TRADED FREELY AND ARE NOT FOR SALE is so difficult to understand? I mean, it's English, right? And I can see that you read & speak it, so...
markgugs said:
What part of...once you make a copy of material that you do not own or have rights to...whether you trade it or keep it, we'll assume keep it, you now pocess someone else's property. In other words, you have committed a theft of property.
Say you take a cable feed from your neighbors housE, just for your own use....guess what happens if you are caught.............
Justify all you want...you are wrong.
MadeInNewJersey
nursing my wounds
King Lek said:
Wrong.
Taking a cable feed is stealing, plain & simple. Recording a live concert for your own personal use is no different than taping a song off the radio (back in the day).
Apples & oranges.
You clearly don't understand. Which is fine, I sense English isn't your first language.
PowerFreak
Jizz Master Zero
Bryan316 said:I won't be doing the Nude Camera Passes. You can thank me now.
I will be though.
Auditions for further interaction can be made.
MC Zilla in da nude yo!
I think you guys are starting to completely lose the point here. The notion of no digital cameras at ProgPower has nothing to do with legality or illegality. It doesn't even have anything to do with what Glenn thinks about bootlegging... he has to get bands for the show, and if they are concerned that they are going to be bootlegged, concerned enough that they would refuse to play the show (as he said many bands are), he has to take such steps as he sees fit in order to make sure the festival continues to be a place where bands want to play.
I'll admit, I don't have any strong feelings on the matter... I don't own any sort of camera, and have no interest at all in taking pictures, videos, recordings, or anything. When I'm at the venue, I'm there to watch the show, not be distracted by trying to find good angles, etc, to take pictures that I'm never going to look at anyway. I don't even bring my cellphone into the venue with me (not that it has a camera anyway, but I'm there to watch the show, not talk on the phone). Hell, even aside from ProgPower, if I'm just sitting at home, I'd much rather listen to an actual album than some crappy bootleg that I someone traded me. I don't even much care for official live releases.
But whatever... some people like taking their still photographs, and advancing technology makes this difficult to regulate. I think the idea of an extra camera fee with a separate camera line is a fair one, as long as the bands are satisfied that this is a strong enough measure. If it's SLR's only, that would make it pretty easy. The line would undoubtedly take longer, and the security person might need to be more knowledgeable (and higher paid), if he were to check to make sure that other cameras were not video capable. And even then, there will still be problems, as some people are going to disappointed or pissed off when they find out their camera will not be allowed in. In terms of how such a thing would work in practice, the policy will still have to be "35mm and all SLR's allowed, all other devices completely at security's discretion".
Nonetheless, whether it's legal or not is not the issue. Whether the bootlegs are sold or given away is not the issue. If the bands aren't cool with it (regardless of its legal status), Glenn has to respond to that. And, logically, even if next year's lineup happened to consist entirely of bands that didn't mind bootleg videography, the overarching policy of the festival would still have to remain "no video recording".
I'll admit, I don't have any strong feelings on the matter... I don't own any sort of camera, and have no interest at all in taking pictures, videos, recordings, or anything. When I'm at the venue, I'm there to watch the show, not be distracted by trying to find good angles, etc, to take pictures that I'm never going to look at anyway. I don't even bring my cellphone into the venue with me (not that it has a camera anyway, but I'm there to watch the show, not talk on the phone). Hell, even aside from ProgPower, if I'm just sitting at home, I'd much rather listen to an actual album than some crappy bootleg that I someone traded me. I don't even much care for official live releases.
But whatever... some people like taking their still photographs, and advancing technology makes this difficult to regulate. I think the idea of an extra camera fee with a separate camera line is a fair one, as long as the bands are satisfied that this is a strong enough measure. If it's SLR's only, that would make it pretty easy. The line would undoubtedly take longer, and the security person might need to be more knowledgeable (and higher paid), if he were to check to make sure that other cameras were not video capable. And even then, there will still be problems, as some people are going to disappointed or pissed off when they find out their camera will not be allowed in. In terms of how such a thing would work in practice, the policy will still have to be "35mm and all SLR's allowed, all other devices completely at security's discretion".
Nonetheless, whether it's legal or not is not the issue. Whether the bootlegs are sold or given away is not the issue. If the bands aren't cool with it (regardless of its legal status), Glenn has to respond to that. And, logically, even if next year's lineup happened to consist entirely of bands that didn't mind bootleg videography, the overarching policy of the festival would still have to remain "no video recording".
