What REALLY happened

"Perfectly written"

Not really. It hinges on a flawed premise - that people don't understand the principle of collecting and trading. We understand it - it's just that it's outdated and irrelevant to the community at large.

They'd do well to keep this stuff strictly on the down low. If they aren't going to disclose a recording, then keep it to them fucking selves. In the end, you can't take it with you.

Where do the traders get the original material from anyway?

[QUOTE] [b]plumrach wrote:[/b]
Where do the traders get the original material from anyway?[/QUOTE]
Just guessing, but ex-studio technicians, ex-roadies, etc? Anyone closely connected with the band could have potentially had access to material that was never released. Hell, tapes have been found in skips before (not necessarily Queen, just in general), or people's lofts, as in the recently discovered old episodes of Dr. Who or Dad's Army. They can surface anywhere, and then, presumably, the 'finder' either holds onto them, or tries to achieve the best price he can get for them. I wonder how much the finder of the 'missing' Dr. Who tapes got for them, assuming he didn't just give them to the BBC for nothing?

Doesn't make much of a difference how they got hold of something, if it wasn't meant for release it's not anyone's property except the band...therefore stolen.
If I find a car with the door open, it doesnt mean it's mine, likewise if I buy the same car from some chap who found the door open, I am still in posession of stolen property.
I understand the desire to collect, I collect guitars, and I understand the enjoyment of hearing rare recordings, but I dont really like the idea of sneeking them out from under the owners nose, once you have paid for something you are effectively complicite in the theft, just as if you buy a stolen dvd player from a guy in the pub... I think the recording of concerts is a different thing, they are performances and I dont think you can claim ownership of a performance, however studio tracks are a totally different thing, if they are meant to be under lock and key in Rogers studio then that's where they should remain until he decides to release them.
I record many tracks myself, and particularly if the tracks are going on a cd that will be sold I dont want outtakes or unfinished work getting out. Not that anyone would be that interested I am not Brian May...however the point is I have made a choice what i want to put out and the rest sits at home...if I found someone selling my work that was not intended for release I would without doubt go after them with the help of my lawyer.
Thins do get leaked from studios but... it's still stolen, pure and simple.

" Posted: 02 Apr 12, 12:03
Admittedly I do approach this topic from a mostly musical perspective. I just enjoy listening to stuff.

Random acts of altruism don't hurt anyone. I just think that, with QPL taking their sweet time to get good stuff out the door, it doesn't make sense to have the fan community doing the same thing. The collectors that are griping, to me, are akin to people who made a bad decision on the stock market. Dust yourself off and be wiser next time. " - Zebonka12

^ This sums up all these threads. It's fascinating for an outsider like myself to read about the feelings and emotions of hard core business/collectors.

Can a member of this Fanthology post a list of what they have? NOT who's got what, just what theyve got between them? Or is there another QOL like rule preventing this?

Specifically concert footage. This way I maybe be able to add to the list.
Cheers

The system BigV describes works a whole lot better
when you're dealing cassettetapes, i.e. music on
physical data carriers.

When dealing with digital rarities which can be
shared with thousands of people with the click of a
button, the actual music inherently decreases in
value and only the original analog data carrier
remains valuable.

In a nutshell, Fuller is Wikileaks and the collective you are the American government. Character assassination, accusations without trial, efforts to influence through fear - all in the name of a process and a greater good. It's interesting to have debated issues around Wikileaks and even organized religion - which also works as an analogy - with some of the more outspoken on this issue and see the moral and ethical inconsistencies. I don't mean that in a snarky way, I mean it's genuinely interesting. Just as with Julian Assange v The United States of America I have no fixed position on who is right, and in fact distrust elements of both hero complex driven recklessness and entrenched power.

I must admit that I've never understood why people think that David Fuller is something wonderful. Yeah he has a Youtube channel with a lot of things on there. However, most of it widely available elsewhere in better quality. People act like he is doing something magical and wonderful by posting the stuff.

I don't blame John for being highly pissed off.

Pieter, I suspect a lot of his fans don't even post on Queenzone, therefore they don't realize his slimy cheerful ways.

I never mentioned this before, but even prior to the Reaction Acetate controversy, I had high suspicions about his character, and that was because a year or two ago I asked him in private for a copy of the "We Believe" promo edit specifically in the original format and quality that he would have received it in. Fucking guy sends me a WAVE file that sounds like a slightly shittier copy of his 320p YouTube upload!! Sounded wet and lossy like hell!
But I didn't bother to raise a stink of it, and eventually a better quality MP3 made it's way to the Hub anyways.

Did anyone else have that happen to them??

[QUOTE]

[b]John S Stuart wrote: [/b] Grateful fan: no I did not say that. Please do not put wordsin my mouth. I feel I have too many either misquoting or misunderstanding.
[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure what you're referring to.  If it's the Wikileaks reference *I* am drawing that analogy, not attributing it to you.