Dave Fuller At It Again

I've spent so much money on Queen-related stuff over the years, so I don't feel bad about getting some for free.

I think all of us who are interested in the unreleased stuff feels the same way, and we would have bought it if it were released.

Not that I want to redirect your discussion or anything (and I'll bow out of it now because I seem to be fixated on something other than what you guys are talking about) but really - my rants (and those of some other members) aren't really to do with the basic act of sharing rare things on Youtube for everyone to look at. I don't think you'll find too many people who'd be flat against this, by itself.

My problem with Fuller boils down to three points. First - he's charging money for shit that isn't his, some of which is misrepresented as the real deal. If you can't see this as a dick move, then God help anyone who ever gets into any kind of financial or emotional entanglement with you.

Second, to be in the position to execute some of this perceived altruism on Youtube - he had to screw some people and violate the conditions by which he came into possession of the things he's sharing. Now it's all well and good to be a good little sucker, download the stuff and say 'I don't care where it came from', but I think we can do better. For anyone who claims to care about Queen as a band or a community, this kind of behaviour should at least be acknowledged as a bit fucked.

And third - guy's a douche. In private, he goes (in short order) from asking you for stuff, to treating you like crap when you don't worship the napkin he drools into.

It's senseless to sit there and repeat the mantra 'well, if you set aside the fact that he's a con, there's nothing really wrong with uploading rare stuff to Youtube'. My problem is that you're really that willing to just ignore the fact that he is that shitty a person in the first place.

But yeah, I've repeated myself a bit too much on this. As always, I hope Queen gets onto actually selling some of this shit properly, and I hope Fuller accidentally leaves a speaker coil propped up against his hard drives overnight. Peace to you all.

[QUOTE] [b]AssDudeRule wrote:[/b]

Is it really such a bad thing that Dave shares these vids on YouTube? Separating the "sale" aspect of his approach, I enjoy listening to the rare works of queen.

[/QUOTE]

So did other people before Fuller existed.

What is it with people who think Fuller is the only person who has ever leaked rare music?

[QUOTE] [b]Zebonka12 wrote:[/b]

Now it's all well and good to be a good little sucker, download the stuff and say 'I don't care where it came from', but I think we can do better. For anyone who claims to care about Queen as a band or a community, this kind of behaviour should at least be acknowledged as a bit fucked.

[/QUOTE]

Indeed, but self-interest will always leave people short of saying that. The "gimme gimme more more" attitude will always be the bigger force.

[QUOTE] [b]Thistleboy1980 wrote:[/b]
1 - There is no such thing as a victimless crime.
2 - how do you know that no-one is willing to resolve it?
3 - At no point did I say I treated it the same as OYT. That remark was illustrative, but also tongue-in-cheek: imagine we took splick splack's stance on all things that didn't directly affect us.
4 - Your example may seem a tad much, but if she was intelligent enough to make the download, she was also intelligent enough to know it was wrong. Confiscation of a laptop is nothing - if they had jailed her, we might be talking.
5 - your deliberate awkwardness is becoming tiring. Like the majority of the discussion here, you know the point I'm making, but are taking pedantry to new levels. Don't take everything so bloody literally.

[/QUOTE]

1) David Fuller selling shitty Queen mp3's is a victimless crime as when those same songs aren't going to be commercially available. It doesn't reduce a single penny of their royalties.

2) As long as the same person, with the same user name, and the same material keeps returning to the same video site every few months, it's blindingly obvious that QP isn't doing all the work they can to shut him down.

3) Fair enough, but it was a REALLY poor comparison to make.

4) One possible explanation (not that it was necessarily the truth) was that some web browser comes with a bittorent client pre-installed, and all you have to do is click on a google search of your favourite artist. It doesn't require any legal or technical knowledge whatsoever.

5) It's easy to make flippant posts and take no responsibilty for what you actually write. It might have been comical, but you still wrote seriously enough to call someone a twat.
You were a a twat for making a comparison between David Fuller and operation Yewtree, and I'm a twat for hammering the point that you took that analogy too far...

[QUOTE] [b]tero! 48531 wrote:[/b]

1) David Fuller selling shitty Queen mp3's is a victimless crime as when those same songs aren't going to be commercially available. It doesn't reduce a single penny of their royalties.

[/QUOTE]

Whether or not they intend to release certain songs doesn't make them any less their property.

Do you not think Stephen King would be pissed if someone was selling a few chapters of an unfinished book that's been on the back burner for a few years?

[QUOTE] [b]tero! 48531 wrote:[/b]

2) As long as the same person, with the same user name, and the same material keeps returning to the same video site every few months, it's blindingly obvious that QP isn't doing all the work they can to shut him down. [/QUOTE]

You're partly wrong there. QPL has followed proper procedure with YouTube to file multiple claims against DRF on numerous occasions.
However, whoever's in charge of maintaining these claims on YouTube on QPL's behalf isn't doing a very good job rejecting DRF's counterclaims that he clearly keeps filing to get his account and videos back up. Maybe Universal/Island Records should be handling that instead, they're more effective at keeping videos off YouTube.

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]AssDudeRule wrote:[/b]

Is it really such a bad thing that Dave shares these vids on YouTube? Separating the "sale" aspect of his approach, I enjoy listening to the rare works of queen.

[/QUOTE]

So did other people before Fuller existed.

What is it with people who think Fuller is the only person who has ever leaked rare music?[/QUOTE]

If they got off their ass and released them officially Id buy them in a second,but all we are getting is fluff.

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]tero! 48531 wrote:[/b]

1) David Fuller selling shitty Queen mp3's is a victimless crime as when those same songs aren't going to be commercially available. It doesn't reduce a single penny of their royalties.

[/QUOTE]

Whether or not they intend to release certain songs doesn't make them any less their property.

Do you not think Stephen King would be pissed if someone was selling a few chapters of an unfinished book that's been on the back burner for a few years?[/QUOTE]

I don't deny the crime here, all I'm saying is that it doesn't take away anything from the band even if it makes them pissed.

Just like a few chapters of a Stephen King book doesn't take anything away from his creative process or sales.
On the contrary, it will only boost his sales if the material is good.

[QUOTE] [b]inu-liger wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]tero! 48531 wrote:[/b]

2) As long as the same person, with the same user name, and the same material keeps returning to the same video site every few months, it's blindingly obvious that QP isn't doing all the work they can to shut him down. [/QUOTE]

You're partly wrong there. QPL has followed proper procedure with YouTube to file multiple claims against DRF on numerous occasions.
However, whoever's in charge of maintaining these claims on YouTube on QPL's behalf isn't doing a very good job rejecting DRF's counterclaims that he clearly keeps filing to get his account and videos back up. Maybe Universal/Island Records should be handling that instead, they're more effective at keeping videos off YouTube.[/QUOTE]

Partly wrong, but mostly right. ;)

Doing a poor job equates to not doing everything you can, doesn't it?

[QUOTE] [b]tero! 48531 wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]inu-liger wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]tero! 48531 wrote:[/b]

2) As long as the same person, with the same user name, and the same material keeps returning to the same video site every few months, it's blindingly obvious that QP isn't doing all the work they can to shut him down. [/QUOTE]

You're partly wrong there. QPL has followed proper procedure with YouTube to file multiple claims against DRF on numerous occasions.
However, whoever's in charge of maintaining these claims on YouTube on QPL's behalf isn't doing a very good job rejecting DRF's counterclaims that he clearly keeps filing to get his account and videos back up. Maybe Universal/Island Records should be handling that instead, they're more effective at keeping videos off YouTube.[/QUOTE]

Partly wrong, but mostly right. ;)

Doing a poor job equates to not doing everything you can, doesn't it?[/QUOTE]

In my view, that depends whether the people they have delegated to handling their official YouTube account plus copyright infringement reporting, are also people that have numerous other tasks regularly delegated to perform aside from maintaining the YouTube account, which would definitely lead to a serious potential for distraction from ensuring their YT copyright claims are followed up regularly.
And DRF isn't the only one they've taken videos down from, take that into consideration as well. DRF is unique however with regards to the illegal sale problem, and IMO they should have been paying special attention to ensuring his account stayed shut, which they clearly didn't. So, something is up there, and I think distractions are definitely at play here.

That being said, I'm just speculating, as I have no personal knowledge of who exactly IS in charge of running their YT account. Nor if they're doing it on a paid basis or volunteer run basis.

[QUOTE] [b]AssDudeRule wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]AssDudeRule wrote:[/b]

Is it really such a bad thing that Dave shares these vids on YouTube? Separating the "sale" aspect of his approach, I enjoy listening to the rare works of queen.

[/QUOTE]

So did other people before Fuller existed.

What is it with people who think Fuller is the only person who has ever leaked rare music?[/QUOTE]

If they got off their ass and released them officially Id buy them in a second,but all we are getting is fluff.

[/QUOTE]

In your opinion. And you still completely missed the point. Queen rarities have been leaking out since before Fuller was born.

Read my post on page 1. The band has released plenty of great things in the last decade or so, including plenty of old live material and unheard studio outtakes ranging from 1977 to 1991.

If you don't like this kind of stuff, then what in the world are you waiting for (and what are you doing on a Queen forum)?

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]AssDudeRule wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]

[QUOTE] [b]AssDudeRule wrote:[/b]

Is it really such a bad thing that Dave shares these vids on YouTube? Separating the "sale" aspect of his approach, I enjoy listening to the rare works of queen.

[/QUOTE]

So did other people before Fuller existed.

What is it with people who think Fuller is the only person who has ever leaked rare music?[/QUOTE]

If they got off their ass and released them officially Id buy them in a second,but all we are getting is fluff.

[/QUOTE]

In your opinion. And you still completely missed the point. Queen rarities have been leaking out since before Fuller was born.

Read my post on page 1. The band has released plenty of great things in the last decade or so, including plenty of old live material and unheard studio outtakes ranging from 1977 to 1991.

If you don't like this kind of stuff, then what in the world are you waiting for (and what are you doing on a Queen forum)?[/QUOTE]

Back off Man.. What's with the attitude?

You ask me what am I doing on a forum? I'm just politely expressing a view. You on the other have a major issue.

Indeed you were polite, but my inquiry remains - what kind of official release can you possibly be hoping for that wouldn't be "fluff" ? And what is it that Fuller has provided that hundreds (if not thousands) of other music collectors have not previously provided?

A forum is a place for meaningful discussion about a particular subject, so I'm curious to know what has informed these views of yours.

[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]

Indeed you were polite, but my inquiry remains - what kind of official release can you possibly be hoping for that wouldn't be "fluff" ? And what is it that Fuller has provided that hundreds (if not thousands) of other music collectors have not previously provided?

A forum is a place for meaningful discussion about a particular subject, so I'm curious to know what has informed these views of yours.[/QUOTE]

No, I dont want to discuss this with you. For as right now, you make me feel like I'm a shit person. I'v been dancing to Queen since I was 3. 30 years later I have to defend my self on a forum that is supposed to bring fan's together?