Holly2003 wrote:
So .... selling bootlegs is fine now?
If you read the owner of the tape's explanation and proceed not to use binary thinking - then perhaps yes.
Holly2003 wrote:
So .... selling bootlegs is fine now?
The Real Wizard wrote:
Holly2003 wrote:
So .... selling bootlegs is fine now?
If you read the owner of the tape's explanation and proceed not to use binary thinking - then perhaps yes.
Holly2003 wrote:
The Real Wizard wrote:
Holly2003 wrote:
So .... selling bootlegs is fine now?
If you read the owner of the tape's explanation and proceed not to use binary thinking - then perhaps yes.
Oh I see. It's all clear now lol!
Incidentally, is he the owner of the content of the tape? Does he own the copyright? Is he licensed to sell it by Queen productions?
brians wig wrote:
Barry Durex wrote:
brians wig wrote:
It's mine and I've been trying to get it pressed to bootleg vinyl and CD for a few months...
I've even paid for a licence with MCP to do it as well.
That's blown now and money wasted.
Not sure if this sounds very moral even if it is legal in your part of the world.
I'm sorry if I don't sound very sympathetic.
Well, the bootleg companies are going to make a shit load of money out of this and I'm sorry, but I don't see why they should benefit and I don't. I was hoping to try and beat the bootleggers a bit first and, like I said, I'd been in touch with MCP, told them the situation and they said I could buy a licence which would allow me to have copies made. Being a vinyl freak, I wanted to do 50 vinyls, but that's proving difficult to do in the UK.
brians wig wrote:
I've even paid for a licence with MCP to do it as well.
people on streets wrote:
Isn't Queen productions owner of the played music? Even if they didn't own or make the recording, aren't they the legal owner of the musical performance?
The Real Wizard wrote:
So if anyone is going to vilify someone for pressing LPs like this so that bootleggers can't make a quick buck off them, then they might as well be going after every 14 year old who uploads an iPhone video of the Jonas Brothers to YouTube that they filmed last night, because that is ultimately no different. Otherwise we wouldn't want them to sound hypocritical or anything...
The Real Wizard wrote:
people on streets wrote:
Isn't Queen productions owner of the played music? Even if they didn't own or make the recording, aren't they the legal owner of the musical performance?
Short answer - no.
Licensing and publishing issues remain, however, as QP own the songs themselves. But there is no special monopoly on that particular recording of them unless they own the master copy themselves.
So as long as the LPs are distributed for free (or perhaps even just the cost of production), there should be no real legal issues.
So if anyone is going to vilify someone for pressing LPs like this so that bootleggers can't make a quick buck off them, then they might as well be going after every 14 year old who uploads an iPhone video of the Jonas Brothers to YouTube that they filmed last night, because that is ultimately no different. Otherwise we wouldn't want them to sound hypocritical or anything...
The Real Wizard wrote:
people on streets wrote:
Isn't Queen productions owner of the played music? Even if they didn't own or make the recording, aren't they the legal owner of the musical performance?
Short answer - no.
Licensing and publishing issues remain, however, as QP own the songs themselves. But there is no special monopoly on that particular recording of them unless they own the master copy themselves.
So as long as the LPs are distributed for free (or perhaps even just the cost of production), there should be no real legal issues.
So if anyone is going to vilify someone for pressing LPs like this so that bootleggers can't make a quick buck off them, then they might as well be going after every 14 year old who uploads an iPhone video of the Jonas Brothers to YouTube that they filmed last night, because that is ultimately no different. Otherwise we wouldn't want them to sound hypocritical or anything...
Ghostwithasmile is BACK! wrote:
These things are very well written down at a Swiss legal company.
Ghostwithasmile is BACK! wrote: Remember them re-selling the bootlegs at the top100 bootleg project? Those were direct rips of those bootlegs
The Real Wizard wrote:
Holly2003 wrote:
The Real Wizard wrote:
Holly2003 wrote:
So .... selling bootlegs is fine now?
If you read the owner of the tape's explanation and proceed not to use binary thinking - then perhaps yes.
Oh I see. It's all clear now lol!
Incidentally, is he the owner of the content of the tape? Does he own the copyright? Is he licensed to sell it by Queen productions?
Considering he said he's giving a copy of the tape to Brian, maybe you should ask to clarify such details before making yourself look like a fool.