[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
So .... selling bootlegs is fine now? [/QUOTE]
If you read the owner of the tape's explanation and proceed not to use binary thinking - then perhaps yes.
The Real Wizard
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Holly2003
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
So .... selling bootlegs is fine now? [/QUOTE]
If you read the owner of the tape's explanation and proceed not to use binary thinking - then perhaps yes.
[/QUOTE]
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?
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
So .... selling bootlegs is fine now? [/QUOTE]
If you read the owner of the tape's explanation and proceed not to use binary thinking - then perhaps yes.
[/QUOTE]
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?
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
So .... selling bootlegs is fine now? [/QUOTE]
If you read the owner of the tape's explanation and proceed not to use binary thinking - then perhaps yes.
[/QUOTE]
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?[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
So .... selling bootlegs is fine now? [/QUOTE]
If you read the owner of the tape's explanation and proceed not to use binary thinking - then perhaps yes.
[/QUOTE]
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?[/QUOTE]
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.
people on streets
[QUOTE] [b]brians wig wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Barry Durex wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]brians wig wrote:[/b]
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.
[/QUOTE]
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.
[/QUOTE]
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.
[/QUOTE]
http://www.gzvinyl.com/
Good luck. Make nice artwork. :)
[QUOTE] [b]Barry Durex wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]brians wig wrote:[/b]
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.
[/QUOTE]
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.
[/QUOTE]
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.
[/QUOTE]
http://www.gzvinyl.com/
Good luck. Make nice artwork. :)
people on streets
[QUOTE] [b]brians wig wrote:[/b]
I've even paid for a licence with MCP to do it as well.
[/QUOTE]
Wich license did you get?
This one?
http://www.prsformusic.com/users/recordedmedia/cdsandvinyl/Pages/AP1AP2.aspx
Interesting stuff. 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? That's how it works in my country. PM me if you like. I'm very interested in the legal aspects of all this.
Good luck with all.
I've even paid for a licence with MCP to do it as well.
[/QUOTE]
Wich license did you get?
This one?
http://www.prsformusic.com/users/recordedmedia/cdsandvinyl/Pages/AP1AP2.aspx
Interesting stuff. 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? That's how it works in my country. PM me if you like. I'm very interested in the legal aspects of all this.
Good luck with all.
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]people on streets wrote:[/b]
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?[/QUOTE]
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...
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?[/QUOTE]
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...
people on streets
[QUOTE] 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...
[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the answer.
It all depends on the money being made from the product that is released. Those 14 year olds don't earn money from their youtube uploads.
I can't imagine that the Bootleg LP's will be handed out freely or at costprice.
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...
[/QUOTE]
Thanks for the answer.
It all depends on the money being made from the product that is released. Those 14 year olds don't earn money from their youtube uploads.
I can't imagine that the Bootleg LP's will be handed out freely or at costprice.
Ghostwithasmile is BACK!
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]people on streets wrote:[/b]
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?[/QUOTE]
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...
[/QUOTE]
Legal aspects of this are different in each country.
Queen owns the publishing rights of their music in what form ever. Some countries disagree on this fact : like Italy were bootlegging was legal in some sort of form. Many bootleg cd were released in Italy during the 90's end 90's they stopped this due a change of this law. In australia it was legal to sell unauthorised cd's as long as they printed "umauthorised" on it.
No- one can access the legal rights to any reproduction of Queens lyrics, sound , image or what so ever with the purpose of making money out of this.
These things are very well written down at a Swiss legal company.
[QUOTE] [b]people on streets wrote:[/b]
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?[/QUOTE]
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...
[/QUOTE]
Legal aspects of this are different in each country.
Queen owns the publishing rights of their music in what form ever. Some countries disagree on this fact : like Italy were bootlegging was legal in some sort of form. Many bootleg cd were released in Italy during the 90's end 90's they stopped this due a change of this law. In australia it was legal to sell unauthorised cd's as long as they printed "umauthorised" on it.
No- one can access the legal rights to any reproduction of Queens lyrics, sound , image or what so ever with the purpose of making money out of this.
These things are very well written down at a Swiss legal company.
Ghostwithasmile is BACK!
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]people on streets wrote:[/b]
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?[/QUOTE]
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...
[/QUOTE]
Legal aspects of this are different in each country.
Queen owns the publishing rights of their music in what form ever. Some countries disagree on this fact : like Italy were bootlegging was legal in some sort of form. Many bootleg cd were released in Italy during the 90's end 90's they stopped this due a change of this law. In australia it was legal to sell unauthorised cd's as long as they printed "umauthorised" on it.
No- one can access the legal rights to any reproduction of Queens lyrics, sound , image or what so ever with the purpose of making money out of this.
These things are very well written down at a Swiss legal company.
[QUOTE] [b]people on streets wrote:[/b]
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?[/QUOTE]
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...
[/QUOTE]
Legal aspects of this are different in each country.
Queen owns the publishing rights of their music in what form ever. Some countries disagree on this fact : like Italy were bootlegging was legal in some sort of form. Many bootleg cd were released in Italy during the 90's end 90's they stopped this due a change of this law. In australia it was legal to sell unauthorised cd's as long as they printed "umauthorised" on it.
No- one can access the legal rights to any reproduction of Queens lyrics, sound , image or what so ever with the purpose of making money out of this.
These things are very well written down at a Swiss legal company.
Ghostwithasmile is BACK!
Oh and BW when you want to make a vinyl or a pressed cd pm me or contact me through Facebook
Ghostwithasmile is BACK!
Oh and BW when you want to make a vinyl or a pressed cd pm me or contact me through Facebook
people on streets
[QUOTE] [b]Ghostwithasmile is BACK! wrote:[/b]
These things are very well written down at a Swiss legal company.
[/QUOTE]
Wich one? Do you have a link to the document?
These things are very well written down at a Swiss legal company.
[/QUOTE]
Wich one? Do you have a link to the document?
Ghostwithasmile is BACK!
"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. "
Remember them re-selling the bootlegs at the top100 bootleg project? Those were direct rips of those bootlegs
Remember them re-selling the bootlegs at the top100 bootleg project? Those were direct rips of those bootlegs
BETA215
[QUOTE]
[b]Ghostwithasmile is BACK! wrote: [/b] Remember them re-selling the bootlegs at the top100 bootleg project? Those were direct rips of those bootlegs[/QUOTE]
Including the long-awaited Montreal 1981 concert as a bootleg. LOL
[b]Ghostwithasmile is BACK! wrote: [/b] Remember them re-selling the bootlegs at the top100 bootleg project? Those were direct rips of those bootlegs[/QUOTE]
Including the long-awaited Montreal 1981 concert as a bootleg. LOL
Holly2003
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
So .... selling bootlegs is fine now? [/QUOTE]
If you read the owner of the tape's explanation and proceed not to use binary thinking - then perhaps yes.
[/QUOTE]
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?[/QUOTE]
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.[/QUOTE]
Wow it doesn't take much for you to start firing the insults off. So what did I do to deserve your wrath this time your lordship?
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
So .... selling bootlegs is fine now? [/QUOTE]
If you read the owner of the tape's explanation and proceed not to use binary thinking - then perhaps yes.
[/QUOTE]
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?[/QUOTE]
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.[/QUOTE]
Wow it doesn't take much for you to start firing the insults off. So what did I do to deserve your wrath this time your lordship?