IDM Mailing Archive

Although I don't own a record label or make music myself I can't understand why people who do get so upset ("fuckface"?) about the whole issue of bootleging, and I think they may be looking at it from the entirely wrong perspective. Try to see it where I'm coming from: I'm a huge AFX fan, fucking massive, I've bought every single thing I can find. And I mean everything, remixes, everything. Still, since I've only been a fan for about 1 1/2 years there are certain things I just can't find: Analogue Bubble Bath 3 on CD, the Caustic Window Joy Rex Eps, Q-Chastic, Power Pill, and the chances of me EVER finding any of these are very slim. Even though I've called countless stores, mail order houses, record finders, etc. no luck. Now imagine you where a Beatles fan, the biggest Beatles fan in the world and couldn't, no matter how hard you looked, find a copy of Sgt. Pepper or The White Album. You can imagine how insanely depressing this might be, especially being able to hear snipets on the web and knowing that other people do have these releases, but you never will and will never have a chance to hear them in their entirerity. If someone were to make a bootleg of these releases, which I cannot find anyway and where no longer in print, how would I be hurting the label? I'm not taking money from it, because it has no competing product, its long gone. But look how happy it would make me? And if the label WERE to come out with re-issues of the material at some later date I would certainly buy them in an instant, in fact I'd probably have them on special order and wait all day in the store until the UPS van pulled up, because the quality of an official release would surely be better than the bootleg. I have bought identical copies of Bootleged material officialy released at a later date (Nirvana Unplugged, unreleased Velvet Underground), and I assume most people willing to shell out the amount of money for bootlegs, being bigger fans than your average, would do the same as well. I have never bought bootleged material where an official release is available, it simply doesn't make sense. Oh well. -Fresh Orange County, California USA ========================================================================= Fullerton College claims no responsibility to the opinion expressed above (This is an automatic stamp from our Email system and not from the user.) =========================================================================

quoted 1 line [...] I don't own a record label or make music myself

> [...] I don't own a record label or make music myself

quoted 2 lines I can't understand why people [...] get so upset [...] about the whole

> I can't understand why people [...] get so upset [...] about the whole > issue of bootleging [sic],

There's your answer. If you owned a label or made music, you would easily understand.

quoted 1 line Try to see it where I'm coming from:

> Try to see it where I'm coming from:

Try to see where Grant's coming from.

quoted 4 lines Still, [...] there are certain things I just can't

> Still, [...] there are certain things I just can't > find: Analogue Bubble Bath 3 on CD, the Caustic Window JoyRex Eps, > Q-Chastic, Power Pill, and the chances of me EVER finding any of these > are very slim.

I would be willing to guess that if I went back through my IDM archives (almost 2 years' worth now, and I didn't even join when it began), I could probably find a posting from someone offering any one of the above for sale. (What ever happened to Des' big Aphex-related selloff?)

quoted 3 lines You can imagine how insanely depressing this might be, [...] knowing that

> You can imagine how insanely depressing this might be, [...] knowing that > other people do have these releases, but you never will and will never have > a chance to hear them in their entirety.

So instead of asking somebody that owns them to make you a "fan" tape of them, you'd rather have someone bootleg them illegally and incur the further rath of the label owner? It's bad enough he already probably thinks of this list as being filled with pathetic young spotty college student trainspotters ... (who keep spouting disinformation about his label/artists, in case you didn't read his most recent missive) Also, consider that there might be people in your own backyard (figuratively speaking) that own these records. I can categorically state that within an hour's drive of your house, *somebody* owns almost all of the records you quoted above. :-)

quoted 1 line But look how happy it would make me?

> But look how happy it would make me?

And of course, your happiness is the only thing that matters here?

quoted 2 lines And if the label WERE to come out with re-issues of the material at some

> And if the label WERE to come out with re-issues of the material at some > later date I would certainly buy them in an instant [...]

But the label may not be in a position to simply repress something that John Q. Trainspotter from Orange County California wants ... I've not been to the RePHLeX HQ but I suspect it's a *wee* bit smaller than, say, the General Motors plant in Van Nuys CA ... this is sort of like complaining to Aston Martin that they don't produce their hand-built cars like all the other robot-equipped production line manufacturers. In short, I think by now everyone on this list should have realized that RePHLeX is a small operation and is thus subject to ups and downs and vagarities that do not impact larger concerns as much; therefore we should be happy with what we get. Does it really *matter* whether "Bluff Limbo" gets re-issued on CD? It's only a record, it's not the 2nd Coming fer chrissakes. Get some perspective, already. (And yes, I am aware that 'way back at age 21, I *did* indeed treat certain records - "154" ... "Unknown Pleasures" - as the 2nd Coming ... (-: ) - Greg

On Sat, 2 Mar 1996, Greg Earle wrote:

quoted 4 lines I would be willing to guess that if I went back through my IDM archives

> I would be willing to guess that if I went back through my IDM archives > (almost 2 years' worth now, and I didn't even join when it began), I > could probably find a posting from someone offering any one of the above > for sale. (What ever happened to Des' big Aphex-related selloff?)

Yeah, but how does that help *now* ? :-)

quoted 3 lines So instead of asking somebody that owns them to make you a "fan" tape of them,

> So instead of asking somebody that owns them to make you a "fan" tape of them, > you'd rather have someone bootleg them illegally and incur the further rath of > the label owner?

You seem to be saying making a "fan" cassette copy is ok but a "fan" CD copy is not. I don't see much difference, both are illegal bootlegs, they're just in different formats. Assuming I'm interpreting correctly what you meant correctly, if someone wants to make 20 cassette copies (or even *one* cassette copy) of Caustic Window ep's for 20 idm friends how is that any different than making 20 Cd copies? I'm not siding with one side over the other here, but this seems incongruent. I recognize both sides of the issue but I sort of wonder how anti-bootleg people deal with the issue of cassette copies for friends. Do you never make cassettes? On a related note: Alan, I'm still looking for: B12 - prelude pt 1 CD, Philosophy of Sound and machine CD, Applied Rhythmic Technology CD will pay *at least* $30 each...maybe more. You said most all rare stuff is available (at places like Modern music)...are my wants available *anywhere*? If so please drop me a line...ANYBODY please drop me a line. Respects, Tony

quoted 8 lines On Sat, 2 Mar 1996, Greg Earle wrote:

> On Sat, 2 Mar 1996, Greg Earle wrote: > >> I would be willing to guess that if I went back through my IDM archives >> (almost 2 years' worth now, and I didn't even join when it began), I >> could probably find a posting from someone offering any one of the above >> for sale. (What ever happened to Des' big Aphex-related selloff?) > > Yeah, but how does that help *now* ? :-)

Point being that from time to time, these things do bubble to the surface and escape. "Patience, young Grasshopper ... "

quoted 11 lines So instead of asking somebody that owns them to make you a fan tape of them,

>> So instead of asking somebody that owns them to make you a fan tape of them, >> you'd rather have someone bootleg them illegally and incur the further rath >> of the label owner? > > You seem to be saying making a "fan" cassette copy is ok but a "fan" CD > copy is not. I don't see much difference, both are illegal bootlegs, they're > just in different formats. Assuming I'm interpreting correctly what you > meant correctly, if someone wants to make 20 cassette copies (or even > *one* cassette copy) of Caustic Window EP's for 20 idm friends how is > that any different than making 20 CD copies? I'm not siding with one > side over the other here, but this seems incongruent.

Who said anything about 20 copies? I was answering Gonzi's particular problem. *He* wants the stuff. I don't think it kills anybody to make a tape for somebody else with some rare trax on it. But when you're talking 20 copies now you're talking "possession with intent to sell", i.e. kinda like getting caught with a blunt as opposed to an oh-zee :-) Besides, if we start talking about 20 or more dups of anything, we're sliding down the slippery slope towards the whole "Ethicality of mix tapes" argument, and Lord knows I got enough of *that* from the SoCal-Raves list before I hopped off ...

quoted 4 lines Philosophy of Sound and machine CD

> Philosophy of Sound and machine CD > > will pay *at least* $30 each...maybe more. You said most all rare stuff is > available (at places like Modern music); are my wants available *anywhere*?

Well, "Philosophy of Sound of Machine" is available in my house :-) Tell you what, buy me a roundtrip to London on 14th so I can catch the RDJ/MS (Mighty Squarepusher) gig, and you can have it :-) - Greg

yes but the key to the whole argument is SELLING the bootlegs to IDM friends...using music that does not belong to you to make money...I guess if you could find someone to MAKE a tape to GIVE to you of the rephlex stuff, that would be a lesser evil....

On Sat, 2 Mar 1996, Gonzalo Merchan wrote:

quoted 4 lines find: Analogue Bubble Bath 3 on CD, the Caustic Window Joy Rex Eps,

> find: Analogue Bubble Bath 3 on CD, the Caustic Window Joy Rex Eps, > Q-Chastic, Power Pill, and the chances of me EVER finding any of these > are very slim. Even though I've called countless stores, mail order > houses, record finders, etc. no luck. Now imagine you where a Beatles

FYI, Modern Music in Baltimore has as shitload of rare Aphex/Rephlex stuff just sitting in the bins - Universal Indicators red and blue, Curve remix, Powerpill (black and yellow vinyl versions), Joyrex J4, AB3 etc. You can expect to pay out the arse for it, but it is there and available. :: Alan M. Parry :: fluid@hyperreal.com :: <finger me for PGP key> :: http://hyperreal.com/~fluid

I don't own any bootlegs of anybody. The prices are usually ripoffs and they sound quality is usually second rate. Then again, the Orb's live album sounded worse than a couple bootlegs ive heard. I do like the IDEA of bootlegs because it takes money away from record companies who are either money-grubbers or they are these snooty ambient/techno 'underground' labels who take themselves too seriously. When I was doing my radio show I tried a million times to get on the promo lists of some of these companies and was told 'we dont provide promotional material to radio, even non-commercial radio'...As if they made the stuff of life at their company. As a result of those policies I was unable to provide a lot of new music to listeners who aould have been reached and promted to buy the stuff retail...etc etc... So, had I been able to find unauthorized copies of whoever's music, damn straight id buy it, broadcast it, etc. If they had a gripe, id say: increase security at your shows and tell your label to step off and make the music more readily accessible. I live in shitville, deepsouth, USA...they have a hard time not stocking 100% country down here. I have to work hard to get these tunes, and they should take that into account and at least make the stuff available to radio and the media who review the stuff. On the retail end, most people wont sell actual bootlegs, and those who do classify them as 'imports' to get around a few laws and to justify the 40.00+ price tags. On the bad side, the only bootlegs produced in large quality around here have been...hmmm...'hootie' and the like. Anyway...I know that the integrity of the artform is preserved by making the stuff harder to get and producing limited quantities, etc... But I agree with G.M. in that the starving know few bounds when it comes to getting food. I will do anything but steal the shit from the stores... And I have come close to doing that. :) Jasonosaj

On Sun, 3 Mar 1996, Alphabet Design wrote:

quoted 7 lines When I was doing my radio show I tried a million times to get on the

> When I was doing my radio show I tried a million times to get on the > promo lists of some of these companies and was told 'we dont provide > promotional material to radio, even non-commercial radio'...As if they > made the stuff of life at their company. As a result of those policies I > was unable to provide a lot of new music to listeners who aould have been > reached and promted to buy the stuff retail...etc etc... >

The truth is that most people who listen to non-commercial radio are not prompted to run out and buy the stuff. Sure you can give a hundred anecdotes of stuff you and your friends have heard on the radio and run out and bought, but for every story like that there are thousands of people hearing thousands of songs who aren't moved to go buy a single thing. The hit and miss nature of the thing, along with the fact that most small labels can't afford to just flush money down the toilet like that. Also, don't forget that there is often a chorus of hundreds of whining voices saying "I'm a DJ and I luuuv you, so send me lots of free stuff" (many of whom turn bratty when you say "No, I can't afford it") makes doing promos for DJs and radio really more trouble then it is usually worth. Jeff --------------------------------------------------------------- Jeffrey G Reid jgreid@u.washington.edu --------------------------------------------------------------- "O holy mathematics, may I for the rest of my days be consoled by perpetual intercourse with you, consoled for the wickedness of man and the injustice of the Almighty!" -- Isidore Ducasse

quoted 2 lines The truth is that most people who listen to non-commercial radio are not

> The truth is that most people who listen to non-commercial radio are not > prompted to run out and buy the stuff.

Granted, the radio show was in a small area which by population alone would not generate tons of sales... BUT... Nearly 3/4 of the calls the show received were : "What is that and where can I get it?" The answer to which was: Tower Records, Atlanta (6 hrs away) or Tower Records, New Orleans (5 Hrs) or Mail Order (Rip off, unguaranteed stock)

quoted 3 lines whining voices saying "I'm a DJ and I luuuv you, so send me lots of free

> whining voices saying "I'm a DJ and I luuuv you, so send me lots of free > stuff" (many of whom turn bratty when you say "No, I can't afford it") makes > doing promos for DJs and radio really more trouble then it is usually worth.

I imagine that could get annoying. I never approached it that way though. I would send a brief letter describing the show, the format, the area demographics, the show's ratings and also request to be added to the promotionals list. No phone calls or whiny voices. It was either go broke spending my own money on the radio show, which I did not get paid to do, or ask for promos, or play old crap all the time. The show had a budget of as much as 15 new cds a semester, but that was a miracle. Plus, how much trouble is doing your job (If your job is promotionals/pr)? It is a cycle. If you dont promote, you wont sell, then you 'can't afford' to promote. The old saying 'it takes money to make money' is true. All radio is, really, is advertisement for music.

On Mon, 4 Mar 1996, Alphabet Design wrote:

quoted 2 lines All radio is, really, is advertisement for music.

> All radio is, really, is advertisement for music. >

It is possible for radio to be more than an ad or music. Non-commercial, community and college station are supposed to be free rom commercialism. It's not always going to happen as many programmers will take the easy route and play whatever everybody else is playing. Being a non-commercial station which you mentioned that you were, frees you from record companies. It's a true gift when you realize that commercial radio stations program what they play weeks in advance. At a commercial station they are adverrtising music. Most commercial stations don't even have entire albums and they get sent special cd with about 15 songs (all big singles) from te labels MOST major artists. These get ed into a Sony jukebox and programming takes care off itself. I do have a radio show. I play techno. I know I have a a fairly big following but I never get phone calls. One week I decided not to announce any song titles. Still no phone calls. Check with my friends in the next couple of days, and yeah, they had listened but they didn't care about the song titles. They are only listening to enjoy and to be especially exposed to somethhing they can't get anywhere else. (in a city of 80000). sorry or the long pointless(?) rant, but I feel strongly about college radio and I never see my show as an ad, cause I know people aren't going to run out and buy Disjecta, but they do enjoy when they hear it. Phil Downey

quoted 2 lines It is possible for radio to be more than an ad or music. Non-commercial,

> It is possible for radio to be more than an ad or music. Non-commercial, > community and college station are supposed to be free rom commercialism.

Nope. Just free from COMMERCIALS. They still manage to have 'underwriters' who 'donate' money to the station. Its the same as an ad, just the terminology has to be different to avoid FCC violations.

quoted 2 lines It's not always going to happen as many programmers will take the easy

> It's not always going to happen as many programmers will take the easy > route and play whatever everybody else is playing.

That is true in many senses... The station I worked at was on a schedule of sorts, but there was never a set list. My show was in another block in which I could determine the format and the content.

quoted 2 lines Being a non-commercial station which you mentioned that you were, frees

> Being a non-commercial station which you mentioned that you were, frees > you from record companies.

I get what youre saying, sort of... But the record companies still make records whether the station is commercial or not...so I dont follow you completely. A non comm station doesnt have to be at the mercy of the top 40 charts, but they still have to get the tunes from somewhere...

quoted 3 lines I do have a radio show. I play techno. I know I have a a fairly big

> I do have a radio show. I play techno. I know I have a a fairly big > following but I never get phone calls. One week I decided not to > announce any song titles. Still no phone calls.

Hmm.. I rarely ever said anything on air except at the beginning of the show and the top of the hour...and I rarely announced titles...but i did distribute a playlist which included order numbers, etc. I also made a point of promoting the show and such... The local music shops reported an increase of sales in ambient/techno...as well as increased orders... Also reported were customers coming in the stores with printed copies of the playlist so that they could get the spellings right. I wanted the audience to want to own the music so that the stores would stock more of it so that *I* could buy more of it.

quoted 4 lines Check with my friends

> Check with my friends > in the next couple of days, and yeah, they had listened but they didn't > care about the song titles. They are only listening to enjoy and to be > especially exposed to somethhing they can't get anywhere else.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Yeah, especially the record stores and the like. I wanted my audience to know what the form was, and to want to own it. I would review a couple CDS every now and then and 'recommend' CDs I knew would not be found locally. You have to create an audience of followers to keep the spot on the air, and the audience must have a market in which to buy the stuff you have just convinced them that they like. Why in the world would you think that non comm radio was not selling music? It is just selling the music that isnt on the top 40 (Yet). Billboard rates the fringe music as well. Plus, look at CMJ...etc etc....they all have charts. Music stores read those charts...and buy CDs based on the charts. And thats how the fringe makes it to the mainstream. Its like that water cycle from gradeschool. 10 years from now the top 40 crap of today will be retro-alternative and then top 40 all over again! Isnt it exciting?! But I dont care about any of that. I just want the damn music that I like right now. I dont want to be driving 6 hours for CD's. I have to plan a weekend to go to the record store and that travel cash diminishes my buying power. But anyway. All radio sells music. You might be all idealistic and say 'Oh, I never sell the music and MY listeners just love the music' and all that hogwash, but Im telling you that someone heard and liked and BOUGHT and thats what I mean by advertising. A thing is presented in a public forum, is preferred over other things... is purchased...no sales pitch necessary. Maybe he loved the music, like you say, and that was all...but he still BOUGHT it. Jasonosaj

quoted 3 lines sorry or the long pointless(?) rant, but I feel strongly about college

>sorry or the long pointless(?) rant, but I feel strongly about college >radio and I never see my show as an ad, cause I know people aren't going >to run out and buy Disjecta, but they do enjoy when they hear it.

I agree. Here in Dallas/Fort Worth, TCU has the only 'real' college radio station in the area [that broadcasts a wide range of programming farther than fifty feet]. At night we play the same 200 playlisted "modern rock" songs. Every night. And all day on Saturday. It gets a little disgusting. There are plenty of students here who are keen on programming their own specialty shows. But they aren't granted that privilege. The only thing KTCU management seems to be really interested in is promoting the Toadies or Tripping Daisy or any similar mediocre local rock artists. I had to plead my arse off to get a idm/ambient/dub show [which should be on the air early April], and I might have to deal with a shitty time slot [2am - 5am Fridays], but at least it's a start. It pains me to see a facility as modern as KTCU in a city as cosmopolitan as Dallas/Fort Worth almost completely wasted. I feel very strongly about non-conventional radio; commercial or not. I'm glad someone else does. Which brings me to a good question. Which domestic labels could I count on for support [i.e.: new releases + performance info]? I have an outstanding personal library regardless. It's nice to be able to weasel new material, though. .grant .http://delta.is.tcu.edu/~ghhorne/ .the.slugs.have.eaten.all.the.lettuce.tim

I was on a mail list last year and one of the guys was doing a project for a marketing class. His thesis was that bootlegs of concerts, unreleased, or unavailable tracks should not be illegal because they pose no threat of lowering the demand on the label's/artist's current "legitimately" released work. After I answered his survey on my music buying habits, I asked him to send a copy of his paper to me. He hasn't. Anyone familiar with this person? His point is that most people that buy bootlegs don't do it to save money, they do it cause they want (need?) everything! I think most people would agree with this. Dave

At 12:31 02/03/96 -0800, you wrote:

quoted 10 lines Although I don't own a record label or make music myself I can't

>Although I don't own a record label or make music myself I can't >understand why people who do get so upset ("fuckface"?) about the whole >issue of bootleging, and I think they may be looking at it from the >entirely wrong perspective. Try to see it where I'm coming from: I'm a >huge AFX fan, fucking massive, I've bought every single thing I can >find. And I mean everything, remixes, everything. Still, since I've only >been a fan for about 1 1/2 years there are certain things I just can't >find: Analogue Bubble Bath 3 on CD, the Caustic Window Joy Rex Eps, >Q-Chastic, Power Pill, and the chances of me EVER finding any of these >are very slim.

The fundamental right of copyright goes far beyond a few Aphex tracks. The quick (and simplistic) answer to why you would be absolutely wrong to distribute RDJ's music like this is quite simply because it is not yours to distribute. You would be commiting *common theft*. Willful breach of copyright is both a civil and criminal offence in the US. I'm sure you wouldn't advocate stealing his tank or one of his keyboards so why should you want to steal something which is even closer to him? RDJs music is his. He assigns the rights to it (in this case to Rephlex), not you. If he (or they) don't wanna give it to you (for what ever reason) - tuff!! Live with it. I've just deleted about 3 more paragraphs of me ranting on about how just because you like something passionately doesn't give you the right to nick it etc etc. But i think you get the general idea. g. :::::Warp Net!(TM)::::: http://www.warp-net.com

quoted 11 lines You seem to be saying making a "fan" cassette copy is ok but a "fan" C

>You seem to be saying making a "fan" cassette copy is ok but a "fan" CD >copy is not. I don't see much difference, both are illegal bootlegs, they're >just in different formats. Assuming I'm interpreting correctly what you >meant correctly, if someone wants to make 20 cassette copies (or even >*one* cassette copy) of Caustic Window ep's for 20 idm friends how is >that any different than making 20 Cd copies? I'm not siding with one >side over the other here, but this seems incongruent. > >I recognize both sides of the issue but I sort of wonder how anti-bootleg >people deal with the issue of cassette copies for friends. Do you never >make cassettes?

At least part of the difference, I think, is the issue of selling. If I were to make myself a one-off CD of (say) the Joyrexes for my _own_personal_use_, that's one thing ... same as making a backup copy of valuable computer software ... but if I duped a bunch and sold them for profit, that would be a serious no-no. If I made a bunch of one-off CDs and gave them to IDMers as gifts, I still think that would be wrong ... because a CD reference is a (near)-perfect digital copy, and the rights to the songs and Sound Master are owned by the label, artist, and/or publisher. For cassettes the issue gets a little hazier, but tape-dubbing has always been a can of worms. Personally, I feel that if I make a friend a cassette of (say) some Aphex stuff as a gift, then that's fine: It's not a near-perfect copy, I'm not making a profit, and if my friend likes it they usually go out and buy an Aphex album (so IMHO the label should be happy too). But, again, if I dupe a load of tapes and sell them ... that's bad news. As mentioned before, just because _you_ want a copy of the record doesn't mean that it's going to be financially sound for the record label to invest in pressing more. C'mon, part of the fun of transpotting is busting your butt for years to find one lousy remix or b-side! As a conciliatory note to Grant: The only reason this nonsense is going on is that we psychotically love your products! We're not setting out to screw you or make your life miserable, but please understand that very few consumers understand the technicalities and financial trials of owning a record label. (Implied: There are many, many technicalities and financial trials of owning a record label.) --Seofon, "pathetic young spotty college student trainspotter"

On Sat, 2 Mar 1996, Seofon wrote:

quoted 5 lines At least part of the difference, I think, is the issue of selling. If I

> At least part of the difference, I think, is the issue of selling. If I > were to make myself a one-off CD of (say) the Joyrexes for my > _own_personal_use_, that's one thing ... same as making a backup copy of > valuable computer software ... but if I duped a bunch and sold them for > profit, that would be a serious no-no.

Yeah, but I don't think people here have that in mind. I think the 20 CD copies of Caustic Window ep's was suggested by someone to be sold at cost not profit. What if someone made 20 copies and sold them at cost? I've never seen anyone on IDM trying to sell dupes of anything for a profit. If I made a bunch of one-off CDs

quoted 4 lines and gave them to IDMers as gifts, I still think that would be wrong ...

> and gave them to IDMers as gifts, I still think that would be wrong ... > because a CD reference is a (near)-perfect digital copy, and the rights to > the songs and Sound Master are owned by the label, artist, and/or > publisher.

But a high quality cassette is not much different from a Cd in terms of quality. This is what is perplexing to me in these sorts of debates...some say it's ok to "bootleg" a deleted release onto cassette for a friend or fellow IDM'er (as long as it's not for profit) but copying onto a CD isn't ok (even if not for profit)...Doesn't the label still own the rights whether it's on CD, cassette or Dat? Even if it's a muddy dub on a low bias cassette they'd still own the rights wouldn't they? Anyway, we all have our opinions I guess. :-)

quoted 4 lines As mentioned before, just because _you_ want a copy of the record doesn't

> As mentioned before, just because _you_ want a copy of the record doesn't > mean that it's going to be financially sound for the record label to invest > in pressing more. C'mon, part of the fun of transpotting is busting your > butt for years to find one lousy remix or b-side!

Yup, and I've done that for years and have a pretty impressive collection of rare music as a result, but I'm getting to the point where I don't have the kind of time to invest in tracking these hard to find item down anymore. I spent *months* tracking down all the Fax CD's (and calling all over the world) But now, I (and I think the average person) don't have this kind of time to spend trying to find stuff. Well anyway...just my little rant. Tony

Gonzalo Merchan wrote:

quoted 5 lines If someone were to make a bootleg of these

> If someone were to make a bootleg of these > releases, which I cannot find anyway and where no longer in print, how > would I be hurting the label? I'm not taking money from it, because it > has no competing product, its long gone. But look how happy it would > make me?

I dunno, if the tunes are copyrighted, bootlegging the stuff is stealing and indefensible on any grounds. I can easily see why a label could upset about this. On another subject, I finally decided to check out the Orbital 'Times Fly' single and liked how they included the original samples they used for their breaks in the slower version of the title song. Any recommendations in terms of other tunes that use slow, clean-sounding breaks? It's stylistically refreshing in comparison to most breakbeat stuff which always seems to run at the same tempo and sounds somewhat muddy. GD

On Sat, 02 Mar 1996 14:52:44 -0800 Greg Earle wrote:

quoted 5 lines I've not been to the RePHLeX HQ but I suspect it's a *wee* bit smaller

>I've not been to the RePHLeX HQ but I suspect it's a *wee* bit smaller >than, say, the General Motors plant in Van Nuys CA ... this is sort >of like complaining to Aston Martin that they don't produce their >hand-built cars like all the other robot-equipped production line >manufacturers.

i can see it now... the dedicated rephlex staff toiling day and night chiseling the vinyl grooves by hand... . ...heh. from a rustic -<J> 'hmmm' <G>

quoted 1 line His point is that most people that buy bootlegs don't do it to save

>>His point is that most people that buy bootlegs don't do it to save

His definition of *bootleg* is slightly different (I believe) then what prompted this discussion. We are talking about the recording and reproduction of an authentic pre-recorded production. He is talking about the recording and reproduction of a live *performance*. A distinction worth making. IMO. Teep obligatory IDM content: Get ready for the next Morgan Geist on Metamorphic! It's *fantastic!*

At 10:08 04/03/96 -0600, you wrote:

quoted 13 lines I was on a mail list last year and one of the guys was doing a project

>I was on a mail list last year and one of the guys was doing a project >for a marketing class. His thesis was that bootlegs of concerts, >unreleased, or unavailable tracks should not be illegal because they pose >no threat of lowering the demand on the label's/artist's current >"legitimately" released work. > >After I answered his survey on my music buying habits, I asked him to >send a copy of his paper to me. He hasn't. Anyone familiar with this >person? > >His point is that most people that buy bootlegs don't do it to save >money, they do it cause they want (need?) everything! I think most >people would agree with this.

The point is that whatever the quality, be it DAT/CD/tape/or 0s and 1s scratched out on someones arse and no matter whether you are selling it at a loss or profit - YOU ARE TAKING SOMETHING WHICH DOES NOT BELONG TO YOU. Think yourselves lucky; the majors are currently trying to think of ways to outlaw the sale of second hand CDs and they have commercially penalised shops selling second hand CDs in the past. g. :::::Warp Net!(TM)::::: http://www.warp-net.com

g303 wrote:

quoted 5 lines The point is that whatever the quality, be it DAT/CD/tape/or 0s and 1s

> > The point is that whatever the quality, be it DAT/CD/tape/or 0s and 1s > scratched out on someones arse and no matter whether you are selling it > at a loss or profit - YOU ARE TAKING SOMETHING WHICH DOES NOT BELONG TO > YOU.

Of course, it is perfectly legal to make mix tapes for people, in the US anyways, for non-commercial purposes. However you feel about ownership, those are the rules. I believe it also applies to mix CDs as well, were you to be in posession of a CDR. As long as it is not a commercial enterprise, I am within my legal rights to do this. That is the law. In terms of taking something which is not yours, what are you referring to? Surely you are not referring to royalties, because there is no way for the record company or the artist to receive any further financial renumeration for the transfer of ownership of a medium containing that artist's music once all media containing that artist's music are sold and the record company decides not to produce any more. Once it's out of print, no more money can be made unless the label decides to put it back in print. And the facts are, especially when referring to the crowd on this list, that pretty much everyone here, given the choice, would rather have the "real thing" over a copy, which is to say that even if someone decided to make a CD of the Joyrex tracks and give it away, and then later Rephlex were to print up legitimate ones and sell them, I can't imagine that we would not all purchase the legitimate one. Are you referring to the ownership of the "art?" Which is to say, the artist feels that his/her "art" consists of 500 slabs of vinyl with music s/he made engraved into it, to be sold by a licensee of his/her choice at standard commercial prices, rather than just the music itself? And once someone decides to press up 5 more for their friends, this constitutes a violation of the artist by changing his/her art without permission? This is an interesting philosophical question, but you would have to agree that, legally, there's no basis for this. Or are you referring to the concept that "only 500 people should hear this," which is easily violated simply by playing the music on the radio? In this picture, given that it is legal for me to record the music in any non-commercial manner I choose, on any medium I choose, what *exactly* am I taking that doesn't belong to me? -- Adam J Weitzman ----- Individual, Inc. ----- weitzman@individual.com "I love the music of the 20th century!" - Bruce Willis, "12 Monkeys"

On Mon, 4 Mar 1996, Adam J Weitzman wrote:

quoted 6 lines Of course, it is perfectly legal to make mix tapes for people, in the US

> > Of course, it is perfectly legal to make mix tapes for people, in the US > anyways, for non-commercial purposes. However you feel about ownership, > those are the rules. I believe it also applies to mix CDs as well, were > you to be in posession of a CDR. As long as it is not a commercial > enterprise, I am within my legal rights to do this. That is the law.

sidestepping the personal arguements here, and interupting (ahem) how would anyone care to define non-commercial purposes. I see mix tapes for sale at hipster music stores for the average of $10. how can this be not a profit? can one justify this price by listing semi-bogus costs such as packaging, shipping, promotion, etc... Im interested cause i want to start selling my mix tapes in stores, for a profit if i can! Im all for this as mix tapes to me are a whole different art form than originals. I remember some recent supreme court decision saying ( i think concerning a software company legal dispute) something to the effect that if the merchandise has its own unique method of delivery/story telling/context, even if it shares identical content in some way with anothers product, it is still not an infringment, and can be considered unique... hows that for a vague synopsis! basically if you retell another persons original story in your own unique way, it is then your story legally...anyhow, it struck me as very reasonable, but a bit different than the laws that are used for music these days (unfortunately) perhaps im a bit off base here- any one care to correct/flame me...

quoted 14 lines In terms of taking something which is not yours, what are you referring

> In terms of taking something which is not yours, what are you referring > to? Surely you are not referring to royalties, because there is no way > for the record company or the artist to receive any further financial > renumeration for the transfer of ownership of a medium containing that > artist's music once all media containing that artist's music are sold and > the record company decides not to produce any more. Once it's out of > print, no more money can be made unless the label decides to put it back > in print. And the facts are, especially when referring to the crowd on > this list, that pretty much everyone here, given the choice, would rather > have the "real thing" over a copy, which is to say that even if someone > decided to make a CD of the Joyrex tracks and give it away, and then later > Rephlex were to print up legitimate ones and sell them, I can't imagine > that we would not all purchase the legitimate one. >

are royalties legally binding for djs playing new music on mix tapes or at clubs/raves/etc...?

quoted 8 lines Are you referring to the ownership of the "art?" Which is to say, the

> Are you referring to the ownership of the "art?" Which is to say, the > artist feels that his/her "art" consists of 500 slabs of vinyl with music > s/he made engraved into it, to be sold by a licensee of his/her choice at > standard commercial prices, rather than just the music itself? And once > someone decides to press up 5 more for their friends, this constitutes a > violation of the artist by changing his/her art without permission? This > is an interesting philosophical question, but you would have to agree > that, legally, there's no basis for this.

on another side note, if someone remixes, in my mind it would no longer be the same piece of "art", but a new unique expression... what are the laws concerning remixing anothers work? can one do it, sell it comercially, all without the original artists permission...? I doubt this, but why not? to me it would open the market wide up, and put more focus on quality rather than quatity...(if there are 10 million versions of a song, people are going to start being more choosy...just look at the internet!) bracing myself for the barrage of royalty recievers angry rebuttles- -Thad

I see mix tapes for

quoted 3 lines sale at hipster music stores for the average of $10. how can this be not a

>sale at hipster music stores for the average of $10. how can this be not a >profit? can one justify this price by listing semi-bogus costs such as >packaging, shipping, promotion, etc...

try l.a. or s.f. the norm is $15 for a tape. i know from $5-8 usually go to the stores selling them. it is kinda of funny how the dj's are makin' all the cash w/ their tapes and their gigs but the people making the music (the underground people) are the one's struggling. david *+* on now: new hafler trio 7"

quoted 10 lines if the

>if the >merchandise has its own unique method of delivery/story telling/context, >even if it shares identical content in some way with anothers product, it >is still not an infringment, and can be considered unique... hows that for >a vague synopsis! basically if you retell another persons original story >in your own unique way, it is then your story legally...anyhow, it struck >me as very reasonable, but a bit different than the laws that are used for >music these days (unfortunately) > >perhaps im a bit off base here- any one care to correct/flame me...

You are right! Take sampling, where you use old sounds, or photography, where you basically copy the reality. I would say both these forms of art have creative input so why wouldn't mixtapes? ********************* * Johan Jaatinen * * aniag@info.liu.se * *********************

On Tue, 5 Mar 1996, Farm A Cist wrote:

quoted 22 lines me as very reasonable, but a bit different than the laws that are used for

> > >me as very reasonable, but a bit different than the laws that are used for > > >music these days (unfortunately) > > > > > >perhaps im a bit off base here- any one care to correct/flame me... > > > > You are right! Take sampling, where you use old sounds, or photography, > > where you basically copy the reality. I would say both these forms of art > > have creative input so why wouldn't mixtapes? > > Heck, AFX sampled plenty of beats/breaks/sounds, wouldn't he be satisfied > with the high level of sales he already has had? That is, wouldn't he be > a bit hypocritical in squandering his time over these few trainspotters' > bootlegging, etc? How much money is potentially lost there anyway vs. > what he/REPHLEX-label might make hourly from his creative work? > > All I know is; I am selling tapes of my non-sampled, synth programmed > stuff next to local DJ tapes, and while their mediocre mixes are priced > at $12-15 a tape, my original songs are selling for less! This feels > very wrong to me. Sure there is an art to mixing, but, $15?!?!? A CD of > local ambient-techno programmers sells for less than that and goes to the > people who actually generated the sounds!! >

yes but which ones are selling? that is the real question! dont blame the djs, mediocre or excellent, for your own lack of sales... and BTW, djs (when they are good) generate (or perhaps unfold) once hidden sounds from found sounds... -daht

On Thu, 7 Mar 1996, PIRNIE JUSTIN THOMAS wrote:

quoted 11 lines On Tue, 5 Mar 1996, Farm A Cist wrote:

> On Tue, 5 Mar 1996, Farm A Cist wrote: > > > All I know is; I am selling tapes of my non-sampled, synth programmed > > stuff next to local DJ tapes, and while their mediocre mixes are priced > > at $12-15 a tape, my original songs are selling for less! This feels > > very wrong to me. Sure there is an art to mixing, but, $15?!?!? A CD of > > local ambient-techno programmers sells for less than that and goes to the > > people who actually generated the sounds!! > > > > yes but which ones are selling? that is the real question!

Well, the dj tapes of course! I can't expect many people to by the original music. The techno music industry seems to work like: programmer makes records for dj's (who buy a lot of them) and then sort of resell them to the audiences that they mix for.

quoted 1 line dont blame the djs, mediocre or excellent, for your own lack of sales...

> dont blame the djs, mediocre or excellent, for your own lack of sales...

I don't mean to, but the local clubs won't let live programmers play very much as they really aren't in the business of live music, I guess, as people don't go to see that. I was just pointing out that it was a weird fact of life at present. A music-maker near this genre is not really allowed to sell directly to the average listener of techno/ambient/etc then because it is more of a recorded medium and is very hard to pull off live with the same amount of variety and flexibility a dj has. Also, most dj's don't particularly let the club-goers know what they are playing, so that keeps the dj positioned as a middleman/co-creator, too. Hmm. I was thinking that, while I understand the dynamics, it is just "weird" to see the prices higher for dj tapes than each of the local original music tapes there and know that techno that one makes will reach more listeners ears through an anonymous existence on a dj tape than through the old album-release approach. I think that this allows more experimental programming in the end, (so I guess I'm not really *bothered* by this whole reality) because dj's will buy stuff to filter out the bits with popular appeal or fashionable qualities and just listen to the rest of the odder stuff in their bedrooms at home (i.e. muziq and his mixable and non-mixable incarnations, or just albums vs. 12"s). The reason that all of this is weird to me is I have been programming since before I was aware of the dj'ing scene, so for a long time, I was thinking along the album-release-idea; time for me to toss that old way of thinking! ;-/ ;-} David Chandler - chandler@nethost.multnomah.lib.or.us (503)301-3011 grep -i casio goodwillbins >> mystudio ; grep -i atari goodwillbins >> mystudio ;

quoted 5 lines Of course, it is perfectly legal to make mix tapes for people, in the US

>> Of course, it is perfectly legal to make mix tapes for people, in the US >> anyways, for non-commercial purposes. > > sidestepping the personal arguements here, and interupting (ahem) how > would anyone care to define non-commercial purposes.

If you're selling it, you're engaging in commerce, which makes it for commercial purposes. Whether or not you're actually turning a profit has nothing to do with it, except that your turning a profit makes it easier for the copyright holder to demand damages from you when they sue you.

quoted 6 lines I remember some recent supreme court decision saying ( i think concerning

> I remember some recent supreme court decision saying ( i think concerning > a software company legal dispute) something to the effect that if the > merchandise has its own unique method of delivery/story telling/context, > even if it shares identical content in some way with anothers product, it > is still not an infringment, and can be considered unique... hows that for > a vague synopsis!

I suspect you're missing some essential detail of this, because I'm pretty familiar with copyright law and I'm not aware of any such decision (or even one that might be interpreted this way, at least where software is concerned). If you hold the copyright one a work, you also have the right to control any works that are derived from your original work. This is a very well-established aspect of copyright law.

quoted 2 lines are royalties legally binding for djs playing new music on mix tapes or at

> are royalties legally binding for djs playing new music on mix tapes or at > clubs/raves/etc...?

Yes. If a work is performed in public, the artist has the right to demand royalties. That includes live DJ gigs. (As I mentioned before, this is usually taken care of in the US when venue pays their annual license fees to ASCAP and/or BMI.)

quoted 7 lines [...] the artist feels that his/her "art" consists of 500 slabs of

>> [...] the artist feels that his/her "art" consists of 500 slabs of >> vinyl with music s/he made engraved into it, to be sold by a licensee >> of his/her choice at standard commercial prices, rather than just the >> music itself? And once someone decides to press up 5 more for their >> friends, this constitutes a violation of the artist by changing his/her >> art without permission? This is an interesting philosophical question, >> but you would have to agree that, legally, there's no basis for this.

Urrr, there is certainly plenty of legal basis for preventing this!

quoted 2 lines on another side note, if someone remixes, in my mind it would no longer be

> on another side note, if someone remixes, in my mind it would no longer be > the same piece of "art", but a new unique expression...

A remix is a derivative work, and as such, requires permission from the person who holds the copyright on the work the remix is derived from. -- ::: Lazlo (lazlo@swcp.com; http://www.swcp.com/lazlo)

On Tue, 5 Mar 1996, Lazlo Nibble wrote:

quoted 10 lines Of course, it is perfectly legal to make mix tapes for people, in the US

> >> Of course, it is perfectly legal to make mix tapes for people, in the US > >> anyways, for non-commercial purposes. > > > > sidestepping the personal arguements here, and interupting (ahem) how > > would anyone care to define non-commercial purposes. > > If you're selling it, you're engaging in commerce, which makes it for > commercial purposes. Whether or not you're actually turning a profit has > nothing to do with it, except that your turning a profit makes it easier for > the copyright holder to demand damages from you when they sue you.

ok. thanks for the clarification

quoted 15 lines I remember some recent supreme court decision saying ( i think concerning

> > > I remember some recent supreme court decision saying ( i think concerning > > a software company legal dispute) something to the effect that if the > > merchandise has its own unique method of delivery/story telling/context, > > even if it shares identical content in some way with anothers product, it > > is still not an infringment, and can be considered unique... hows that for > > a vague synopsis! > > I suspect you're missing some essential detail of this, because I'm pretty > familiar with copyright law and I'm not aware of any such decision (or > even one that might be interpreted this way, at least where software is > concerned). If you hold the copyright one a work, you also have the right to > control any works that are derived from your original work. This is a very > well-established aspect of copyright law. >

ok. but is it fair/correct...? I understand an artist's interest in preventing outright *duplication* of his work without his permission, with no changes made to it... but derivated works!?! (its possible i missed some details on the legal dispute, but none that would change my overall point. if my shady memory halfway serves, another example was microsoft being sued for utilizing (not copying!) the mac "look"...the case was denied.

quoted 7 lines are royalties legally binding for djs playing new music on mix tapes or at

> > are royalties legally binding for djs playing new music on mix tapes or at > > clubs/raves/etc...? > > Yes. If a work is performed in public, the artist has the right to demand > royalties. That includes live DJ gigs. (As I mentioned before, this is > usually taken care of in the US when venue pays their annual license fees > to ASCAP and/or BMI.)

ok. again thanks for clarifying. but if a work is mixed up with other works, say four layers on top of one another, who is being creative at that point...? to me its the djs work at that point- he's (she's) making connections between works that were not made evident/manifest before his handiwork...true, he could not have done exactly what he did w/o the originals, but it is *no longer the originals*!

quoted 6 lines on another side note, if someone remixes, in my mind it would no longer be

> > > on another side note, if someone remixes, in my mind it would no longer be > > the same piece of "art", but a new unique expression... > > A remix is a derivative work, and as such, requires permission from the > person who holds the copyright on the work the remix is derived from.

everything is derivative of everything else. (even "original" creations- they did not just come out of nowhere!) the trick is to be innovative with derivation (evolution)- what creation is all about! anyhow- thats my current 16 bit philosophy BTW, there is an interesting web page devoted to mix tapes, with articles discussing the various sides o the arguement. point your netscapes to: urk. lost the address. well anyhow- its out there! just plug the phrase "mix tapes" in to netscapes latest net search search engine... if for some reason your desperate, ask me via privat email, and ill rumage through the trash... have a wvnderfvl evening- -daht