The Corroseum forum (new design under construction)

Rockadelic wrote:I've seen people bootleg songs from sources as varied as pulling off an ebay clip to literally recording it over the phone!

Haha, now that's pathetic!

Does it matter if it's a part or the complete song? Does it make it less illegal this way? I mean, it's like saying that you're a little bit pregnant...I think it's violation of copyright laws on both cases.

Well, I was googling for some info and the most detailed answer I found was this

If the track is from a CD, you can use up to 10% or 30 seconds of a track (which ever is less) for non-profit, "educational" situations, say if it was for a short film for a video production course. If you need more than that, then you require both a Usage License from the copyright holder and a Master Use license from the performer.

And I know several well known sellers who do in fact post full songs in their auctions, so this discussion is actually turning a tad hypocritical, in my opinion.

However, I still feel the persons downloading clips from other people's ebay auctions, Poisonoise etc, and then put them on their own blogs, or make bootlegs out of them, should be hung out to dry. I think we can all agree on that subject.

Selling cannot be considered as "non-profit, educational situation" either.

this is the site of the World Intellectual Property Organization: http://www.wipo.int/portal/index.html.en

a month ago i took a free online course from it,they even send you an official diploma if you pass you rfinal test (free shipping ha)...you can find all legal answers there,most of the UN members (countries that is) are part of this organization too,so its almost the same internaional legislation regarding music

Now Playing: JUDAS PRIEST- 'Breaking the Law'

Not only did they inspire suicide - time to drag them back to court again?

I don't see eBay samples as "selling for profit" unless the sale point is for a digital download of the aforementioned sample.

stormspell wrote:I don't see eBay samples as "selling for profit" unless the sale point is for a digital download of the aforementioned sample.

Hello!
It's been a white I hope all is well
You are a good person for thei thread

How would you feel if someone uploaded you new release for free down load a week after it came out?

Do you think it would hurt your sales?

glockose wrote:

stormspell wrote:I don't see eBay samples as "selling for profit" unless the sale point is for a digital download of the aforementioned sample.

Hello!
It's been a white I hope all is well
You are a good person for thei thread

How would you feel if someone uploaded you new release for free down load a week after it came out?

Do you think it would hurt your sales?

I just asked him the same thing in the other thread- oops


As I mentioned in that thread, I admit to d/ling his Crosswind CD recently*. But now that I've heard it I really like it and I will definitely buy it. So at least in this one case, downloading earned him a sale that he otherwise would not have gotten (I honestly would not have bought a copy based on the samples/clips that were posted; they sounded fine but I thought the album might end up in the 'generic power metal' stack, and I don't need anything added to that stack!).


*- and I realize that's hypocritical of me since I said earlier that I do not approve of u/ling new releases that are in print.
Contrary to popular belief, I am not perfect

Contrary to popular belief, I am not perfect [/quote]


In my mind you are the man of my dreams!!!

I think we can also all agree on that ripping and blogging a new release, which is still carried by a label, is a very bad thing to do. I don't think anyone is arguing against that.

The whole discussion, unfortunately, turned into what's legal and illegal and whether we act according to the what the law says. Not about what is right or wrong in the ethical sense or whether we have good intentions when we do something or if we don't have profit in mind or whatever.
I have the feeling that none of us knows exactly what the copyright says and probably most of us are not even aware of the existence of some of the laws. And apparently, from what I'm reading so far, we all have in one way or another violated the law. I guess we can continue this discussion without any dose of hypocrisy if we admit that. Arguing about blogs and short clips won't make any difference if we keep discussing in strictly legal terms.

glockose wrote:

stormspell wrote:I don't see eBay samples as "selling for profit" unless the sale point is for a digital download of the aforementioned sample.

Hello!
It's been a white I hope all is well
You are a good person for thei thread

How would you feel if someone uploaded you new release for free down load a week after it came out?

Do you think it would hurt your sales?

Howdy,

Honestly I didn't want to get involved in this thread as it is such a broad and complicated issue and my English is not so good to let me express my thoughts clearly in the way I'd like. So here is an abbreviated version of my position on this issue:

In general I try to be positive and not to let such things bother me. The reason is, ALL new albums end up being ripped off and uploaded on the net as soon as the release is out, if not sooner. This is the nature of the beast.
I just prefer to think that I do cater to that small part of the population which would make the effort to buy it if they like it. So from that stand point I do not think the free downloads hurt my sales much. I've said it many times before, and I do mean it when I say there are fans which would find a way to support a band/label, and there are leechers which would not buy and find an excuse even if we start selling it for $1.00, so it is all irrelevant in my opinion. So if we take the old saying "the dogs are barking and the caravan is moving", to paraphrase it accordingly: the leechers are downloading, and the business is moving on...

All those corporate businesses and organizations which cry wolf and try to milk every cent from every sound sample and police the internet - crying out loud and counting "loss of profit" at every free download, they are way too optimistic in my opinion. Those downloads thrive coz they are free, charge money for 'em and they'll be gone in a flash.

Same with the samples - how many of you would browse myspace in search of new bands if you got charged $0.99 every time you check a tune? Or have to pay a subscription fee to use youtube? It just wont work and there wouldnt be much profit to gain from it. The only thing would be, people would not be familiar with many of the bands they are now.

Which brings another interesting point: One of my bigger sellers have been LICH KING - originally a one-man studio project which haven't even played live until recently. Would I have been able to sell so many copies of the first two albums if it wasnt for the aggressive self-promotion of Tom Martin on every online venue possible with hooking fans with free mp3s and such? I really dont think so... Food for thought.