home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!auvm!!"OUT,
- Original_To: ALLM
- Original_cc: OLIVOTTO
- Message-ID: <ALLMUSIC%93012206001100@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU>
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.allmusic
- Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 10:45:00 N
- Sender: Discussions on all forms of Music <ALLMUSIC@AUVM.BITNET>
- From: "Out,
- out - you'll not feel the fall-out..." <OLIVOTTO@ITNCISCA.BITNET>
- Subject: Tape dubbing aethics (WAS: LW listened to PG)
- Lines: 55
-
- >Date: 08 Jan 1993 13:37:01 -0600 (CST)
- >From: Leonard Watkins <ISTS024@UABDPO.BITNET>
- >Subject: LW listened to PG
- >
- >Do you sometimes feel guilty when you copy something, like your ripping off
- >the artists, keeping them from some of their royalties. If someone was copying
- >your stuff without paying for it, would it bother you. To be honest it kinda
- >bothers me sometimes, especially artists that need support. How do you feel.?
-
- The past strikes back... there was a discussion about this more or less
- a year ago. My position was firm on the "don't dub" side then. It still is, but
- in a different way. Lemme explain.
- The point is that the problem is complicated: there is a deep differen-
- ce (not only in the music style :) ) between a band like TNR (me!) issuing a CD
- out of their own pockets and, say, Pink Floyd. If someone dubs my CD, it's a
- personal loss for me, and it's a *total* loss (no mechanicals, no income from
- a possible sale); if someone dubs Pink Floyd the loss is different, since they
- usually receive enormous advances from their record label, and so the ultimate
- damage is really done to the label (not a bad idea, corporate rock still sucks
- 90% of the time) rather than the band.
- But at the same time, speaking -- so to say -- of the non-commercial
- sense of the thing, I don't care that much. Advertisement is as important as
- gain, in this field, and I had an interesting discussion about this with our
- own Michelle May, now not on this list anymore, who "confessed" she wanted a
- copy of our album on tape rather than purchasing the CD, and somebody talked
- her out of this -- so she wrote and apologised. I wasn't upset about it, in
- a sense, since I am curiously (and wierdly) torn between the idea that one
- more copy, even if non-official, might possibly help us somehow indirectly,
- and the need to recoup the production money.
- My personal position is: I never dub or accept dubs for any reason ex-
- cept when:
-
- 1) the album/song is impossible to find otherwise;
- 2) I am definitely sure there is no profit whatsoever in the tape trade
- (tape swapping OK; tape sale at raw tape cost OK; tape sale with gain NOT
- OK);
- 3) there is an ALLMUSIC compilation around :).
-
- Needless to say I am totally against unofficial releases which are
- produced at low cost by some guy and are sold for-fans-only with 500% gain.
- The only serious bootleg I own is that of TNR, which we made from master ta-
- pes of "The Chessboard" and distributed *freely* (is this coherence or foo-
- lishness?) in 100 and only 100 copies. Well, almost, I have some bootlegs.
- But when I dubbed a tape (20 copies) of a Peter Hammill concert I had recor-
- ded in Munchen I sent the man some money to cover copyrights. Call me what
- you want, I thought it was just sensible. And, of course, I made no money
- out of it. :)
-
- Ciao, Marco
-
- P.S.: FYI: the first version of "The Chessboard" on cassette, released in 1991,
- had *at least* 30 non-official copies around. I know or I have gotten in
- touch with that many people owning it, but they weren't in my sales list.
- That cassette actually sold 200, so at least 15% of it were dubbed. I am
- afraid that 40% is a not-too-crazy percentage, though. So life goes...
-