Please remember I said
I was wrong, much wrong, regarding the Brussels recording. It was just
une belle connerie on my part and I ain't gonna do it again. Promise.
mrgreen wrote:My point is: I'm NOT a bootlegger. I'm not a f**king tw*t who takes his DV cam to a gig, makes a dvd of it, and sells it on Ebay. I just record shows in order to be able to relive them afterwards. As a courtesy to real fans, I sometimes share my recordings. But, obviously, if sharing is illegal, I will keep 'em for myself next time.
Now all I'd like to discuss is the general issue of live recordings. Sure you're no bootlegger, but only because such a thing doesn't exist in the eyes of law. All there is are legal or illegal live recordings. I
think recording a live show as such is a civil offence, but of course some more expertise would help. Intentions good or bad don't count, unfortunately. It's the act that matters, and not whether you're a good person or not. The 93 EU legislation was based on the assumption that illegal live recordings, given for free or sold, were detrimental to the interests of the music business as a whole. It's supposed to be bad for the artist because :
- either the copy is sold and in that case the consumer will have less money to spend on official products.
- or it's given for free, and even that is considered an offence, as it still makes the consumer less likely to buy official products.
The trouble is such reasoning is bullsh!t : actual music fans are after official products
and bootlegs, not one or the other. Bootlegs and live recordings, all of them, are but a victim of the war on illegal copies, which is a problem, but only in China, Russia...
I'm on the side of bootleggers (well, only those who show some degree of respect and don't take fans for dummies), amateurs and pros alike, but I know that what they do is illegal.