Re: [JBC] CD duplication is not ok

David,

Not to be a hardass myself because I agree that musical artists have a right to determine how their music is distributed and how they should be remunerated for that (and large labels often stack the deck against a fair split), but...

don't you have a very (enviably) large stack of JBC boots that you list on the site and that you regularly trade? Perhaps this part of the site has been taken down since you discussed this with Pat but if not I don't see much difference between trading live shows and duping CDs when in both instances it is not done in conjunction with the artist (or the label) in a way that fairly compensates them.

I've regularly traded boots on this list myself so I'm not exactly 'holier than thou' but I have also bought virtually every JBC CD/album I can get my hands on and would willingly contribute to a tape trading fund with the proceeds going to Pat.

Gregor

> so, the issue is not that "making copies of CDs takes nothing
> out of pat's pocket"..
>
> the issue is that this desire to fill-out our CD collections does
> nothing to attempt to PUT money into the artist's pocket.
>
> admit it or not, but by distributing the music in any manner not
> approved in contract by the artist, you are ripping him off.
>
> i have spoken with pat on this in the past. we were on the topic
> of MP3 trading, and the above basically reflects his line - without
> a protocol in place to provide for artist payments, then he considers
> the process bootlegging and will act to cease it. this is his livelihood,
> plain and simple.
>
> that known - please refrain from discussing the duplication and distribution
> of CDs on this mailing list.
>
> sorry to be a hardass.
>
> -david (del@adjective.com)
> -------------------------------------------------------
> 700w st c m dj ct v c m nc nv n nt c m htdb rg m r
> c rcl n c rg s d sw p c m s m s n c c m xp ll n8 c m
> mustn't offend
>
>
Received on Mon Aug 23 12:00 PDT 1999