It's time to talk about Bootleg culture, kids.

[Sondheimite]

Posted: 10/26/18 at 11:16am

Listen, I love a good bootleg.  I'm pretty unapologetic.  I understand the arguments against bootlegs and they're very valid though I think many people are not aware that many performers/creatives are watching/listening to the same bootlegs that many of us are.  This can dissolve into a discussion on the morality of bootlegs and I'm sure it will.

BUT FIRST (and I'm amazed that I have to even say this in year of our Lord Bob Fosse, Two Thousand And Eighteen):

Why would anyone think it was okay to post a link to a bootleg, even more so... a bootleg they didn't record themselves, on a public Broadway World message board thread?
 
Last night, someone posted the link the Laura's My Fair Lady performance on this site.  Publically.  The person who posted it did so in complete disregard to the fact that they could have gotten the person who recorded it in huge legal action by posting the link publically on an industry site.

It is selfish, thoughtless, and egotistical to post a link to a bootleg on Broadway World.  I understand everyone here wants to look like the cool kid with the most connections and I understand the temptation to straight up share a link in a thread in order to give off that cool connected kid image.  But it is such a short sighted and idiotic move to do so.  The person who recorded the link could get in serious legal trouble due to internet showboating, is that worth it?  It's also straight up a d!ck move towards Laura to post an early recording of her on one of the most visited industry sites.  If you think Big Wigs from Broadway don't refresh these boards all the time, you have no knowledge.  

If you want to continue to have bootlegs, there is a reason that most of it takes place in private groups.  Send it over a Private Message, send over facebook, send it over an email.... but don't post the link on Broadway World.  We're better than that as a community. 

Most of you don't remember when we couldn't even post links to youtube on this site.  You are risking moderator crack down and stricter rules ALONG WITH risking the site itself, as the owners could get in trouble for you having links to bootlegs posted on here.

If you want to still have bootlegs to enjoy, enjoy them without being an @$$h013. 
It's like Weed educate:  it's polite to share a joint if you're in a small circle of friends but it's foolish to go out onto the street and scream, "I GOT WEED IF ANYONE WANTS SOME!!!"

Now go watch an Aura Spider Woman, you crazy kids, and argue about this post bellow.

 

Updated On: 10/26/18 at 11:16 AM

[Bwayfan292]

Posted: 10/26/18 at 11:30am

I agree 1000% with this post. If you find a bootleg on your own, enjoy it but my rule is never speak about it. The level of stupidity to post a bootleg of a first preview in a thread is beyond me...

[Fosse76]

Posted: 10/26/18 at 11:43am

Not to get too deep into this, since I didn't see the post or the link, but it should be said: owning a bootleg video is not illegal. For the person who owned or shared the original bootleg to be in any type of legal trouble, the rights- holder would have to be able to prove (s)he made the recording her/himself.

[DooWahDiddy]

Posted: 10/26/18 at 12:06pm

Is that true?  To use the OP's metaphor, what if you were caught with weed (in a non-legalized state)?  Would you be okay if you hadn't made it yourself?  What if it was something even more criminal, like child pornography or something?  Wouldn't you be in trouble even though you didn't film it yourself? 

I didn't see the link either and don't own any bootlegs, but I'm curious about this statement of ownership and responsibility.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 10/26/18 at 12:16pm

We are talking about bootlegs of broadway shows, so that falls under intellectual property rights. Those are civil statutes. Controlled substances and child pornography are criminal offenses. They aren't even remotely comparable.

[Catsbroadwayfan]

Posted: 10/26/18 at 12:23pm

Still, posting a first preview bootleg on a public thread is tacky and a huge no no. The mods remove threads if we even mention theres a bootleg. Its disrecpetful, if you happen to pass one and feel like watching, do it. Just don't talk about it.

[Rainah]

Posted: 10/26/18 at 1:17pm

It's disrespectful both to the people on bww (for all the reasons listed) and to the culture of bootlegs themselves. It's like the golden rule, guys. Do. Not. Post. Publicly.

I do like the comparison to going out and shouting about weed. While most people won't condemn you for indulging in private, that's where it should stay.

[scripps]

Posted: 10/26/18 at 1:33pm

I remember the days sitting next to friends who would boot a show on cassette tapes and have to artfully disguise that they were flipping the tape during intermission or even during one of the acts. Did these tapes ever see the light of the day outside of that moment or when I was at the Edison with a friend who just had to share her latest obsession with me, a new musical at NYTW called "Bright Lights Big City" starring some hot young thing named Patrick Wilson? 

Don't post this stuff publicly kids, <<edited by BWW staff>>.

Updated On: 10/26/18 at 01:33 PM

[CedricOates]

Posted: 10/26/18 at 1:54pm

From what I remember, unless if can be 100% proved that the person who posted the link actually filmed it, there are no legal grounds.

[haterobics]

Posted: 10/26/18 at 2:06pm

CedricOates said: "From what I remember, unless if can be 100% proved that the person who posted the link actually filmed it, there are no legal grounds."

Depends on what you mean... there are grounds to shut down Facebook groups that post them, websites that promote them, etc. Plus, most people online (especially on Facebook) come right out and say they are the ones who recorded it, so it doesn't take much sleuthing.

[MVintheheartland]

Posted: 10/28/18 at 10:02am

I'll try to find a bootleg if I can't get to NYC to see it. It's frustrating that certain great performances can't be preserved for us to see after the fact (for a fee), such as "Falsettos". I did get to see the performance at a movie theater, and then watched the bootleg over and over until it was taken down (mostly to watch Stephanie J. Block  do "I'm Breaking Down", one of the best performances EVER). I'll try to see the live performance (I go to NYC twice a year) or see the filmed version, but sometimes this just doesn't happen. 

If the public (who can't necessarily get to NYC) could see a show online for a fee, (maybe after it's closed), there would be a happier public and more money to be made. Just sayin'

As an aside, I'm looking forward to seeing the filmed version of the performance of "Everybodys Talking about Jamie" which will be in the US in November. 

 

 

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 10/28/18 at 10:53am

MVintheheartland said: "If the public (who can't necessarily get to NYC) could see a show online for a fee, (maybe after it's closed), there would be a happier public and more money to be made. Just sayin'"



But in all seriousness... that's not exactly a certainty.

We producers would love to make a regular release schedule of filmed versions of shows happen, but for it to work for us financially, and to keep going at a more steady rate, people need to buy these (be it a digital product or physical) like they buy Hollywood blockbusters, and they just don't.

Now, this is one situation where, much to the apparent joy of our fearless leader at present (ahem), there are B.S. arguments on both sides. Allow me to break them down.

Some producers (and consumers) say, "Filming shows conveys a deadly idea, that the film version of a show is a reasonable substitute for the live show, and that's the exact opposite of the message we want to communicate; besides, given the rise in ticket prices, who's to say someone doesn't opt for the video instead and take money out of our pocket?" Wrong. It's intelligent not just in terms of preservation, but in terms of revenue for live performances, as seen from the upward spike in ticket sales that long-running Broadway shows like Chicago and The Phantom of the Opera received when their movies came out.

Some consumers (in fact, most consumers) point to the above statistic and say, "And this is why we should film everything; it expands interest in theater and preserves the art form!" Also wrong. While such taping could expand interest in theater, from a purely economic standpoint, Broadway is not dying. Grosses last year increased in record numbers. Flop rates generally have remained the same for a long time. Some would argue that the giant ticket price increases in the past few years may seem a big reason for Broadway to buckle under its own weight, but the numbers indicate that the audience has simply shifted. Now, New York is a destination for deep-pocketed tourists with beaucoup tourist dollars. The industry simply hasn't gotten to a point of "adapt or die" for media accessibility, even if your favorite shows are closing, and an "evolution" where we move more toward taped theater will only be necessary when theater-going as a hobby/tourist attraction falls in both ticket sales and gross.

Allowing for the fact that theater is legally defined as a high-risk investment, most people who invest in a business venture generally want to see a return on their investment. And a video is a serious investment, both of time and money, with little chance of return, especially when it is a filmed record of a live performance. The bottom line, sad to say, is money. And the problem with filming and releasing musicals (or even plays) is that it's simply not lucrative. Why set aside money to professionally film even a hit, when it's hard enough to fund a show as it is without throwing in the additional cost of filming a video which is probably even less likely to be profitable than the show itself?

Between securing the rights, union costs before, during, and after filming, the filming itself, production costs, finding a distributor, etc., after all is said and done, the relatively few people who actually pay the fee don't constitute enough revenue to create a good profit margin. There are always exceptions to what I've said above, but they also always have a reason that they are the exception and not the rule.

For all the obvious reasons, I, as a producer, am nominally opposed to bootleg culture. But in all honesty, it's cheaper than going the legal route, and we as an industry have to address that, especially as bootlegging technology exponentially increases to the point where, in the not-too-distant future, it might even (visually speaking, at least) put a professional taping to shame.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 10/28/18 at 11:00am

Many many years ago I had the idea to add a $1-2 “preservation fee” to each ticket sold that could fund the filming/distribution of these shows. And even still, I think it’s a damn good idea.

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 10/28/18 at 11:08am

That's a good idea, Jordan, but slightly more realistically, taking union costs into account (I'm not anti-union, I'm just realistic), it would require a deal to lower other attendant fees on tickets, and increasing that putative "preservation fee" to more like $5-10.

Updated On: 10/28/18 at 11:08 AM

[OlBlueEyes]

Posted: 10/28/18 at 11:29am

The rest of the entertainment industry has greeted the new century with massive changes. Streamed video, Netflix, Spotify, Sirius Satellite. See or listen to what you like when you like, without waiting for the clock to hit 9:00 pm. Traditional national TV networks steadily losing viewership and influence. Cable TV in the intensive care unit.

But Broadway still sends its front line stars out there eight times a week, or seven if you're important enough, and stars like Kristin or Audra disappear for years to mundane television. We haven't seen Kristin since her tour de force in On the 20th Century three and a half years ago.

The producers dispense their product to thousands a month at $250 per ticket to those who happen to be in the city. On those terms, even great theater such as My Fair Lady and The Band's Visit after a few months begin to leak empty theater seats and the producers begin a careful watch on income versus expenses. Productions representing the best in American art shut down unseen by millions who are deprived of the pleasure. 

They cannot determine a method of getting millions of more eyes on their creation at a non-trivial but affordable price through DVD sales, in-film theater (The King and I next month), pay per view at home, and live television broadcasts during closing week.

Any damage done by the elegant Live From Lincoln Center broadcast? It's biggest defect was probably that so marketing it did not produce much revenue.

[Niles Silvers]

Posted: 10/28/18 at 11:39am

As long as they are not charging for people to watch it, this seems to fall more into the bad judgement and questionable morality areas than to a violation of the law.  

[dearalanaaaa]

Posted: 10/28/18 at 4:08pm

It is very sloppy to advertise bootleg LINKS publicly, but have you ever seen the Instagram fandom and their bootlegs? Often it's a simple "slide up for a link to Be More Chill/My Fair Lady/ Mean Girls bootleg!" and bam, a google drive dedicated to the bootleg is there. 

There's a full list of masters that goes around on Tumblr, all of their emails. I even messaged one, and they usually charge $20 to cover their ticket to the show to have the bootleg about 2-3 months early. Personally, if I know I can't afford to see a show, that's the best way. I never paid more than $5 for a bootleg, but by fund pooling, it's easy for 4-5 friends to buy a boot early.

As long as you're smart about your boots and not hurting the masters, do whatever you want. But protect your masters at all costs, because we may not get boots if they're not protected.