What is so bad about bootlegs? — Page 8

ra·tion·al·ize

raSH nl. z,raSHn. lz

verb

attempt to explain or justify (one's own or another's behavior or attitude) with logical, plausible reasons, even if these are not true or appropriate. "she couldn't rationalize her urge to return to the cottage"
synonyms: justify, explain, explain away, account for, defend, vindicate, excuse

---

Updated On: 9/26/13 at 08:54 PM

Liza I honestly don't want to get into it with you again, but you seem to be against bootlegs here, unless I misunderstood........... but on another equally contentious thread, you seem in favor of amateur groups posting their crap illegally all over YouTube. Am I misunderstanding?

"Glass Menagerie revival already available."

Of course it is!

---

I think you may have missed the point,
spork goddess

I don't really see how I missed the point. This difference has been discussed time and time again during the debate about online piracy. There are reasons to be against bootlegging, but to compare it to theft is disingenuous.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/29/opinion/theft-law-in-the-21st-century.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0

---

Updated On: 9/26/13 at 10:06 PM

To ignore copyrights and royalties is what's disingenuous, sporkg.

---

Kad- am I one of the people you think is trying to rationalize? I promise, I'm not. I think that recording can be incredibly distracting to performers and those around you, and it is illegal.

I was simply trying to explain the line copyright law draws between recording and distribution. (After all, I had to suffer through several months of studying copyright--it was torture-- so I'm pretty sure I know where that line is now.)

No, you weren't someone I had in mind- and I found your explanation of the (admittedly confusing and outdated) laws helpful.

Perhaps you can confirm something for me:
Recently, you may recall, a link to a professionally taped recording of the original production of Pacific Overtures was shared on the board. This was shot for the purpose of broadcast in Japan, and it indeed was shown there. However, it was never subsequently broadcast anywhere else- or released in any medium. Now, despite the fact that the performers and designers undoubtedly had to sign a waiver and were probably compensated for the taping and initial broadcast, this upload is still illegal, correct? It is still a bootleg, despite having originally been authorized by the parties involved, right?

---

Kad- Yes, you are right. The upload is still illegal. Basically copyright law boils down to unauthorized distribution of the copyrighted work (and in this case, that includes both the Broadway production and, as a separate aspect, the film production rights).

i am aware of the legality of those.

I was not talking about them.

And, in terms of legality, an illegal upload of a legal recording is just as bad.

The legality of the issue cannot be debated.

---

Updated On: 9/26/13 at 11:56 PM

As teen I briefly got into bootlegs--but I admit I found the quality so lacking that that was the main detriment to not bother anymore (this was, mind you back in the VHS days--I imagine something recorded digitally would look a lot better.)

This isn't quite the same thing, but at the same time there were a lot less Japanese anime titles that could be seen in English (subtitled or dubbed.) Fansubbers a they were called would translate the shows, make subtitles with their computer (of various translation quality) and the reputable ones would only make you copies if you sent them a video tape and return postage. It was kinda an honour thing--and if the titles would get licensed (like when Miyazaki's films were finally licensed by Disney) the belief would be you would no longer distribute the tape nor would they--in theory I think there was an honour system belief you would buy the release, but I'm not sure how many people did that. Of course there were some people who would then sell these tapes--online, through video stores, etc...

Not the same thing either, but there does seem to be a largely different take once a show is a certain age--like the excitement about those home movies of the original Follies--I never see anyone complain about them being posted...

It can be frustrating too when projects fall through--like the infamous thread on here about the end of those Broadway's Lost Treasures DVDs of Tony performances--complete with Wanda Richert from 42nd Street coming on here and blasting people for supporting the release.

It was kinda an honour thing--and if the titles would get licensed (like when Miyazaki's films were finally licensed by Disney) the belief would be you would no longer distribute the tape nor would they--in theory I think there was an honour system belief you would buy the release, but I'm not sure how many people did that.

That definitely didn't happen--fansubs still were widely distributed even after the anime was licensed. However, Japan had different laws about it than the USA did, so that was the loophole.

---

It's interesting to note how time changes everything. A show taped today is considered theft while a recording taped 30, 40 or 50 years ago is considered a treasure. Most opera lovers are thankful that bootlegs were made of Maria Callas's performances. Most people I've spoken to say that what made her special could not be recorded in the studio. Her legacy continues because of the bootleg recordings that her fans made. They are now even sold commercially.

And in which everyone says to those with a different point of view "you've missed the point." As if disagreement could only come from ignorance.