Question about bootlegs

believerindeed · Post by **believerindeed** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 5:55 pm

Hello,
I'm new to the board and was wondering about whether the band frowns upon bootlegs, etc. I know on the stryper forum, it is made very clear that it is frowned upon, but I figure with the band in retirement maybe it wouldn't be such a big deal. Anyway, I am a huge Petra fan and am looking to buy any Petra concerts on dvd or cd (preferably dvd) besides the new Farwell ones. I particularly would like a dvd of the No Doubt era as this was one of my favorite tours, but I would be open to anything besides what was released by the band themselves (i.e. Beyond Belief video collection, Unseen Power collection, Wake Up Call video collection. Anyways, if anyone has any bootleg dvd or vhs they are willing to sell please email me at [email protected] with Petra dvd in the topic and I'll get back with ya. I am not trying to obtain these for making money off of----just simply a fan who misses the good ole days of when Petra was around.

darthpethead · Post by **darthpethead** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 7:30 pm

I dont think the band really cares.

epdc · Post by **epdc** » Wed Mar 15, 2006 11:10 pm

I think sometimes a cd is so hard to get that is not bat at all to make a copy. and also i think that if a cd is very expensive (like in mexico) is ok to make a copy

p-freak · Post by **p-freak** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 5:46 am

Bootlegs are not supposed to be sold. I have lots of bootlegs but I only got those for free or by trading. So I don't think it would be right to pay for bootlegs or to sell them. Even copies of out-of-print videos (excepting of course CITAS and On Fire Video Event) are regularly available for small prices at eBay.

Edward · Post by **Edward** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 9:45 am

epdc wrote:I think sometimes a cd is so hard to get that is not bat at all to make a copy. and also i think that if a cd is very expensive (like in mexico) is ok to make a copy

It is ok to steal because something is expensive? Where do you stop with that thinking? Why not take a car? A boat?

What is expensive for you, may not be for another citizen of Mexico. So that thinking is not only relative, but wrong.

Petra felt a big hit in sales because of all of the illegal copies. John told me that their Spanish CD sales barely covered the studio expenses to make it. Yet, when they did concerts in that market, everyone knew the words, and they signed hundreds if not thousands of bootleg copies.

Why is it fair for someone to invest their time and money to make music for God, and have it shared for free? That music that you aquire illegally will not bless you like it could have.

Edward · Post by **Edward** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 9:51 am

Just because a band is no longer recording or touring doesn't mean jack. Bob and company own the rights to the music. The labels still own the rights to distribute the music. All of Petra's back list is for sale new, in stores, on-line, etc.

What you can do is use your Petra recordings for personal use. Legally you cannot distribute the songs, or charge for them.

pmal · Post by **pmal** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 9:52 am

Hey, welcome to the board. I noticed your user id right away as that is my aol im screen name. That's really a great song. Anyway, there are lots of bootlegs on audio clips on www.johnwschlitt.com from the years, including video clips. Also, petrarocksmyworld.com has some as well. So, enjoy!

Regards,
Phillip

Michael · Post by **Michael** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 11:40 am

Edward wrote:Petra felt a big hit in sales because of all of the illegal copies. John told me that their Spanish CD sales barely covered the studio expenses to make it. Yet, when they did concerts in that market, everyone knew the words, and they signed hundreds if not thousands of bootleg copies.

Edward, I have to respectfully point out that there were severe distribution difficulties in Mexico that may not have been ironed out even now. Elo, have you been able to actually purchase a copy of the Spanish version of JAH down there? The finger of blame for THAT bootlegging should be pointed at whoever dropped the ball in actually shipping actual copies of the actual CD to the stores in Mexico! If there had not been bootlegging, the crowd would not have been ABLE to sing along. 'Cause they couldn't buy it.

I have serious issues with the industry ca-ca about music downloading hurting CD sales that much. I realize there are people out there that download CDs and burn 'em instead of buying them, but I also realize, as someone who grew up in the 80s, that BOOTLEGGING MUSIC IS NOT THE INTERNET'S FAULT. I dubbed copies of cassettes in the 80s that I never purchased until years later. I've done my best as an adult to replace those with legit copies since then, but I may still have some bootlegs in my collection somewhere that I haven't taken care of. Illegal copying is not a new thing. The music industry has fed us a serious load of BS, blaming their own problems on bootleggers. The reason CD sales dropped was that:

The music industry is overall churning out crummy product (Petra's CDs would of course not qualify as crummy product)
The music industry still hasn't really figured out that on-the-air radio is on its way out as the ONLY way, or even the main way, that people find new music
The music industry took forever to capitalize on the Internet as a way to actually SELL music, instead choosing to accuse the Internet of being evil and taking away their record sales

Notice that now that the music people have figured out that it is a GOOD idea to actually SELL music online, they have had enough success that online sales are now tracked in a way similar to CD sales. Last time I read anything about it I'm pretty sure it was not the primary medium of music sales, but it's up there.

That said, and all fingers pointed where pointing is due (industry whiners that want to blame their short-sightedness and stupid mistakes on others)... I want to make it clear that OWNING COPIES OF MUSIC (or movies, or whatever) WHEN YOU DO NOT OWN THE ORIGINAL IS ILLEGAL. There is no question. Probably illegal in Mexico, too, I imagine. That's the law. Now, to me personally, there is a gray line when the material has been basically abandoned (the CD is completely unavailable to purchase new anywhere because it has been placed out of print; there is no way to legally purchase it online). I have no personal qualms with owning an "illegal" bootleg of material that has been put out of print and cannot be purchased legally. But even then, if I have a bootleg of something and find a used copy at a CD place, or eBay, or a garage sale or flea market or whatever... I think it's my duty to buy that legal copy to replace my bootleg.

Others are totally entitled to their own opinions about the gray areas. They are not gray under the letter of the law, but the risk of prosecution is likely very low since the record company doesn't care enough to even keep the material in print.

executioner · Post by **executioner** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 12:16 pm

There was a lawsuit a couple of years back with an individual and Aerosmith and it had to do with this person transfering an old full length concert video by Aerosmith from VHS to DVD and than selling it through his web site. Aerosmith filed a lawsuit against this person and lost. The judge gave 2 reasons why Aerosmith lost the case.

1. This person was not making any money off of DVD, but was only charging for the making of it and the shipping costs.
2. The VHS was out of print and it was not available to purchase any longer.

The issue with JAH(spanish) is it is NOT readily available in Mexico or Central-South America, and if you do find it it costs anywhere from $50-$100 per copy. If Petra wants to sell this product in these countries they need to find a better distributor and also need to make sure that price gauging is not going on. I'm sorry but this is Petra-Inpop's fault.

executioner · Post by **executioner** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 12:19 pm

Edward wrote:Just because a band is no longer recording or touring doesn't mean jack. Bob and company own the rights to the music. The labels still own the rights to distribute the music. All of Petra's back list is for sale new, in stores, on-line, etc.

What you can do is use your Petra recordings for personal use. Legally you cannot distribute the songs, or charge for them.

Than these artists need to distribute the music. It's their own fault.

crossways · Post by **crossways** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 12:58 pm

I guess there are two ways of looking at this problem:

1) Do whatever your conscience will allow you to do and most people probably won't get caught or in trouble for any duplicates they make. Unless they make it a major business venture.

2) Read the US Copyright law. There is a fairly easy to understand version on line at a .gov site ( a simple google should find it ).

Now, we can justify just about anything we want to do. And you can blame who ever you want for the fact that you make copies or duplicate music in any form.

But Petra and the companies who are supposed to make some money to be able to finance Petra are supposed to get a % of those sales from cds, videos, and singles. Even bands who cover Petra tunes (like mine) are supposed to pay a certain amount. It may be $10 here or 99cents there, but I am sure it adds up.

But why are we debating it? Why not just email Bob or John about things that are not in print and Inpop about things that are, and see what they say? Heck they may just give you a blank check in copying whatever you want.

Peace

Shell · Post by **Shell** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 1:27 pm

Aw, the copyright/bootleg thread...It was about time someone started that one again, it's been awhile.

Some of the other threads that seem to never go away:

The notorious CITAS/CITS debate.

Why did so-and-so leave the band?

Greg vs. John.

More recently Louie vs. Paul (mostly on Josh's site).

So-and-so is cute.

Which album do you like/hate the most?

Why did so-and-so get divorced? (Fair warning, you will likely get yelled at if you start that one, and I will probably be the first one to do so).

brent · Post by **brent** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 2:06 pm

executioner wrote:
Edward wrote:Just because a band is no longer recording or touring doesn't mean jack. Bob and company own the rights to the music. The labels still own the rights to distribute the music. All of Petra's back list is for sale new, in stores, on-line, etc.

What you can do is use your Petra recordings for personal use. Legally you cannot distribute the songs, or charge for them.

Than these artists need to distribute the music. It's their own fault.

There are often reasons, that are none of the public's business, why a band doesn't keep product on the market. Last time I check, we have a free economy. Free to trade. NOT free to you. Now, it is MY decision to well MY product where and when I want, not the consumer. If I don't want a product on the market, then I don't have to keep it out there. If I do not have it on the market, you do not have the right to steal my product and sell it. The judge was wrong, just as judges were wrong about abortion, partial birth abortion, prayer in the schools, etc. Just because a judge says something, does not make him or the issue right.

There were other issues and conscessions in the Aerosmith case.

Petra is not responsible for the foriegn market's economic climate. If it costs 50 or 50,000, Petra deserves their $.39 per CD. The label deserves their money. Maybe the people in those markets should be actively changing their policies via public officials, etc. Maybe they boycott. It is not the band's responsibility to make sure everyone has a copy.

executioner · Post by **executioner** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 2:32 pm

brent wrote:
executioner wrote:
Edward wrote:Just because a band is no longer recording or touring doesn't mean jack. Bob and company own the rights to the music. The labels still own the rights to distribute the music. All of Petra's back list is for sale new, in stores, on-line, etc.

What you can do is use your Petra recordings for personal use. Legally you cannot distribute the songs, or charge for them.

Than these artists need to distribute the music. It's their own fault.
There are often reasons, that are none of the public's business, why a band doesn't keep product on the market. Last time I check, we have a free economy. Free to trade. NOT free to you. Now, it is MY decision to well MY product where and when I want, not the consumer. If I don't want a product on the market, then I don't have to keep it out there. If I do not have it on the market, you do not have the right to steal my product and sell it. The judge was wrong, just as judges were wrong about abortion, partial birth abortion, prayer in the schools, etc. Just because a judge says something, does not make him or the issue right.

There were other issues and conscessions in the Aerosmith case.

Petra is not responsible for the foriegn market's economic climate. If it costs 50 or 50,000, Petra deserves their $.39 per CD. The label deserves their money. Maybe the people in those markets should be actively changing their policies via public officials, etc. Maybe they boycott. It is not the band's responsibility to make sure everyone has a copy.

If Petra expects to get a return on their product then it is their responsibiity to make sure the climate is ripe for their product; The climate was ripe but not at $50 per copy. Petra should have known what was going to happen with JAH(spanish) in central-south america, if they didn't then they are either very naive or their management didn't follow through on their product. I'm sorry but there have been over the last 5-7 years alot of bad business decisions made with Petra and for the most part with the exception being JAH these decisions have been half #%$^^.

Shell · Post by **Shell** » Thu Mar 16, 2006 2:52 pm

It may not be up to the band to make sure everyone has a copy of their CD, but isn't part of the reasoning behind recording a CD is so that it's available for people who want to buy it? I don't condone bootlegging, but I can understand why it would happen in Mexico and South America. I don't know what all is involved in distribution, but there's obviously a problem there. There are obviously people in other countries who want Petra's music but don't have easy access to it. I don't have any answers to what could be done about that.

Michael's post was a good one; the record companies should look at the Internet as a way to sell music and put a little more effort into making sure music is available at a reasonable price instead of screaming about bootlegs and downloads. That way there might be a better alternative and maybe more people would buy music honestly instead of bootlegging or downloading.

I personally don't think there's anything wrong with making a copy of a CD you own or recording a concert with the band's permission. It's when you make money off of it I start having a problem. And there are websites where you can download stuff and pay for what you download.

The Petra Zone

Question about bootlegs

Question about bootlegs

I THINK

Re: I THINK

re: Believerindeed

Re: I THINK

y

Who is online