Topic: Please help. What to do? Taped and gig and told not to spread by management.

[deadheadcorey]

I've been following this thread for a while now, and I finally feel that it's time to add my $0.03 (due to inflation).

I think there are two issues here that people are confusing:

1. The original post says it all: the taper was asked NOT to circulate the show after in contact with the artists management/personnel. That is, IMHO, the end of the debate.  You've been asked NOT to do so, so you don't.  End of story.  If you do, you end up burning the ability for others to tape the artist's show (whether it be this particular artists or others who are represented by the same team members).

2. If the original poster had not been in contact and had stealth'd the show and then chose to seed it, trade it, give it away, then the only way he would have had to stop as if he'd been asked to by the artist/management/legal, etc.

By having been in contact with the team, and having been asked not to, it's been summed up in two letters: NO.

what he said.... 

[flipp]

I say you sit on it until 1) the webmaster answers your question whether he was the promoter or 2) get in touch with the artist's management, not the artist's site webmaster, and ask them directly if it can be circulated or they want you to keep it under wraps.

Reading your original post it seems you have only been in contact with one person who may or may not have any official capacity to speak for the artist. So ask someone who does speak for the artist. If the response is No, then sit on it; if the response is Yes, then circulate it.

[Tye]

I wasn't going to ask this question but I have always been confused about how this issue of stealthing is handled in this community.
 Some in this thread say that this situation(circulating after being asked not to ) is diffrent from stealthing example NO=NO .
 
 By stealthing (I mean the true act of recording bands that don't allow taping) doesn't that make the assumption the artist/managment has already stated a policy NOT to record the concert.
 I have seen many people get flamed for asking similar questions as randallanddarcy. Now my opinion on this  is if they ask not to circulate the issue ends there DO NOT CIRCULATE !!!

My question is why are so many people so quick to say don't stir the pot and get the artists/management upset by not respecting their policy/requests when they stealth bands often and don't hesitate to spread it with source info and at times their name on it when it could be easily traced to the taping community?

 If a band says no before or after how does that differ?
 Honestly to me I don't care if people stealth because as far as I know it has never had a huge impact with tapers as of yet. I'm just curious why the double standard?
 

[newplanet7]

I wasn't going to ask this question but I have always been confused about how this issue of stealthing is handled in this community.
 Some in this thread say that this situation(circulating after being asked not to ) is diffrent from stealthing example NO=NO .
 
 By stealthing (I mean the true act of recording bands that don't allow taping) doesn't that make the assumption the artist/managment has already stated a policy NOT to record the concert.
 I have seen many people get flamed for asking similar questions as randallanddarcy. Now my opinion on this  is if they ask not to circulate the issue ends there DO NOT CIRCULATE !!!

My question is why are so many people so quick to say don't stir the pot and get the artists/management upset by not respecting their policy/requests when they stealth bands often and don't hesitate to spread it with source info and at times their name on it when it could be easily traced to the taping community?

 If a band says no before or after how does that differ?
 Honestly to me I don't care if people stealth because as far as I know it has never had a huge impact with tapers as of yet. I'm just curious why the double standard?
 

This is the question I posed earlier addressing my hypocrisy.

I definitely wasn't suggesting he do anything, one way or the other.
I just wanted to hear peoples opinions who stealth tape and spread against the bands wishes, ala Dime/TTD. That was my whole gray area point. Is one situation more valid because one is a general to all policy not to share vs. a specific show policy?

Personally, I wouldn't post it but, there is a hint of hypocrisy in ME that sometimes downloads a
bands show against their no taping/trading policy.

[Tye]

I didn't mean to be redundent I have been wanting to ask this for a long time but feared being flamed, oh hell flame away 

I wasn't going to ask this question but I have always been confused about how this issue of stealthing is handled in this community.
 Some in this thread say that this situation(circulating after being asked not to ) is diffrent from stealthing example NO=NO .
 
 By stealthing (I mean the true act of recording bands that don't allow taping) doesn't that make the assumption the artist/managment has already stated a policy NOT to record the concert.
 I have seen many people get flamed for asking similar questions as randallanddarcy. Now my opinion on this  is if they ask not to circulate the issue ends there DO NOT CIRCULATE !!!

My question is why are so many people so quick to say don't stir the pot and get the artists/management upset by not respecting their policy/requests when they stealth bands often and don't hesitate to spread it with source info and at times their name on it when it could be easily traced to the taping community?

 If a band says no before or after how does that differ?
 Honestly to me I don't care if people stealth because as far as I know it has never had a huge impact with tapers as of yet. I'm just curious why the double standard?
 

This is the question I posed earlier addressing my hypocrisy.

I definitely wasn't suggesting he do anything, one way or the other.
I just wanted to hear peoples opinions who stealth tape and spread against the bands wishes, ala Dime/TTD. That was my whole gray area point. Is one situation more valid because one is a general to all policy not to share vs. a specific show policy?

Personally, I wouldn't post it but, there is a hint of hypocrisy in ME that sometimes downloads a
bands show against their no taping/trading policy.

[newplanet7]

I didn't mean to be redundent I have been wanting to ask this for a long time but feared being flamed, oh hell flame away 

No one flamed me.
It's a legit question.
What I was more or less  posing is that I couldn't give an answer
because it's a gray area to me.

[jamroom]

A bit of clarification might be necessary here. Just because a recording was "stealthed", does not necessarily mean that the recording was made against the artist's official or unofficial taping policy. Most European recordings have to be made this way, as the venue culture is greatly different from that in the US, although again, I'm sure there are US venues that do not permit taping, regardless of the artist's policy.

[danlynch]

I "stealth" taper-friendly bands all the time because of venue issues.

[newplanet7]

A bit of clarification might be necessary here. Just because a recording was "stealthed", does not necessarily mean that the recording was made against the artist's official or unofficial taping policy. Most European recordings have to be made this way, as the venue culture is greatly different from that in the US, although again, I'm sure there are US venues that do not permit taping, regardless of the artist's policy.

I "stealth" taper-friendly bands all the time because of venue issues.

That's not what anyone is referring to.
We were talking of bands that don't allow taping/trading or online trading.
Who said anything about stealthing for bands that allow taping?
We're not talking about the venue at all.

This seems like a catch 22 of sorts IMO.
There are tons of members on this board that stealth and circulate recordings against
the bands policy/wishes.

I just wanted to hear peoples opinions who stealth tape and spread against the bands wishes, ala Dime/TTD. That was my whole gray area point. Is one situation more valid because one is a general to all policy not to share vs. a specific show policy?

By stealthing (I mean the true act of recording bands that don't allow taping) doesn't that make the assumption the artist/managment has already stated a policy NOT to record the concert.
 I have seen many people get flamed for asking similar questions as randallanddarcy. Now my opinion on this  is if they ask not to circulate the issue ends there DO NOT CIRCULATE !!!

My question is why are so many people so quick to say don't stir the pot and get the artists/management upset by not respecting their policy/requests when they stealth bands often and don't hesitate to spread it with source info and at times their name on it when it could be easily traced to the taping community?

[jamroom]

^^^ I read all of your post, thank you. I made the point for others (newbs), not you, as I was happy enough with what you had posted - note I did not quote you. Not everyone picks everything up, so I just wanted to clarify.

[newplanet7]

^^^ I read all of your post, thank you. I made the point for others (newbs), not you, as I was happy enough with what you had posted - note I did not quote you. Not everyone picks everything up, so I just wanted to clarify.

Gotcha.
I didn't even think of that angle 
+ tea.
-todd