Distributing stealth recordings

[Fryhoffer]

I just made my first stealth recording tonight and was wondering if there is any protocol dealing with distribution.  If I post the show(s) on... Sharing The Groove, for instance, and identify myself as the taper will I be in any kind of legal danger?  What's the deal with getting recordings out of artists who officially don't allow it?  I'm thinking it's probably fine, but I wanted to double-check here just in case.

Thanks!
Jon

[Fatah Ruark (aka MIKE B)]

I just use STG.org for my stealth recordings. Legal recordings go to bt.etree.org.

I don't credit myself on the stealth stuff (just to be on the safe side). I believe it's still posible for someone to figure out who you are via your IP. Bit Torrent is not anonymous. I'm under the impression that you don't have much to worry about.

MIKE B

[Fryhoffer]

Say an artist, like Guster, allows recording but the venue doesn't... would that be considered "legal?"  Postable on bt.etree.org?

[Swampy]

You'll be fine!

[Sean Gallemore]

Say an artist, like Guster, allows recording but the venue doesn't... would that be considered "legal?"  Postable on bt.etree.org?

Yeah, all they care about is staying out of legal trouble with the band.

[greenone]

The venues can't come after you, because the act of recording isn't illegal. All it does is break the contract you entered into when you bought your ticket, and since all they can legally do for breaking that contract is kick you out of the venue, you've got nothing to worry about. If it's Guster, post on archive.org - I've got a few recordings of no-recording-allowed shows but the band doesn't care, it was just the venue/promoters/headlining act being a pain in the ass.

[Fryhoffer]

Thanks for the help guys!

[Nick in Edinboro]

anyone who posts there needs a lesson in ethics, regarding our hobby.

I understand your point Moke, but those who post concerts for free download, especially those of which are of taper friendly bands don't seem to me to be the ones requiring the lesson in ethics.  More so I believe those trying to accure a profit are the ones requiring some teaching.

You could say it's a question of "feeding the fire" but I fail to see the ethical dilemma with seeding a show for free download on the internet.

[nickgregory]

I disagree wholeheartedly.  Trading and sharing goes hand in hand...always has, in the last 15 years I have been doing this....

[Nick in Edinboro]

I will attribute that to everyones rush to taper fame in posting thier recordings, and the masses not having a clue of ethics.

Ugh.  Haven't we had this same conversation before   You attribute all this blame on the distribution methods today compared to the that of yore but don't even put into consideration the duplication methods of today.  Now we have blank CD-R's which can be duplicated in seconds using files on a computer and a CD-ROM drive.  Back in the days of yore, of your elegiac memories of Euro presses, etc. you had to have glass masters right?  Or atleast some sort of stamping system far beyond owning a personal computer.

Today kids are bootleggers, back then it was a little more involved.

Don't blame the distribution, blame the duplication IMHO.

[zhianosatch]

Bottom line: It's not the taper's fault.

[Fryhoffer]

Let me get this straight... the issue is people bootlegging recordings that we have made of artists that do not allow taping.  What better way to thwart the bootleggers efforts than to make such a recording widely available?  It seems even sending out only 3 or 4 copies can eventually cause a bootlegging issue.  My opinion is, if you're going to distribute... go all out. Then no one will have any need to purchase a bootleg.  Two situations...

Concert recorded > distributed to select few > bootlegging follows
Concert recorded > distributed to masses > bootlegging mostly worthless

The way I see it... if you're going to give it to even one person, might as well give it to everyone.  If a show is going to get out anyway, the artist will probably prefer people not profiting from it.  Of course, I have limited experience and may not understand the seriousness of the bootlegging industry as well as others.

[Tim]

Let me get this straight... the issue is people bootlegging recordings that we have made of artists that do not allow taping.  What better way to thwart the bootleggers efforts than to make such a recording widely available?  It seems even sending out only 3 or 4 copies can eventually cause a bootlegging issue.  My opinion is, if you're going to distribute... go all out. Then no one will have any need to purchase a bootleg.  Two situations...

Concert recorded > distributed to select few > bootlegging follows
Concert recorded > distributed to masses > bootlegging mostly worthless

The way I see it... if you're going to give it to even one person, might as well give it to everyone.  If a show is going to get out anyway, the artist will probably prefer people not profiting from it.  Of course, I have limited experience and may not understand the seriousness of the bootlegging industry as others.

in a perfect world you would be correct. But you are assuming that every person seeking a copy of the show has the knowledge of free trading, has the time to find someone with a copy and consumate a trade, has the technological capabilities to trade etec.

it's pretty apparent that we're not living in a tape trading utopia, more copies are available for free than ever before yet we are finding bootlegs in ebay on a daily basis. To me this is pretty clear evidence that flooding the percieved market has had little to no effect.

[Nick Culbreth]

Let me get this straight... the issue is people bootlegging recordings that we have made of artists that do not allow taping.  What better way to thwart the bootleggers efforts than to make such a recording widely available?  It seems even sending out only 3 or 4 copies can eventually cause a bootlegging issue.  My opinion is, if you're going to distribute... go all out. Then no one will have any need to purchase a bootleg.  Two situations...

Concert recorded > distributed to select few > bootlegging follows
Concert recorded > distributed to masses > bootlegging mostly worthless

The way I see it... if you're going to give it to even one person, might as well give it to everyone.  If a show is going to get out anyway, the artist will probably prefer people not profiting from it.  Of course, I have limited experience and may not understand the seriousness of the bootlegging industry as others.

i think don't think "flooding the market" puts an end to bootlegging because in most situations the members of the trading community who have access to the recordings are different than those individuals who actually buy the bootleg recordings.  most of the time the music i tape has little to no commercial value so there isn't really an issue but if i taped something with perceived worth i wouldn't go posting a bt on sharing the groove.

[Sloan Simpson]

I hope they can/do track ip's for stg.com!
anyone who posts there needs a lesson in ethics, regarding our hobby.

That's a pretty big blanket there. . . Does that cover, say, an up-and-coming band who finds people coming to hear them in a town they've never played before because people downloaded and enjoyed what they heard?  Or were you just referring to stealth tapes, and not open-taping situations?

Sloan