Ever have any moral issues downloading concert recordings?

[nigelss]

I was having a look through my vinyl Zep concert recordings bought many centuries ago (actually late 70s) and it struck me that I'd like to hear the full Bonzo's Birthday Party concert. This is allegedly available on the internet with the bulk of it coming from a soundboard recording. This got me thinking about the "morality" of downloading such recordings. Don't get me wrong - I don't want to start a "pointing fingers tut tut" debate but it strikes me that some material is more legitimate to download than other material. I would really like to hear your views on the subject so here are mine to start the ball rolling.

We'll take copyright infringement as read and not go into that any further!

I have no problem with audience recordings, or radio and television recordings. Audience recordings exchanged between fans seem to be tolerated as can be seen by the wealth of O2 material on Youtube for example. As I recall there was a brief period after the O2 concert when material was being removed from Youtube as fast as it was being put up but then this stopped and the material was allowed to remain. For the latter it is similar to me recording something off the radio or telly at home.

Soundboards, pro-shot concert video (i.e. not intended for broadcast) and studio outtakes are a bit more tricky. If the material originates from the theft of material from Jimmy's house back in the late 80s it seems morally wrong to me to benefit from that theft. It is to all intents and purposes receiving stolen goods, and is in a completely different league from some copyright infringement caused by fans sharing self-recorded material.

So there's the dilemma. I'm wondering if anyone else feels like this or is it just me? I suppose in a nutshell what I'm saying is that it just seems wrong to me to go and download anything which has its origins in material stolen from Jimmy's house. The problem I have is how do I know if a particular soundboard recording of a classic Zep concert is stolen goods?

I really would like to know your views. Like I said, I'm not accusing anyone of anything so please don't take offence and hit me with lots of negative feedback or retort with "if you got a problem with it don't download 'em!"

Best wishes,

Nigel

[chef free]

No. Me downloading does no harm to Mr.Page, he would never release any of this stuff and if he did I would most certainly buy it. Further, downloading takes money away from bootleggers, which helps Mr. Page. And all this keeps intrest in Led Zeppelin alive, why I have even made a few new Zep fans by playing downloaded bootlegs for friends. They have gone on to buy Zep albums. It's good for everyone to download!

[Jahfin]

Even though I've never downloaded a Led Zeppelin concert, I see no problem with downloading (or trading live concerts) as long as no money changes hands (except for shipping & handling in the case of CD's). I think the Grateful Dead's business model is a good one. Anything that sticks it to the bootleggers is a good thing so the liberating of so many shows via free downloads is a good thing as no one should be profiting off of these recordings other than Led Zeppelin themselves. As for what was stolen from Jimmy Page, I've read about that but I have no idea what those specific recordings are.

[Bong-Man]

I've spent too much money on these people in my life to worry about it at this point. As far as Zeppelin goes, I've bought everything they have made commercially available. Neil Young might have a bitch with me. I already had boots of all those concerts he's been releasing for years, and if I didn't, I probably would have bought them. But hey, I paid to see the man about 10 times too.

I discovered a lot of bands I didn't know much about thru downloading, and that led to some purchases (Pearl Jam, Pavement, Stone Roses, Radiohead, etc). These days it's all a trade-off.

If you frequent downloading sites that allow an artist to request their material not be posted, you might not feel so guilty ? Just a suggestion.

I've never attempted to download new studio releases in any illegal way, and never would. Strictly live performances for me.

[SteveAJones]

I think you'd be hard-pressed to find let alone uphold any moral absolutes with regard to Led Zeppelin or rock music in general. I have never downloaded any recordings but I do own quite a few bootlegs. I think there is something to be said for a well-produced bootleg. Though it'd be ideal if the artists received a portion of the proceeds from dowloading and bootlegging, on the other hand if they were that concerned there are business models in place that they could adopt.

[DAS]

I see it like this: If I'm downloading stuff instead of buying the official albums then I think it's a problem because then the band loses money because your taking the free recordings. If on the other hand downloading does not prevent you from buying the official releases then I don't think anyone gets hurt so I think it's acceptable.

[3hrsoflunacy]

I see no problem with downloading (or trading live concerts) as long as no money changes hands (except for shipping & handling in the case of CD's).

Believe it or not, paying the postage is paying for the distribution and people have been prosecuted for that. Pretty ridiculous.

I have maybe 10,000 bootlegs. I don't feel guilty for downloading them. To be honest, I have wasted money on some very crappy movies. If I had downloaded anything the MPAA objects to, I wouldn't feel bad about that either. But that is a whole different subject.

[DAS]

Is it actually illegal to download or purchase or just to sell?

[3hrsoflunacy]

Is it actually illegal to download or purchase or just to sell?

In December, 1994, Congress changed the law of unrecorded music performances when it passed The Uruguay Round Agreements Act. This act included a new provision, which prohibited the recording of live musical performances (that is, bootleg copies) even when there was no other "fixation" of the work. This provision includes separate prohibitions against the distribution and transmission of bootleg copies. In fact, the prohibition against transmission does not even require that a physical copy of the performance ever be made. While this act appears to create an exception to the fixation requirement for copyright, it is probably best understood as an independent right that is similar to copyright, but is not copyright.

Actual text in the US Code:

§1101. Unauthorized fixation and trafficking in sound recordings and music videos

(a) Unauthorized Acts.—Anyone who, without the consent of the performer or performers involved—

(1) fixes the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance in a copy or phonorecord, or reproduces copies or phonorecords of such a performance from an unauthorized fixation,

(2) transmits or otherwise communicates to the public the sounds or sounds and images of a live musical performance, or

(3) distributes or offers to distribute, sells or offers to sell, rents or offers to rent, or traffics in any copy or phonorecord fixed as described in paragraph (1), regardless of whether the fixations occurred in the United States,

shall be subject to the remedies provided in sections 502 through 505, to the same extent as an infringer of copyright.

( Definition.—In this section, the term “traffic” has the same meaning as in section 2320(e) 1 of title 18.

(c) Applicability.—This section shall apply to any act or acts that occur on or after the date of the enactment of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act.

(d) State Law Not Preempted.—Nothing in this section may be construed to annul or limit any rights or remedies under the common law or statutes of any State.

(Added Pub. L. 103–465, title V, §512(a), Dec. 8, 1994, 108 Stat. 4974; amended Pub. L. 109–181, §2(c)(3), Mar. 16, 2006, 120 Stat. 288.)

References in Text

Section 2320 of title 18, referred to in subsec. (, was amended generally by Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title VIII, §818(h), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1497, and, as so amended, provisions similar to those formerly appearing in subsec. (e) are now contained in subsec. (f).

The date of the enactment of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, referred to in subsec. (c), is the date of enactment of Pub. L. 103–465, which was approved Dec. 8, 1994.

Amendments

2006—Subsec. (. Pub. L. 109–181 added subsec. ( and struck out heading and text of former subsec. (. Text read as follows: “As used in this section, the term ‘traffic in’ means transport, transfer, or otherwise dispose of, to another, as consideration for anything of value, or make or obtain control of with intent to transport, transfer, or dispose of.”

[/code]

There is a caveat to all of this. Many bands allow taping and trading to various degrees, so you have to factor in all of that. The RIAA has successfully prosecuted people who have received money as payment for the bootlegged recordings. They have also successfully prosecuted people for receiving money as payment for postage (as I mentioned above) and have successfully prosecuted people who made 2:1 trades since they essentially received more in value for what they traded out. But that is rare.

To be safe, don't exchange any money and use programs like peerblock and/or vpn's to provide a bit more anonymity to yourself when downloading music. I would also stay abreast of the latest news on Torrentfreak with filehosts and torrent trackers and the efforts to stop them. Sound paranoid, yes maybe, but better safe than sorry.

[reswati]

No moral issues, neither did I have moral issues walking into a venue armed with a tape recorder.

[Nutrocker]

No. Me downloading does no harm to Mr.Page, he would never release any of this stuff and if he did I would most certainly buy it. Further, downloading takes money away from bootleggers, which helps Mr. Page. And all this keeps intrest in Led Zeppelin alive, why I have even made a few new Zep fans by playing downloaded bootlegs for friends. They have gone on to buy Zep albums. It's good for everyone to download!

Pretty much how I feel as well...if not for downloading, I'd only have the boot LP's I bought back in the 80's...and that is not enough live Zeppelin for me. Jimmy has no plans to release these things himself, but I wanna hear 'em, so I have no choice but to find them through other means. And downloading is free as opposed to shelling out ridiculous amounts for commercial bootleg recordings!

I've spent too much money on these people in my life to worry about it at this point. As far as Zeppelin goes, I've bought everything they have made commercially available.

Ditto. No, Zeppelin's official catalogue isn't as extensive as, say, Neil Young's or the Stones, but I've bought all the albums on LP, cassette AND compact disc at one time or another. Probably helped to pay for one of Jimmy's Crowley artifacts or something. And, sure, if Led Zeppelin did follow Neil and the Stones' suit and started putting out 'live archive' releases, I'd buy those too.

Yes.

Every time I DL a boot, a little part of my soul dies.

Indeed...there are a fuck of a lot more 'morally objectible' things to worry about than downloading stuff. If downloading causes a moral crisis for somebody, I'd advocate they join the priesthood, or something...

[Glyn]

I have no issues with downloading boots. As far as I am concerned these performances were never planned on being released, there would be no other way to have heard them, and in all reality the band isn't missing out on anything. The only ones I would actually buy are vinyl album bootlegs. I have absolutely no use for silver cds.

I do however have a moral problem with downloading leaked songs/albums or pirating commercially available music. I am honestly too fearful of the feds kicking down my door for downloading one officially released song.

There are some exceptions though....needle drops, fan remasters, and multitracks

[JTM]

No problem here. In the past I bought some horrible sounding and poorly pressed bootlegs (some good ones aswell,but not enough of them). So now downloading rather than buying an unofficial product is the way to go imo.

[DAS]

No moral issues, neither did I have moral issues walking into a venue armed with a tape recorder.

What kind of tape recorder will make a decent concert recording?

[tmtomh]

If you're not depriving the legal copyright holder of any actual or potential income, then I have no ethical problem with it. As such, I would say downloading unreleased concert material is totally fine. The only caveat would be material that appears, in some form, on official releases. So for Zep boots that include material that ended up on BBC Sessions, HWWW, TSRTS or the DVD, I would say it's ethically okay as long as you've purchased the official release.

I would also say that "sticking it to the bootleggers" only has ethical significance if the concert material you're downloading is a so-called master or low-gen, e.g. an original, freely traded source. Then you are indeed sticking it to the bootleggers. But if you're downloading a ripped copy of someone else's bootleg CD or DVD, then the bootlegger already has made his/her money and you're not sticking it to him/her.

Finally, keep in mind that for a lot of Zep soundboards, particularly a number of '75 and '77 shows, there are no freely circulating low-gens - everything on the internet is sourced from ripped bootleg discs. So if EVERYONE "stuck it to the bootleggers," we'd likely have no access at all to those shows.

[Nutrocker]

I would also say that "sticking it to the bootleggers" only has ethical significance if the concert material you're downloading is a so-called master or low-gen, e.g. an original, freely traded source. Then you are indeed sticking it to the bootleggers. But if you're downloading a ripped copy of someone else's bootleg CD or DVD, then the bootlegger already has made his/her money and you're not sticking it to him/her.

Finally, keep in mind that for a lot of Zep soundboards, particularly a number of '75 and '77 shows, there are no freely circulating low-gens - everything on the internet is sourced from ripped bootleg discs. So if EVERYONE "stuck it to the bootleggers," we'd likely have no access at all to those shows.

This is true...for good or ill, even in this 'digital age' bootleggers are still a necessary evil. Sure, we may download these '75/'77 soundboards for free, but in order to do so, some poor S.O.B. actually had to pony up the dough to buy the fucking bootleg CD's and upload 'em. Hell, I've done this, sharing my small collection of commercial boots, as have a lotta other people, of course. At some live music torrent sites that's the only way you can upload- no CDR copies, it's gotta be the actual purchased 'silver' CDs.

And, let's not forget -especially for old 'old school' bastids like myself- in the old days (pre-internet) if you wanted an unofficial recording, you had to either a- get involved in tape trading circles or b- track down and buy the bootleg. The damned things weren't just a click away like they are nowadays. We've become totally spoiled by that; we take the internet as our 'one stop shop' for unofficial recordings for granted...

[nigelss]

Many thanks for your comments. Looks like I'm in the minority as regards downloading stuff which originated in the theft from Jimmy's house so I'll be signing up for the priesthood as recommended by Nutrocker (see #12)

The legal stuff was interesting to see too (courtesy of 3hrsoflunacy in #10). It used to be the case that the owner of a bootleg was in the clear - it was only the sellers/distributers that were in line for a spanking - and I think that is still the case, but now if the owner makes a copy of his precious rare vinyl (for example) to some other medium he/she immediately falls foul of 1101(a)(1) (see #10 above). I suppose the same applies to downloading which is really making a copy of a performance from an unauthorised fixation. Having said that, 3hrsoflunacy's caveat is valid too.

For myself, I think I'll be sticking to audience recordings for the time being. Now please excuse me while I go polish my halo!!

Best wishes to all,

Nigel

[Melcórë]

I don't have a problem (morally/ethically) with downloading unofficial recordings - I've even purchased CD silvers for my collection - with official releases, though...I've steadily become much less willing to seek those out. If/whenever I do, I make a concerted effort to actually purchase the music in some form (usually physical unless lossless digital copies are available for purchase).

The thing that's really burning us? We want to give our money/bandwith to Led Zeppelin, but we haven't been given the chance since 2003. I only hope we don't have to wait until the remaining members are dead before we're able to get excited again about an official Zeppelin release.

[chillumpuffer]

What kind of tape recorder will make a decent concert recording?

A Sony Mini Disc for one. A mate lent me his and i did Robert Plants Dreamland show at Manchester. The quality is that good you can hear the tapping of the cymbals on the opening number and I was half way back in the stalls.You pre set the recording level before the show, attach the tiniest mic to your shirt collar and don't clap or talk loudly and bingo!. Believe me the sound is A1 stereo

Before that I did Frank Zappa's Them and Us show at Hammersmith @ 84 with a very expensive Sony recording walkman and was caught twice. Third time and it was to be handed over. Also did BB King at Manchester @ 85 with a walkman and before that Tina Turner with a smuggled in Ghetto blaster (don't ask).

See if you can get a Mini disc recorder on e bay cos i'm not sure if they still make them?

[bamf4k]

If it weren't for downloading, I wouldn't have anything!

[andyk]

Yes.

Every time I DL a boot, a little part of my soul dies.

Aw me too. My take on this is that if the better stuff was released officially I would buy it, if the band/it's company can't be bothered to make money from these recordings then that's their choice, but don't deprive me of the pleasure of owning/listening to them.

Being old enough to have seen them and owning a number of poor quality (and some excellent quality) bootlegs in various formats from the days when you could acquire them, I am much happier downloading for free and not lining the pockets of bootleggers.

How long did we wait for an official live release having bought all their official stuff in various formats (often 2 or 3 times), I don't download officially available items although I think I already had the various gigs that make up HTWWW in various forms (no I didn't get rid of them when I bought HTWWW on it's official release).

There is loads more stuff that could be released officially if Jimmy wasn't such a perfectionist, but if he is happy leaving it to the bootleggers, I guess that's his choice. I got tired of waiting for official 02 stuff and the bootlegs aren't too bad.

I don't really download much any more (last thing was the Vancouver 75 SB from the 20th March) as I have everything I want, but would be nice to have some of it released officially, how about some 'official bootlegs' other bands have done it at reduced prices to reflect the less than perfect quality. The Stones have done it with a couple of their more famous bootlegs

Andy

[thezepguy]

If an artist has not stated that they do not want their live performances shared, has not officially released the live show(s) in question and no money changes hands, then it is 100% legal to download...so don't have any qualms about it.

[cousinlouie]

LOL NOPE

[thezepguy]

LOL NOPE

If this is in reference to my post, then, I think you need to do some reading on copy right/fair use/intellectual property laws. I don't know where you are..but what I said applies to the U.S.

[cousinlouie]

If this is in reference to my post, then, I think you need to do some reading on copy right/fair use/intellectual property laws. I don't know where you are..but what I said applies to the U.S.

HEY

Didnt mean to be rude or, insult your post, Im a huge Zep fan, because of the internet, I have been able to download, TONS, of live concerts, where before the net, I paid 20 bucks per cd for a Zep show, which usually resulted in 60 bucks for a Zep concert, I'm aware of the laws and I buy official releases, I was just making a joke, because I was able to gain alot of Zep shows on the net, JUST Plant solo I have seen live 19 times, I have spent TONS of cash persuing my favorite band, I feel the internet is a great way to share and get live recordings of great bands, so if I am being ignorant, didnt mean to insult you, but do I feel bad for downloading live music, NO, my post was a reflection on the avaliability of great music, if now or in the future any post of mine on THIS GREAT FORUM, insults anybody, it is not my intention, just having fun and enjoying the insight, and information, and opinions that I get from the great people on this sight. No offense meant!