About this weblog
Here we'll explore the nexus of legal rulings, Capitol Hill
policy-making, technical standards development, and technological
innovation that creates -- and will recreate -- the networked world as we
know it. Among the topics we'll touch on: intellectual property
conflicts, technical architecture and innovation, the evolution of
copyright, private vs. public interests in Net policy-making, lobbying
and the law, and more.
Disclaimer: the opinions expressed in this weblog are those of the authors and not of their respective institutions.
What Does "Copyfight" Mean?
Copyfight, the Solo Years: April 2002-March 2004
1. Crosbie Fitch on August 9, 2005 12:32 PM writes...
It's still a bootleg, because even though you've obtained it from a bonafide source, the RIAA can still sue you.
They get more money this way.
If you're suing 90% of your customers who audition your music via filesharing systems, why not also sue the other 10% who aren't?
Permalink to Comment2. Nathan Jones on August 9, 2005 10:08 PM writes...
It's a bootleg in the same way that a DRM-based digital music store is P2P.
I'm thinking here of Ed Felton's article, Entertainment Industry Pretending to Have Won Grokster Case, in which the entertainment industry made it sound like there can be a centrally controlled and licensed P2P network. Perhaps that is true, but I can't really see the point of it.
Permalink to Comment3. Maciek on August 10, 2005 3:21 AM writes...
Isn't "official Bootlegs" an oxymoron?
Permalink to Comment4. Fred von Lohmann on August 10, 2005 8:58 PM writes...
Yes, the movement toward "official bootlegs" is picking up steam. Ani Difranco does it too. As a fan, I couldn't be happier. Of course, after buying everything officially released, there are still all the "real" bootlegs created and shared by fans.
Just another chapter in the slow corruption/evolution of our language. "Bootleg" will soon be synonymous with "live recording."
Permalink to Comment