Add songs

Stand by Me cover by U2

This topic is locked. You can not reply.

2012-07-28 21:05:18 GMT

Stand by Me

Performance title : Stand by me

Artist name : U2

Medium title : U2 Covering Them (tracks 2 and 13, On 13-- Bruce Springsteen joins U2, listed as a "special guest performer")

Release date : 1992

Record label : Golden Stars

Catalogue number : GSCD 1091

Format : CD

Links (to verify) :

Remarks : The two albums at different sites (links) feature differing track lineup, but this song appears as 2 and 13 on both. With Bruce, (13) it is from a performance in Philadelphia of 9/25/87, where Bono has a broken arm. (see youtube video)

Last edit: 2013-05-30 20:19:19 GMT by Limbabwe

2012-07-31 16:50:02 GMT

Based on the Discogs entry, this was not an official release but, rather, a bootleg. The SHS database does not incorporate bootlegs.

2012-07-31 18:59:11 GMT

How is this a bootleg if it is is on a designated label ? Can you show me where you got that informaion beacuse I thought official retailers (i.e. Amazon) didn't couldn't sell bootlegs for one thing, fear of being sued. Also, I believe this one was sanctioned by the artists.

So does this mean that SHS won't allow any Grateful Dead covers? They not only sanctioned, but encouraged their concert goers to record their performances and there are thousands of these around. Bootlegging refers to illegal/pirating, which contradicts the process of an artist allowing someone to record his/her work outside of an official (i.e. prearranged with all their sound and recording equipment)taping.

2012-07-31 22:14:40 GMT

Discogs describes it as an "unauthorized release". Many bootleggers use a label name -- I own quite a few. It isn't Amazon directly selling this item, it is two individual sellers. Both Amazon and Ebay frequently miss unauthorized releases sold by third-parties. Italy was a big center for bootleggers - where this recording is from - until the law cracked down on their operations. No, SHS does not include covers from unreleased concert tapes in the database either -- sanctioned by the recorded band or otherwise. Pirating is a distinct offense from bootlegging, and refers to copying and reselling officially released material. As you can see if you look, however, there are many covers of officially Grateful Dead songs in the database.

2012-07-31 22:23:20 GMT

Actually Discogs calls it an "unofficial release", and when you click on the label "Golden Stars", Discogs describes it as a 1990s Italian bootleg label.

2012-07-31 22:32:28 GMT

O.K. Thanks-- I think I get it. You probably mean that when an artist sancioned/allowed recording of a live performance, he/she dis not intend for one to go out and sell it, make copies and profit. Yes?

Excuse my (still) ignorance--How are you (SHC) defining "officially" released? And how would I know if a label is legitimate. So, I could not include my recorded Grateful concert covers?

Again Thanks for enlightneing me. I have alot of confusion on this, since many refer to pirating when copying music on shareware even though most/many have no intention of sellinig. Before (years ago) Napster was stopped, I shared thousand of songs on it. And never once sold any. Did I pirate bootleg or both?

2012-07-31 22:47:09 GMT

You weren't pirating unless you were selling what you downloaded. You were violating copyrights to the extent you were downloading songs not in the public domain. Indeed, I've known people who ran into legal difficulties with ASCAP and BMI for downloading copyrighted performances. My recollection of the Dead's policy was that they didn't care if you recorded their concerts unless you intended to resell them.

Incidentally, I believe in paying royalties to artists, but I will purchase otherwise unavailable bootlegged product. I have never knowingly purchased pirated product and I have never downloaded a copyrighted performance. (Actually, I have downloaded few songs in my life as I like owning the physical medium -- complete with cover art and notes -- and don't really care for downloads for many other reasons.)

2012-08-01 01:00:59 GMT

Gee thanks. I plead ignorance. At the time Napster came out (1990-1995?), it was the first of its kind and I had never hear of shareware, let alone any violation of copyrights. Ever since I was a kid, many in my circles would make a cassete copy or mix-tape of music each of us owned/had purchased individually (From LPs) to give(especially boy/girlfriends)each other. I had a friend who would spend hours copying his LPs to cassette so he could keep his LPs "safe" AND play them in his car. He has a great and well-preserved collection. (Yes, I'm up there)So we thought it was the same thing, just an easier way to get it. Mix cds are still very popular. The only people I know who still use sharewarw are young.

So, are you telling me that artists get royalties from otherwise unavailable bootlegged products and thus, this is not violating copyrights?

Is violating copyrights bootlegging?


P.S Where are you? overseas somewhere-- I just noticed the time--I am in Chicago and it is Tue. about 7:30 pm

2012-08-04 11:15:01 GMT

1. I am in Lansing, Michigan.

2. Bootlegging is selling music for which their is a copyright holder. It is considered fair use for the owner of an LP to make one copy for personal use. It is a copyright violation to copy an LP to give it away to another person. Why? That person is unlikely to buy the music if he/she has a free copy and the artist is deprived of a royalty.

3. No, artists do not get royalties from otherwise unavailable bootlegged product -- generally live concerts. The people who sell these are violating the law, but I don't think the purchaser is. I have never heard of a purchaser of bootlegged material being charged with any crimes for this. Purchasers for retail have been charged when they resell. I excuse myself for buying bootlegged material on the grounds that I would gladly purchase the music on an authorized release, were it available. In fact, I think I have always purchased later officially released versions of material that was initially available only as a bootleg.

4. One can violate copyright without either bootlegging or pirating.