The Daily Roxette discussions forum has been closed. The forum is only available as a read-only archive.
Legal issues concerning "Roxbytes"
13 replies
goetz said on November 16, 2006 02:40:
Hey-Ho folks!
This is something I‘ve been wondering for a long time now.
Why is it allowed to share:
- videos of a song? You get the song, too, don‘t
you?! O.K., there‘s some work to be done to
make a CD-player-friendly-rip-off. But you HAVE
the song. And that is all that counts. Otherwise
you could steel a safe and argue that it‘s difficult
to open in order to get the money.
Some of you might say “Hey, your comparrison
sucks d1ck! At least you stole the safe itself!”
Hm..., so why are Videos not protected?? Movies
are...
- Liveversions and Demos of registered and
offically released songs? They´re just
differently “produced” versions of the same
basic songidea. It is actually this basic Idea that
counts. That‘s why I am not allowed to do a
(neither live nor studio)-coverversion of any
Roxette song and put it on my website. Even if it
is for free, not performed by the songwriter
himself and with a completely different production.
- Sydney ‘91 liveversions of “The look”
and “Joyride” f.e. which are still available
on “Tourism”?
Maybe it IS illegal. But why is this site still online and why don‘t they share the albumtracks aswell if they are on thin ice and have nothing to loose?
Or is it some silent agreement: “We don‘t share songs that you(Roxette, EMI, whoever) are making money of (no-one will download a demo as a substitude for the official track and cause you financial problems) and you forget about rights and stuff and take it as some sort of free advertising.”
Can anybody explain?
Cheers,
Christian
Marlene said on November 16, 2006 07:58:
Maybe TV appearances are like radio rips? They are legal as far as I know.
goetz said on November 16, 2006 10:55:
I am a big fan of Roxbytes. Where did I say that I‘d like to see it closed?? Crusade? You are paranoid! If I had a problem with Roxbytes why should I post my concerns on a downloading-friendly board like this and not write directly to EMI?
I am just curious WHY things are the way they are. I have NO PROBLEM with it! Am I only allowed to worry about things when they upset me???
Just wanted to share my thoughts and maybe find someone who knows more than I do.
I apologise! Thanx for sarcasm and moral advice!
Santi said on November 16, 2006 12:05:
This is not a downloading-friendly board. I think the moderators are already sick and tired of repeating that :)
And it has become so lately, so mind it that if you come up with such an issue right here right now, others will think it’s you want to show something’s wrong with that site as well. Bad timing.
andi11 said on November 16, 2006 12:09:
@goetz: interesting questions, wonder about the same things sometimes... don’t know the answer though :)
ally77 said on November 16, 2006 14:13:
But why just single out Roxbytes which is what your doing in the topic of your title....
There are plenty of sites Roxette related than offer downloads....
whateveriam said on November 16, 2006 14:21:
Yeah, how many exactly I don’t know...and thats not including bit torrents...
goetz said on November 16, 2006 16:28:
@santi: With downloadfriendly I ment the users, not the official rules. I wanna communicate with the users, not with the rules. And that wouldn‘t make sense if I were complaining. The unpersonell rules would agree, the users won‘t. So I would be the conservative “ass of the brigade” (german saying). Maybe that‘s what I am anyway, but this should‘t be my intention when trying to discuss properly.
@ ally: I mentioned Roxbytes because of their popularity and because they say that they don‘t share stuff that is already released. So they at least show some respekt (out of empathy or fear???). The rest of the internet doesn‘t. So I always thought Roxbytes is a legal project. If they weren‘t and had to fear legal actions against them, they could also share released stuff aswell (just like the other definetly illegal sites). What would they have to loose? That‘s why I became curious.
I bet Per and EMI know Roxbytes because it is dedicated to Roxette only and very popular. So before they would target any suspicious torrent site on the net with more Artists involved, they would start with Roxbytes. But they seem to ignore it. Do they ignore it out of unimportance or because it is legal?
If it is illegal, why not put the whole Roxette Discographie online? Don‘t get me wrong, I neither demand anything from Roxbytes nor do I want EMI or Roxette to take action against them. I‘m just confused by the legal situation.
And since those copyrights- and filesharing topics got more and more important, I started thinking about them (That‘s what caused my “bad timing”).
Oh and by the way, somewhere I read that “You tube.com” has really to face some trouble (and NO(!) I didn‘t contribute to that ;-) )
Maybe I made some arguements that are anti-Roxbytes. But this was just the possible “lawer-view” not mine.
As you might have noticed, english is not my mothertongue so talking in german is easy but writing in english can complicate things.
O.K. at least you can say:”Don‘t you have something better to do than worrying about those things?”
Well, actually I have. But don‘t we discuss Per‘s hairstyle aswell ;-) ?
Roxbytes 4ever :-)
Christian
ally77 said on November 17, 2006 01:38:
I really don’t think Gessle cares to be honest.... if he really did maybe he would have done something by now!
Ferdan said on November 17, 2006 01:53:
One thing is a copyright of a RECORDING, another thing is the copyright of the song.
whateveriam said on November 17, 2006 07:36:
I really don’t think Gessle cares to be honest.... if he really did maybe he would have done something by now!
Very true...I mean they’ve been running for years in different guises, and nothing has been done
Room_service said on November 16, 2006 03:23:
All I think is you have a personal issue with Roxbytes and/or its staff. If not, I don’t get the point in starting a “crusade” against “illegal-stuff-in-the-web”. If the site is online, I think Per/EMI/whatever don’t care much about that material, like TV perfomances and such. So, if they are not worried about it, we shouldn’t be worried either. Live and let the others live too.