Official Post From Hawkwind

[stephe lindas]

Next thing, noone will be allowed to do reefer at the gigs.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Weil" <frankw at STC.CORP.MOT.COM>
To: <BOC-L at LISTSERV.SPC.EDU>
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 5:04 PM
Subject: Re: Official Post From Hawkwind


> >From: Andrew Garibaldi<Deadearnest at BTOPENWORLD.COM>
>
> >It probably stems from most record companies' historic complete inability
to
> >(or be willing to) distinguish between a bootlegger and a
> >counterfeiter/pirater
>
> I agree with this, and I want to add something from a different
perspective.
>
> DISCLAIMER: I have *no* inside information to the band's reasonings, so do
not read
> too much into the rest of this message!
>
> It is often the case that business decisions are made from the perspective
of what
> is required to have a legal footing in a sometimes-seemingly-unrelated
matter. I am
> not very familiar with English law, but at least in America we have a
legal system,
> not a justice system. (The legal system would like to have you believe
that they are
> the same thing, but they are not.) The legal system says that certain
conditions
> have to be met in order to pursue a legal action.
>
> For example, a railroad puts up crossing gates at sidewalks. They do not
really stop
> someone from walking around/under them, and it costs them extra money for
equipment,
> maintenance, etc. However, it allows them to have a chance if someone is
stupid
> enough to walk in front of a moving train and get hit. The railroad can
argue that
> they made a diligent effort to warn people and keep them off the tracks,
and the
> person who got hit had to specifically circumvent those efforts.
>
> Another example would be a business having a guard at each entrance to
check bags on
> entry for weapons. While no one expects the guards to strip-search
everyone, and
> everyone knows that they could sneak a weapon in without a whole lot of
trouble, the
> business is making some effort. If someone gets shot on the business
property and
> gets sued by the victim for failing to protect him/her, then the business
has a
> basis to claim that it has preventative measures in place, so the attacker
had to
> knowingly and deliberately conceal the weapon. It is a lot harder to prove
> negligence on the part of the business in these cases.
>
> What does this have to do with Hawkwind (read the disclaimer at the top
again)? I
> could easily see that if Hawkwind does not make this pronouncement, then
it would be
> much more difficult to stop true bootlegging through legal channels and to
collect
> restitution. Given that their music is their livelihood, I think it is in
their best
> interest to protect it any way that they think is best. It's all too easy
to sit on
> the sidelines and say what the band should or shouldn't do. Maybe we
should give
> them the benefit of the doubt due to their many years on the inside of the
music
> business, the multitude of legal issues they have been through, and the
amount of
> money they surely have lost due to illegitimate releases.
>
> Personally, I don't listen to Hawkwind because of their taping policy. I
listen to
> them because I enjoy their music. This won't change that one bit.
>
> Frank
>
> --
> As an adolescent I aspired to lasting fame, I craved factual
> certainty, and I thirsted for a meaningful vision of human
> life -- so I became a scientist.  This is like becoming an
> archbishop so you can meet girls.           -- Matt Cartmill
> ============================================================
>       Frank Weil | Frank.Weil at motorola.com
>    phone: (847) 576-3110 | fax: (847) 576-3280