Johnny Winter Guitar Slinger - Blocked for sale on Discogs. Why?

Discussion in 'Marketplace Discussions' started by eddiel, Sep 17, 2017.

  1. eddiel

    eddiel Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    As some of you know, recently, Discogs started blocking for sale bootlegs and known counterfeit/pirated releases. I understand why they might want to do that so this isn't about why they might be blocking something like that.

    However, in the various threads about this on the Discogs forums, I've come across some head scratches.

    For example, they've blocked ALL for sale copies of Johnny Winter's Guitar Slinger on Alligator records.

    Some are saying things like, it could be down to a royalty dispute between the label and an artist/song writer/etc

    But this makes no sense to me as any dispute would be between the label and the artist and if Discogs has to block it for legal reasons wouldn't eBay have to worry about this too? It would be like everyone having to suspend sales of any release as soon as their's contention about copyrights.

    Does anyone know if there's a story behind this Johnny Winter release, or, any more details as to what is going over at Discogs? So far Discogs has not said much at all regarding their blocking in general.
     
  2. Dave

    Dave Esoteric Audio Research Specialist™

    Location:
    Greater Vancouver
    :shrug: Nothing on my end Eddie. The same story on the WEA releases as well. There must be some reason though.
     
  3. masterbucket

    masterbucket Forum Resident

    Location:
    Georgia US
    Bootlegs are accessible everywhere physically and by download. Ebay is loaded with them and always has.
    No big deal.
     
  4. eddiel

    eddiel Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    I think Discogs might have received a legal notice about it. Still digging up info, but there was a recent post in the forums about a David Ruffin release that was blocked and someone posted that Discogs received a legal notice asserting that "a track on the release was not licensed by the rights holder" This was a legit Motown release as well.

    I asked the poster if they could refer me to the original source of that explanation so I'll report back.

    This is interesting though, as it sounds like a simple legal letter was sent and not necessarily something from the court baring the sale. In addition, why on Discogs and not eBay? My guess is eBay is probably saying "Go f*** yourself" whereas Discogs is saying "We can't afford the legal fees so block it"

    I tell you though, if this is how they are going to react to a letter from a lawyer, there are going to be a lot of blocked released on that website.
     
    Dave likes this.
  5. eddiel

    eddiel Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    Ok, no information on the Johnny Winter release but check this edit on the David Ruffin release that was blocked

    Discogs David Ruffin

    Discogs did indeed received a legal letter about this release. Now it sounds like it's a legal letter and not an official court notice.

    EDIT: I'll start a separate thread since this isn't just about one release anymore and could have wider ranging implications...
     
  6. Dave

    Dave Esoteric Audio Research Specialist™

    Location:
    Greater Vancouver
    Last edited: Sep 21, 2017
    eddiel likes this.
  7. eddiel

    eddiel Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    And they got charges $1,000 by their lawyer for the letter. It's so dumb. I'd really like to hear a proper legal opinion on the validity of those letter they're sending out.
     
    Dave likes this.
  8. mpayan

    mpayan Forum Resident

    Wonder if ebay is putting the squeeze on Discogs?
     
  9. Dave

    Dave Esoteric Audio Research Specialist™

    Location:
    Greater Vancouver
    How so? This strikes me more as legal eagles prospecting for gold by legal document enforcement. eBay has no say in what's happening. The Dept. Of Silly Ideas believes they will sell more of these garbage new artists/releases if they are able to neuter the resale of quality material available on-line.
     
  10. quicksrt

    quicksrt Forum Resident

    Location:
    City of Angels
    No, you are close but no. The reason is the keep (used) competition from selling new copies of the old albums. They want to sell new copies at new prices without used ones to compete with.
     
  11. Dave

    Dave Esoteric Audio Research Specialist™

    Location:
    Greater Vancouver
    o_O I believe I said exactly that, but I guess I could have added re-releases.
     
  12. quicksrt

    quicksrt Forum Resident

    Location:
    City of Angels
    I got that you referred to garbage new releases, where I was referring to catalog classics, the same album they are trying to block.
     
  13. quicksrt

    quicksrt Forum Resident

    Location:
    City of Angels
    Someone is going to stand up and take the major labels to court and get a judgement against them for interfering in business transactions that they have nothing to do with. Unfair restraint of trade. Falsely claiming ownership of copyrights not under their control. That's just the beginning. Denying someone the right to an earning to make a living. Stress, etc.

    Those dying dinasaurs better be careful with their phony threatening letters, it could cone back to bite them in the ass.
     
  14. Dave

    Dave Esoteric Audio Research Specialist™

    Location:
    Greater Vancouver
    Let's hope it does.

    FWIW I was stating "if they are able to neuter the resale of quality material available on-line." meaning the stopping of previous release resales.
     
  15. eddiel

    eddiel Forum Resident Thread Starter

    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    In the examples I posted it wasn't the major labels that were causing the issue but rather a songwriter, or someone who represents them, taking issue with a track or tracks on an album. It was not a label driven issue except that the songwriters were saying they didn't get paid from the labels.

    In terms of these official releases being blocked, this is not label driven at all.
     
    Dave likes this.

Share This Page