Boc Old Tunes 1 + 2 / Boc Maxima / orig Twosim etc

Just thought I should contribute something to this hystoric thread.

haha love it !

fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck this thread

So Old Tunes Vol 2 is at £310, £55 more than Vol 1 yet with fewer bids overall. Is it the cover art? The longer running time? Maybe 2 is a more appealing number?

Let's discuss that. Eh? Maybe? Please?

  On 6/3/2013 at 12:41 AM, Hoodie said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 12:36 AM, impotentwhitecapitalist said:

i feel ashamed after looking through this thread. thanks mike (bambi) for wanting to sell these gems, and thanks rixxx for attempting to talk it out with people. sorry about all the bullshit

 

i feel ashamed that there are so many starfuckers on watmm.

 

what are you implying here?

  On 6/3/2013 at 1:50 AM, impotentwhitecapitalist said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 12:41 AM, Hoodie said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 12:36 AM, impotentwhitecapitalist said:

i feel ashamed after looking through this thread. thanks mike (bambi) for wanting to sell these gems, and thanks rixxx for attempting to talk it out with people. sorry about all the bullshit

 

i feel ashamed that there are so many starfuckers on watmm.

 

 

what are you implying here?

 

It means that people here are trying to seek personal approval from the sellers by going along with making a big joke out of it, the same thing they accuse anyone defending BoC of doing on the other side. Of course in this case, having the seller's metaphorical dick in their mouth, they can actually get that approval in the tangible form of a forum post, as opposed to the radio silence that would greet any "white knighting" on BoC's behalf.

lol

this thread is officially idiotic again

  On 6/3/2013 at 1:56 AM, opothecary said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 1:50 AM, impotentwhitecapitalist said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 12:41 AM, Hoodie said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 12:36 AM, impotentwhitecapitalist said:

i feel ashamed after looking through this thread. thanks mike (bambi) for wanting to sell these gems, and thanks rixxx for attempting to talk it out with people. sorry about all the bullshit

 

i feel ashamed that there are so many starfuckers on watmm.

 

 

what are you implying here?

 

 

It means that people here are trying to seek personal approval from the sellers by going along with making a big joke out of it, the same thing they accuse anyone defending BoC of doing on the other side. Of course in this case, having the seller's metaphorical dick in their mouth, they can actually get that approval in the tangible form of a forum post, as opposed to the radio silence that would greet any "white knighting" on BoC's behalf.

 

Surely you mean Radio Silence

  On 6/3/2013 at 1:50 AM, impotentwhitecapitalist said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 12:41 AM, Hoodie said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 12:36 AM, impotentwhitecapitalist said:

i feel ashamed after looking through this thread. thanks mike (bambi) for wanting to sell these gems, and thanks rixxx for attempting to talk it out with people. sorry about all the bullshit

 

i feel ashamed that there are so many starfuckers on watmm.

 

 

what are you implying here?

 

this thread has shown me that people are willing to ignore honor and integrity if it gives them a chance to kiss the ass of someone "famous."

the issue is really cut and dry. if the cassettes were gifts, selling them is in poor taste. unless BoC told the sellers that it's cool for them to pawn the cassettes for such a high price, then i think people have a right to be critical about it.

and before anyone says that it's nobody's business whether or not what the seller is doing is in poor taste, let me remind you that they are using this website as advertising for their auction. they publically exposed their business to us and, as a consequence, some people will critically evaluate it.

deal with it

  On 6/3/2013 at 1:37 AM, joshuatx said:

So Old Tunes Vol 2 is at £310, £55 more than Vol 1 yet with fewer bids overall. Is it the cover art? The longer running time? Maybe 2 is a more appealing number?

Let's discuss that. Eh? Maybe? Please?

vol 2 is higher priced than vol 1 because of that qt on the cover

  On 6/3/2013 at 2:02 AM, LimpyLoo said:

lol

 

this thread is officially idiotic entertaining again

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3N_Lkgftc4

Err..why can't I embed youtube videos anymore?

  On 6/3/2013 at 1:37 AM, joshuatx said:

So Old Tunes Vol 2 is at £310, £55 more than Vol 1 yet with fewer bids overall. Is it the cover art? The longer running time? Maybe 2 is a more appealing number?

Let's discuss that. Eh? Maybe? Please?

Vol 2 is better ?

  On 6/3/2013 at 2:08 AM, Hoodie said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 1:50 AM, impotentwhitecapitalist said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 12:41 AM, Hoodie said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 12:36 AM, impotentwhitecapitalist said:

i feel ashamed after looking through this thread. thanks mike (bambi) for wanting to sell these gems, and thanks rixxx for attempting to talk it out with people. sorry about all the bullshit

 

i feel ashamed that there are so many starfuckers on watmm.

 

 

what are you implying here?

 

 

 

this thread has shown me that people are willing to ignore honor and integrity if it gives them a chance to kiss the ass of someone "famous."

 

the issue is really cut and dry. if the cassettes were gifts, selling them is in poor taste. unless BoC told the sellers that it's cool for them to pawn the cassettes for such a high price, then i think people have a right to be critical about it.

 

and before anyone says that it's nobody's business whether or not what the seller is doing is in poor taste, let me remind you that they are using this website as advertising for their auction. they publically exposed their business to us and, as a consequence, some people will critically evaluate it.

 

deal with it

 

there are many many many assumptions in your post

  On 6/3/2013 at 2:13 AM, LimpyLoo said:

there are many many many assumptions in your post

 

there are few few few cells in your brain

  On 6/3/2013 at 2:24 AM, tht tne said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 2:13 AM, LimpyLoo said:

there are many many many assumptions in your post

 

 

there are few few few cells in your brain

 

please elaborate.

  On 6/3/2013 at 2:27 AM, LimpyLoo said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 2:24 AM, tht tne said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 2:13 AM, LimpyLoo said:

there are many many many assumptions in your post

 

 

there are few few few cells in your brain

 

 

please elaborate.

 

same goes to you. what assumptions am i making?

  On 6/3/2013 at 2:40 AM, Hoodie said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 2:27 AM, LimpyLoo said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 2:24 AM, tht tne said:

 

  On 6/3/2013 at 2:13 AM, LimpyLoo said:

there are many many many assumptions in your post

 

 

there are few few few cells in your brain

 

 

please elaborate.

 

 

same goes to you. what assumptions am i making?

 

Hoodie I like you so how about let's drop it.

I'm sorry I said anything. It doesn't matter anyway.

Cheers.

I'm not going to even attempt to reply to some of the ill-informed, idiotic, and just plain WRONG statements and assumptions in this epic clusterfuck of a thread, so here it is in simple, easy to read form:

1) While it is technically not illegal to sell the tapes, the ethics of doing so, and moreso the timing, is what's at issue here.

2) These tapes (and the unreleased music contained within) were never meant to change hands or become public - by breaking that trust and selling them, there is the almost-certain potential that whomever ends up with these will capitalize on the fact these are first-generation tapes and will certainly rip these and distribute them online, thus depriving Boards of any potential sales or control how their art is presented. This is why Boards has in past fought the sale of these tapes, over and above any emotional investment they had in the people they entrusted their unreleased material with.

3) Quick copyright 101: you retain an informal copyright the moment you create something. It does not matter if those works are released for sale or exhibition or not, no one but the copyright holder has the right to the works.

4) Because of who is selling these items, it sets a precedent for not only others to follow suit. What incentive does Boards have to release these tracks now that poor quality copies are all over online, and not almost certainly higher quality ones will surface?

5) I think Boards should quickly announce digital versions, sourced and mastered from the originals, of select tracks from these compilations for sale soon - thus taking the wind out of the opportunists' sails and end this farce. Then, the fans get what they want, Boards gets compensation for their hard work and art, and any future individuals considering this won't bother. Think I'm wrong? What about Twoism? They finally officially released it so everyone could afford to own it, and as Boards intended it to be presented. Now, any copies of the original are valuable only to collectors who want the original and aren't bothering with ripping it illegally.

  On 6/3/2013 at 2:56 AM, Joyrex said:

3) Quick copyright 101: you retain an informal copyright the moment you create something. It does not matter if those works are released for sale or exhibition or not, no one but the copyright holder has the right to the works.

 

 

Your view of copyright would preclude anyone from selling anything ever. It makes no sense, Joyrex. There is no violation of copyright in simply selling a tape with copyrighted material on it.

At heart copyright pertains to the "right to copy" and it does not apply to this sort of thing.

hoody, maybe my morals are set up differently than yours. i simply trust their judgement in selling a few old tapes and records on ebay; that's all they are... old tapes and records filled with old tunes. they were given them and they are theirs, they can do whatever they want with them. and people trying to give them a guilt trip for doing what they want with what's theirs, ashamed me

JOYREX FOR PRLOLSIDENT

  On 6/3/2013 at 1:05 AM, Adam said:

Just thought I should contribute something to this hystoric thread.

please don't close this thread! very amusing in both the pseudo-legal and "ethical" aspects of the event

  On 6/3/2013 at 2:56 AM, Joyrex said:

What incentive does Boards have to release these tracks now that poor quality copies are all over online, and not almost certainly higher quality ones will surface?

I mean, I would assume the incentive on releasing these tracks would be to please fans and make money? No one really wants shit quality rips. I certainly don't, and that's why I don't have them. People are settling. Boards have had all the time in the world to re-release these cassettes in some form or another. They've yet to do it, and again, probably won't.

So has anyone on here put in a bid?

Come on, own up!