CAT 023 Ebay Auction Is LIVE

  On 6/27/2014 at 3:43 PM, HardToFindRecordsMark said:

The TP is currently owned by one of the 'original' owners and we are acting as proxy for the sale due to our experience and knowledge of the industry. The owner of this piece wishes to remain anonymous, so to try and keep our professionalism that’s all i can really say.

Was going to say 'Mike Paradinas confirmed', but smashing stuff up is more his style so probably not.

Thanks for the info Mark!

Unfortunate that the seller is one of the original owners, as these were not intended for sale.

Reminds me of the old tape tracks issue. Wonder if it's Chris since he doesn't release regularly now. Mike has said it's not him.

Honestly, who is going to admit they're selling this (and incur the wrath of Richard)? I have my suspicions, but I'll keep those to myself.

Technically, this is the property of Rephlex Records (as it was a test pressing and not a commercial release for sale) - without their authorisation, I wonder what the legal area this falls into (if any)?

Thanks to Mark for answering some questions, and being a good sport about it - he could have easily came here and reacted to some of the unwarranted abuse and bad-mouthing, but took the professional route, which I appreciate.

  On 6/27/2014 at 3:47 PM, HardToFindRecordsMark said:

 

  On 6/27/2014 at 1:40 PM, Black Calx said:

 

  On 6/27/2014 at 12:42 PM, BIOXLAT said:

 

  On 6/27/2014 at 11:43 AM, Black Calx said:

I've posed the question yet again on their FB page as to where this actually came from, will update if they reply (probably not lol).

 

theyre really arsey, i asked them a question once on ebay about, coincidentally, a caustic window 12" they were selling but hadn't listed any info on it. their response was pretty much a 'fuck off'

 

 

These guys aren't the original owners of Hard to Find are they? Sure this shop went into receivership and it got bought out.

 

 

... And no, i took over the company about 2 years ago when we had a little restructure - The original owner and old management no longer work at HTFR. I do however apologise for your experience and i'd be extremely surprised if this attitude would be shown with any of our current staff today.

 

in fairness to you, it was around 2+ years ago, so yes probably the old bunch

  On 6/27/2014 at 4:24 PM, Joyrex said:

Technically, this is the property of Rephlex Records (as it was a test pressing and not a commercial release for sale) - without their authorisation, I wonder what the legal area this falls into (if any)?

If it was given to someone, how would it still be property of Rephlex? The moment it left their office and into the hands of X-person, it was X-person's belonging. The music remains Rephlex's property, but this is someone selling the actual record rather than a bootleg or digital rip.

Unless there was some sort of literal contractual agreement involved in the distribution of these records, I doubt there are any legal boundaries against someone selling their copy.

  On 6/27/2014 at 5:12 PM, KyonPalm said:

 

  On 6/27/2014 at 4:24 PM, Joyrex said:

Technically, this is the property of Rephlex Records (as it was a test pressing and not a commercial release for sale) - without their authorisation, I wonder what the legal area this falls into (if any)?

If it was given to someone, how would it still be property of Rephlex? The moment it left their office and into the hands of X-person, it was X-person's belonging. The music remains Rephlex's property, but this is someone selling the actual record rather than a bootleg or digital rip.

 

Unless there was some sort of literal contractual agreement involved in the distribution of these records, I doubt there are any legal boundaries against someone selling their copy.

 

That's why I said I wasn't sure - but surely resale is/could be prohibited? In other words, you are being given something that is not for resale - so are you allowed to sell it?

  On 6/27/2014 at 5:49 PM, Joyrex said:

That's why I said I wasn't sure - but surely resale is/could be prohibited? In other words, you are being given something that is not for resale - so are you allowed to sell it?

Well, are test pressings legally prohibited from resale like promotional copies? I think that would be the deciding factor in this case.

The seller's eagerness to hide in shadows is reflected in his willingness to part with a hefty chunk of cash to a third party in order to maintain his anonymity. He knows what he's doing is morally reprehensible, but he's sat in the shadows for the last month watching the value of this record increase and now he has slyly decided to cash in his chips. What a sneaky, sneaky man.

  On 6/27/2014 at 6:23 PM, KyonPalm said:

 

  On 6/27/2014 at 5:49 PM, Joyrex said:

That's why I said I wasn't sure - but surely resale is/could be prohibited? In other words, you are being given something that is not for resale - so are you allowed to sell it?

Well, are test pressings legally prohibited from resale like promotional copies? I think that would be the deciding factor in this case.

 

we've already discussed the bollocks over this with the Old Tunes BoC tape and the *(imo unwarranted) hounding that Mike P got.

how very human of him.

the smartest thing wouldve been to sell this copy BEFORE 'our' copy got put up

so i'd have to say its not as sneaky as it couldve been

  On 6/27/2014 at 6:38 PM, MisterE said:

the smartest thing wouldve been to sell this copy BEFORE 'our' copy got put up

 

so i'd have to say its not as sneaky as it couldve been

that would not make him look smart, it would make him look like more of a cunt than he already is.

If he sold it before the original auction he wouldn't get as much because all the bidders would know there was a second auction taking place and would be restrained because they'd know they'd have a second chance to get the record. Plus waiting till the original was sold gave him the opportunity to lurk in the shadows and get an an idea of what value would be. He's an opportunistic man to say the least.

  On 6/27/2014 at 6:42 PM, MIXL2 said:

 

  On 6/27/2014 at 6:38 PM, MisterE said:

the smartest thing wouldve been to sell this copy BEFORE 'our' copy got put up

 

so i'd have to say its not as sneaky as it couldve been

that would not make him look smart, it would make him look like more of a cunt than he already is.

 

morals and intelligence are two completely separate things

i didnt say it wouldnt have been more cunty. but the person clearly doesnt care so much about how this may make them look. they want money. they wouldve got more money if they put it up before the other one, which wouldve been smarter. unless for some reason they couldn't do that (maybe both copies come from rephlex themselves, who knows).

meanwhile there is a strong candidate for US pres 2016 who's husband makes 200k for single speeches and she still claims that even at 100m they arent really that well off. and plenty of people who actually aren't well off will vote for her thinking she cares about them. some who are complaining about this record or who had complained about the boc tape likely will too. so again, intelligence, morals, these things aren't the same. and im not trying to bring politics into this here, but only to question how much people really care about the morals of this thing. to me it seems like crocodile tears all around, just like with the boc tape. everyone who cried about that wouldve gladly bought it if they had the loot or the opportunity.

  On 6/27/2014 at 6:51 PM, Schlitze said:

If he sold it before the original auction he wouldn't get as much because all the bidders would know there was a second auction taking place and would be restrained because they'd know they'd have a second chance to get the record. Plus waiting till the original was sold gave him the opportunity to lurk in the shadows and get an an idea of what value would be. He's an opportunistic man to say the least.

you raise some good points here. but the first one up for auction, imo, would always go for more. the winner gets to be the first outsider to own a copy, and the kickstarter copy may have somehow failed to go to auction, through some unlikely bizarre series of events. you see a copy on ebay already, that's the only one 100% guaranteed to be on ebay at any point. because it is already. but maybe it not being the official kickstarter copy and a more mysterious one (although it also wouldve confused that issue and some wouldve thought it WAS the kickstarter copy), may have hurt it also. i'll retract what i said about it being smarter and say that nobody can know for sure, but i'd still bet it wouldve got more than it will now, which can never be proven right. it could be proven as likely wrong if this copy manages more than the first, which would be a surprise but stranger things have happened...

  On 6/27/2014 at 6:35 PM, oscillik said:

we've already discussed the bollocks over this with the Old Tunes BoC tape and the *(imo unwarranted) hounding that Mike P got.

That kinda depends on if a demo tape and a vinyl test pressing can be considered the same thing, though.

  On 6/27/2014 at 6:35 PM, oscillik said:

 

  On 6/27/2014 at 6:23 PM, KyonPalm said:

 

  On 6/27/2014 at 5:49 PM, Joyrex said:

That's why I said I wasn't sure - but surely resale is/could be prohibited? In other words, you are being given something that is not for resale - so are you allowed to sell it?

Well, are test pressings legally prohibited from resale like promotional copies? I think that would be the deciding factor in this case.

 

we've already discussed the bollocks over this with the Old Tunes BoC tape and the *(imo unwarranted) hounding that Mike P got.

 

There is a HUGE difference between a tape meant for friends and family and given in confidence and a promotional record not intended for retail sale - the only commonality is both were given in confidence that they wouldn't be leaked or resold, and in both cases now that promise wasn't upheld, most likely due to old-fashioned greed.

  On 6/27/2014 at 7:15 PM, MisterE said:

 

  On 6/27/2014 at 6:42 PM, MIXL2 said:

 

  On 6/27/2014 at 6:38 PM, MisterE said:

the smartest thing wouldve been to sell this copy BEFORE 'our' copy got put up

 

so i'd have to say its not as sneaky as it couldve been

that would not make him look smart, it would make him look like more of a cunt than he already is.

 

morals and intelligence are two completely separate things

 

i didnt say it wouldnt have been more cunty. but the person clearly doesnt care so much about how this may make them look. they want money. they wouldve got more money if they put it up before the other one, which wouldve been smarter. unless for some reason they couldn't do that (maybe both copies come from rephlex themselves, who knows).

 

meanwhile there is a strong candidate for US pres 2016 who's husband makes 200k for single speeches and she still claims that even at 100m they arent really that well off. and plenty of people who actually aren't well off will vote for her thinking she cares about them. some who are complaining about this record or who had complained about the boc tape likely will too. so again, intelligence, morals, these things aren't the same. and im not trying to bring politics into this here, but only to question how much people really care about the morals of this thing. to me it seems like crocodile tears all around, just like with the boc tape. everyone who cried about that wouldve gladly bought it if they had the loot or the opportunity.

 

What's with the political garbage?

  On 6/27/2014 at 8:27 PM, KyonPalm said:

 

  On 6/27/2014 at 6:35 PM, oscillik said:

we've already discussed the bollocks over this with the Old Tunes BoC tape and the *(imo unwarranted) hounding that Mike P got.

That kinda depends on if a demo tape and a vinyl test pressing can be considered the same thing, though.

 

They are not - see my comment above.

i guess I'm not understanding how someone is a 'cunt' for selling a copy of a record they possess, now that the 'cat is out of the bag' so to speak and the album has been heard by probably millions

and honestly if i was one of the special owners of the vinyl I'd probably suspect that discogs.com seller 'uniquemusicreleases' was richard or grant anyways and justify my own sale of my own copy based on that. the reasoning being why can they start selling their own test pressings if I can't sell mine? Simply because they asked me not to? Well in that case clearly the game has changed, so that agreement might not seem as important now.

and 'uniquemusicreleases' on discogs as far as I know was 'anonymous' too, so why should we look down on someone selling another copy who choses to be anonymous as well? Still a lot of holes in this story unfortunately to make an additional sale not seem that ethically problematic as other are making it out to be

If i missed a key development where discogs user 'uniquemusicreleases' announced who he/she was please let me know

and lets just say that 'uniquemusicreleases' is not Grant or Richard for the sake of argument, in that case a single sale of unreleased Caustic Window LP of course would open the door for other people who possess it to think it's 'ok' to sell theirs now. I don't see how this is so unethical or wrong. Seems like something that would be inevitable.

  On 6/27/2014 at 8:51 PM, John Ehrlichman said:

i guess I'm not understanding how someone is a 'cunt' for selling a copy of a record they possess, now that the 'cat is out of the bag' so to speak and the album has been heard by probably millions

 

and honestly if i was one of the special owners of the vinyl I'd probably suspect that discogs.com seller 'uniquemusicreleases' was richard or grant anyways and justify my own sale of my own copy based on that. the reasoning being why can they start selling their own test pressings if I can't sell mine? Simply because they asked me not to? Well in that case clearly the game has changed, so that agreement might not seem as important now.

 

and 'uniquemusicreleases' on discogs as far as I know was 'anonymous' too, so why should we look down on someone selling another copy who choses to be anonymous as well? Still a lot of holes in this story unfortunately to make an additional sale not seem that ethically problematic as other are making it out to be

Ah, assumptions - the fuel of the internet!

First off (again), the original Discogs seller was NOT Richard or Grant. Neither would bother selling a record in such a fashion, nor need to do so.

Secondly, he got their permission to sell the record, and the reason Rephlex agreed to the Kickstarter was it enabled this record to (hopefully) stay in the hands of someone who would honour the agreement of not distributing/repressing it via the Ebay auction, and raise some cash for a good cause.

In our case, that's exactly what happened - and the fans got to get their own copy legitimately to boot.

i dont see a copy of a record being sold as some big moral transgression. especially not when the kickstarter happened, we got what the main goal of that was- the album made available to us. this auction doesn't in any way undo that. its a piece of plastic. then theres the fact that nobody knows the details around this particular copy- who has it, do they have rephlex permission, is it rephlex themselves? then theres the fact that i dont know any of these people on a personal level so i can't take it personally as if it affects me. for all i know, rdj might be a total dickhead, maybe he hasn't been a very good friend to his friends himself. i have no reason to believe that, but thats because i know nothing about these people on a personal level. one thing i do know is that rdj isnt a god, he's just a guy who makes cool music. these records/tapes arent holy relics. and this particular one doesn't even contain unreleased music like the boc tape did.

further there's even another side to this- it's just a dumb piece of plastic, yet it's a piece of plastic that some very rich people are willing to part with several thousands of dollars for. maybe the people who own these things don't have that kind of money, and maybe they have a real need for some money. in that case it'd be hard for me to really hold their wanting to sell a piece of plastic for an amount of money that might make a real difference in their lives against them. at worst it might create a rift between this person and rdj (assuming its not actually him), but that's between them.

also, plenty of assumptions are already being made on the side against the sale of this thing. such as that it hasnt been approved, and that its not rephlex themselves, for starters.

I don't know why I even care about this whole thing, but it's fascinating to me that someone would pay tens of thousands of dollars for two pieces of wax. That's so far off the top end of my value proposition scale it might as well be a million dollars. Really curious to see how high this auction goes.

  On 6/27/2014 at 9:47 PM, Hijexx said:

I don't know why I even care about this whole thing, but it's fascinating to me that someone would pay tens of thousands of dollars for two pieces of wax. That's so far off the top end of my value proposition scale it might as well be a million dollars. Really curious to see how high this auction goes.

this is pretty fucking obvious. Richard just want to have fun do a little kickstarter thing with limited CW, some good charity. If he really cared about making money, he'd already released tons of albums. He probably releases under new artist names and doesn't care much about making money since he already has so much, I assume. The thing is even though braindance wasn't so popular, RDJ became rather popular. The whole music industry was mostly dependent on labels, so only a few artists who get to release through labels get some publicity. Now, with bandcamp combating piracy, there is just so much free/cheap music out there. Popular artists are still there, but they are rather commercialized. It's about how many fans you have, and then venues can guarantee ticket sales. How do you get more fans? play at parties, etc. I'll just go to a club or rave or festival often, hang out with the peeps, hippies, and druggies. Talk to the party organizer, to play at their shows, etc. etc. Now that's if you want to make money off of music. If you just want your music to go down in history like all those great classical musicians, you don't have to take the conventional route.

it would be awesome if the record could get sold again somehow...

who cares let the man sell his record, someone will be happy with it

everyone is happy with the caustic window lp, watmm, the fans, pirates, aphlex....

i'm very happy with it and it was a fix i needed for await NEW album pliss

now exuse me while i kiss the sky with stomper on maximum beast volume

  On 6/27/2014 at 11:04 PM, Ivan Ooze said:

who cares let the man sell his record, someone will be happy with it

everyone is happy with the caustic window lp, watmm, the fans, pirates, aphlex....

i'm very happy with it and it was a fix i needed for await NEW album pliss

now exuse me while i kiss the sky with stomper on maximum beast volume