Re: [mb-style] RFC: Bad Terminology: bootleg

2007/5/11, Don Redman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: My conclusion would be to actually do as Olivier said and rename the status to "unofficial". What I didn't like in Olivier's original proposition was a purely semantic issue: something must be either Official or Unofficial, where does that leave Prom

Re: [mb-style] RFC: Bad Terminology: bootleg

On 5/11/07, Don Redman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hmm, I am still unsure. Here are the important definitions that were proposed during this thread (did I miss one?) On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 16:21:54 +0200, Lauri Watts wrote: > Any release that was not legally sanctioned by the rights holder, > which

[mb-style] re: bootlegs

A band may say at a show "Go ahead and tape this", but by and large the band doesn't own all the rights and licences for releasing the songs, so the taping (and release) of such a recordng is still unauthorized. Just change the label to "UNOFFICIAL". It's simple and appears to cover all the dif

Re: [mb-style] RFC: "changed name to" AR

What you describe here means: This new AR would introduce a serious change in semantics into the MB database. I believe it is crucial to collect these bands and possible issues and to do some serious testing on test.mb.org . How will the artist pages look like? will they st

Re: [mb-style] RFC: Bad Terminology: bootleg

> [...] A bootleg is> an unlicensed release. You stripped the important part out of it. My apologies, it was unintentional. That's the definition as I saw it repeated in the last few digests where it was quoted, my apologies if there was something else snipped out. It might be useful, so we'r

Re: [mb-style] RFC: Bad Terminology: bootleg

It works for the releases I'm likely to enter from ReDiscovery. I like it. Rob.. On 5/10/07, Aaron Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 5/10/07, Don Redman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lauri: a not legally sanctioned release. > Mudcrow: a release that was not sanctioned by the publisher. >

Re: [mb-style] RFC: Bad Terminology: bootleg

On 5/10/07, Don Redman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Lauri: a not legally sanctioned release. Mudcrow: a release that was not sanctioned by the publisher. Bogdan: a recording that was made without the cooperation of the artist. Both the "Lauri definition" and the "Mudcrow definition" could describe

Re: [mb-style] ARs about cover-art roles

On Fri, 04 May 2007 01:05:45 +0200, Bogdan Butnaru wrote: The only technical issue is splitting the art design/illustration AR with minimal loss of data. Is it possible to make a tiny temporary hack that keeps an already-existing AR "present" but disallows creating new ARs of that type? We only

Re: [mb-style] RFC: Bad Terminology: bootleg

Hmm, I am still unsure. Here are the important definitions that were proposed during this thread (did I miss one?) On Sun, 29 Apr 2007 16:21:54 +0200, Lauri Watts wrote: Any release that was not legally sanctioned by the rights holder, which is normally, but not always, the artist and/or thei

Re: [mb-style] RFC: "changed name to" AR

On Mon, 07 May 2007 13:08:41 +0200, Bogdan Butnaru wrote: Hi! There was a discussion a while ago about bands changing their names. I can't find it now, and I'd like to revive the discussion. In short, I propose we add a new artist-to-artist AR to reflect bands changing their names. The relati