just seen this on discogs they are bannig  boot legs

https://www.residentadvisor.net/news.aspx?id=39760

Edited August 17, 20177 yr by mickjay33

They certainly are, a couple of days ago they took down a Mirwood copy of Jimmy Thomas I had listed. The problem will be working out which are bootlegs and which a legit 2nd issues, like the small 45 Okeh stuff.

They removed one of mine...I'm wondering if other genres are being treated the same as soul [lots of rock boots] or is it a vendetta!!!!!

Hopefully eBay will follow suit...but I'm not holding my breath.

They took down all the 60's beat repros I had and about 30 Northern reissues / boots.  Not that it matters much, my accounts not even open..

Just had a bit of a clarification on this, the boots are still in their database, but are flagged so that people cannot sell them.

groovy

I have mixed feelings. Some re-edits are great dancefloor material, albeit unofficial. I'm talking about Northern stuff, clearly - just to avoid any mouth frothing...

I guess if they're still on Discogs database, people will check them out and just go somewhere else to buy them.

It's not only the northern soul bootleg bits that are cracked down on DishCogs, it's everything. I had an old Beatles USA boot that got withdrawn and if the copy is still featured in their database, quoted as "unofficial", no more copies (while there were more than 15 for sale simultaneously) are presented for sale anymore.

I don't mind them cleaning that from their e-store. It's even healthy IMO. Only issue I have with such action, from them especially, is that Discogs is a bit painful both for the sellers as the buyers. Much less friendlier than the eVilBay to put up for sale with accurate picture and correct entry is sometimes a "pain" so most sellers don't bother and use the "reference" picture and sometimes wrong entry to sell a "similar" pressing...

So those guys deciding on those bases to withdrawn an entry listed item eligible to be "unofficial" is kind of "edgy" I find.

I would imagine it is all to do with the resurgent interest in music and vinyl and the record companies taking a more active role in bootlegs.  They have probably had some sort of warning from the authorities about them facilitating crime.  All are still viewable via their database as they are primarily or were a reference site.

9 hours ago, chalky said:

I would imagine it is all to do with the resurgent interest in music and vinyl and the record companies taking a more active role in bootlegs.  They have probably had some sort of warning from the authorities about them facilitating crime.  All are still viewable via their database as they are primarily or were a reference site.

There's a massive thread on the discogs marketplace forum about boots being withdrawn from sale from the master database. The Northern boots are a miniscule part of the overall size of the boots they are withdrawing. Cos discogs has taken over the world, rumour is they are ready to be bought by a massive company and are cleaning up there database to avoid litigation in future? Not sure exactly on figures but they have summat like 35 million items in the database and have currently removed summat like 35 thousand boots (might be more?) from all genres. and it's growing daily. They stay on the database as reference but you cannot sell/buy them anymore.

Steve

1 hour ago, Steve Plumb said:

There's a massive thread on the discogs marketplace forum about boots being withdrawn from sale from the master database. The Northern boots are a miniscule part of the overall size of the boots they are withdrawing. Cos discogs has taken over the world, rumour is they are ready to be bought by a massive company and are cleaning up there database to avoid litigation in future? Not sure exactly on figures but they have summat like 35 million items in the database and have currently removed summat like 35 thousand boots (might be more?) from all genres. and it's growing daily. They stay on the database as reference but you cannot sell/buy them anymore.

Steve

Would the massive company be EvilBay or the next to be even more evil corporation, Amazon? Too many boots, reissues etc clogging up all record data bases and ruining things for all OVO buyers. There needs to be a market place for these wares but not sure who is best placed to sell them - perhaps bona fide Northern dealers or High Street record shops are the long term solution if the internet is going to exclude them.

I kinda doubt that the beautiful people at Holly Sony would launch their guardian angels on Bob Square attempt to make peanut money to buy food for his starving canary selling a bootleg of the new Paul Anka uncovered northern soul to become...

No seriously, if the cuTe working labour class people of the new sOftPornBay of commercialism are onto that as well, the new assigned mission from unHolly God, it's not even for the Beatles, Stones and other poisonous band from Europe (this is not politically prejudiced, I swear ) it's more about a selling market that escaped the main distribution with the rising e-business and that is more impelled to any small profit margin making like selling them bootlegs amongst the rest tall together.

All the major retailers are loosing more and more part of the globalized world market even on non-analogic support and format and it is taking Darth Moder down with them in the fall. So God the Court decided to take action and send a nice little message with his best wishes in order to counter that chaos. I'm still not sure if the reissue business of today is much more worthy than those bootlegger's.

Edited August 21, 20177 yr by tlscapital

wondering if this and if evilbay follow suit will ever further drive up the price of boots?

Problem I see is that now people will list boots under the listing for OG copies, with a disclaimer in the description. This will then have a massive impact on the sales history and guide. This will be great for buyers and bad for non-clued up sellers. I personally have relied on sales history alot in the past, and it goes some ways to help sellers and buyers. This could ruin that system very quickly.

2 hours ago, olliewtf said:

Problem I see is that now people will list boots under the listing for OG copies, with a disclaimer in the description. This will then have a massive impact on the sales history and guide. This will be great for buyers and bad for non-clued up sellers. I personally have relied on sales history alot in the past, and it goes some ways to help sellers and buyers. This could ruin that system very quickly.

You can't list an item for sale on Discogs and then say it's different to the index listing. They class it as a violation, take your listing down and issue a warning. I've had that happen when I've listed Canadian issues or a promo/issue where they don't have both variations in their database.

There's stacks of "class violations" already on discogs, usually you don't spot it until you read the description/seller info

2 hours ago, Godzilla said:

You can't list an item for sale on Discogs and then say it's different to the index listing. They class it as a violation, take your listing down and issue a warning. I've had that happen when I've listed Canadian issues or a promo/issue where they don't have both variations in their database.

Yep, rather painful as a seller to edit a new entry every time you are trying to sell a record on Discogs with another reference not yet into their index. And once you understand that many sellers just don't bother to put in a new entry (slow and long process) and you're a customer and realize that, you get suspicious as to what exact release the seller really has ! I mean it's not so bad but it's really not that good either.

I hate to say but I find from both the seller's as the customer's side that the the eVilBay is much more "bare able". But they are the really "bad guys" I know. That is why now I'm crying my heart out Bouhouhou ! But why ?

didnt know you could done for entering a voilation. Not happened to me yet. Interestingly i just sold a house boot thats actually a boot of a boot. Not any non northern dubious issue taken down yet. Wonder if they started with northern or are doing it chronologically?

A just-published article from The Vinyl Factory on the Discogs/bootleg situation...

https://thevinylfactory.com/features/do-bootlegs-matter-what-discogs-new-crackdown-means-for-future/

For me, in some respects the most telling part is this...

Quote

"[Discogs]...did not take this decision lightly – my guy from Discogs explained that they see a trend of other third party marketplaces (such as Amazon) getting hit by authorities for being responsible for the sale of copyright-infringed materials. They are doing this to prevent a real disaster, which in my opinion is a very smart move.”

I wonder where these infringement claims are coming from. I presume it's the major rights owners in the music industry - the "big boys". But for that to be the case, these companies (individually or collectively) must be spending an absolute fortune identifying and cataloguing what are legitimate commercial releases of their own content and what aren't, which has to be a monumental task!

 

Different music but same subject, they have also removed many House music boots.