Iron Maiden News, Links, and Interviews

Samantas5855 said:
Ah sad, I bought the CD for this specific "rough mix". Any other obscure cds to look for? Any alternate versions of songs like the running free demo or the women in uniform german version
Click to expand...
Samantas5855 said:
Ah sad, I bought the CD for this specific "rough mix". Any other obscure cds to look for? Any alternate versions of songs like the running free demo or the women in uniform german version
Click to expand...
Samantas5855 said:
Ah sad, I bought the CD for this specific "rough mix". Any other obscure cds to look for? Any alternate versions of songs like the running free demo or the women in uniform german version
Click to expand...

Samantas5855 said:
Ah sad, I bought the CD for this specific "rough mix". Any other obscure cds to look for? Any alternate versions of songs like the running free demo or the women in uniform german version
Click to expand...

Unfortunately Maiden hasn't really released much extra cool stuff even since day one. Now, besides the ones you have mentioned I would recommend hunting for the Wasting Love (Canadian Promo) that has the Wasting Love radio edit, The Angel and the Gambler (US Promo) that comes with an even shorter edit of the title track, and of course the The Wicker Man (US Promo) becuase of the The Wicker Man (Radio Version). Now, if you're extremely picky with getting CD's or albums with different mixes, edit and the like I would recommend you getting my book DETAILED DISCOGRAPHY OF THE BEAST, there I pin point every different version of every song and the places where to find it. You can check it out at http://subscribepage.com/luisma666
 
Samantas5855 said:
Interview only if anyone is interested
Click to expand...

We are but you may be interested in where to post something like this.

recent talk of different threads with different functions:

Video threads

So, I just found myself looking for a YouTube link I knew was posted on this board and I had to look in three different threads until I found it. We currently have the following three threads: The essential bootlegs? Iron Maiden video interviews / shows Iron Maiden News, Links, and interviews...
forum.maidenfans.com
 
Last edited:
^ deleted/recreated that post in the thread for discussion about these things :)
 
By the way, as you remember I linked the Bremen (Beat Club) show from 1981 which was uploaded in september 2018 to the Beat Club-channel.
This was the original post I made: https://forum.maidenfans.com/threads/iron-maiden-news-links-and-interviews.19883/page-45#post-765342
The show had been taped and shared among traders for long time, but this was from the original tapes, which had better quality (never seen it with such a great quality) and also it was the real uncut version of the show, which wasn't available before even for the traders.

This was the full (for the first time ever) setlist of the show:
[00:00:22] Ides of March (from tape)
[00:02:10] Prowler
[00:06:05] Charlotte the Harlot
[00:10:19] checking mental state of audience
[00:10:44] Wrathchild
[00:13:50] Remember Tomorrow (1st try)
[00:15:18] remember audio engineer lessons
[00:18:07] Remember Tomorrow (2nd try)
[00:23:42] Transylvania
[00:27:40] Running Free
[00:31:10] Innocent Exile
[00:35:23] Sanctuary (1st try)
[00:39:33] Killers
[00:44:45] Another Life
[00:48:30] Phantom of the Opera
[00:55:51] Iron Maiden
[01:00:06] Sanctuary (2nd try)

It was there available for some time but then it was taken down. Anyways, did anybody record this show? I would like to see it again.
It was great quality, had couple mistakes and technical difficulties, we saw the guys drink beer while waited for the fix etc. stuff.
If anybody can help me I would appreciate it alot as I would like watch this one again.
 
PhantomOfTheOpera said:
It was there available for some time but then it was taken down.
Click to expand...

The show belongs to Beat Club as Download IM special belongs to Download, these are not bootlegs and we won't get to the prime source if said entities don't release it for free.

We're in a very shitty situation because everything can be monetized by anyone, and the ordinary people are last in that row. Youtube et.al allows "ownership" of any kind of a video, regardless of it's source, content and quality. This poses a problem when real owner does not want to own the video because of the hassle that goes with it. Say Dickinson does a book performance and his side does not want to get involved with any Silicon Valley stupidity. He also says right in the performance that he allows bootlegging. A great bootleg comes out from the audience. All it takes for YT to take down that video is the act of the venue or organizer or anyone else in the chain between real content creator* and consumer, establishing ownership for the media that happened during that event*.

Another example would be an upload of a free to air public TV piece of media. Unless the state TV company enters the YT bureaucracy, establishes ownership over the content ID's and then enables free access to it, someone else could do the same thing, because of YT biz protocols and more importantly their automatic processes. Then that someone could limit the visibility of the content.

*1 - there are many biz entities happening during a single show, band, organizer, venue, broadcasters, all can claim to be content creators. While we know there's just one content creator, the band itself. If you ask Silicon Valley this is not so. They consider the content to be "free for taking" and not public domain by default. This is the most blatant problem. By default for them, the content must have a proprietor. YT el al are not archives of public domain media, that have provisions to assign proprietary content to the proprietor in the case of it. They are private platforms providing access to proprietary content.

*2 - we are not talking about a piece of media, we're talking about algorithms that scan the media and assign it unique IDs. Therefore an audience shot might be resolved to same ID as an security camera shot of the same stage. This will be later used to tag all the "alternative sources" once the ownership is established.

In their own, clumsy, curmudgeon style, EU tried to do something about this. It was called "anti meme law" in an all out propaganda assault and went dead.

The Directive on Copyright and its most controversial component, Article 13, requires online platforms to filter or remove copyrighted material from their websites. It’s this article that people think could be interpreted as requiring platforms to ban memes, but more on that later.

The Directive on Copyright would make online platforms and aggregator sites liable for copyright infringements, and supposedly direct more revenue from tech giants towards artists and journalists.

Currently, platforms such as YouTube aren’t responsible for copyright violations, although they must remove that content when directed to do so by the rights holders.
Click to expand...

The first thing they would make YT et al is to identify copyrighted vs public domain. This would be a huge step in making sure the public domain isn't monetized. This also means that something like Iron Maiden's 1st of May appearance on RAI would never ever be barred access to/monetized because that was a public domain event.

This also means Beat Club and Download would have to protect/copyright their IM media via institutions and not via agreements against some private company. Then we would see whether they have any rights to the material.

One might say, but then, if there's no monetary incentive who would make clean, whole bootleg of the performance in question? Possibly no-one, it would sit in the archives and then get released/leaked because there's no monetary incentive behind it. As it were until now.

/rantoff
 
@Zare But that Beat Club-show was uploaded by themselves (or whoever is their representative of BC handling the youtube) on the official BC-channel.
What was the cause of them pulling the video away as it had been there for quite a while already? It was unbelievable to get some upgraded quality of that show and even uncut full show with mistakes, technical errors and such Spinal Tap happenings.
 
Last edited:
PhantomOfTheOpera said:
@Zare But that Beat Club-show was uploaded by themselves (or whoever is their representative of BC handling the youtube) on the official BC-channel.
What was the cause of them pulling the video away as it had been there for quite a while already? .
Click to expand...

Ok I'll try to explain what I think happens here and exemplify the gist of my post above :

- there's unsurfaced live Maiden in some content proprietor's archives
- this footage is pretty raw, showing band in a technically problematic gig
- from this we can conclude it's not officially sanctioned by Maiden
- if Maiden knew about it they'd include bits on Early Days

What happens next?

- the content proprietor uploads the stuff to YT
- it's a media publisher verified account, the content is parsed, signature is generated and ownership is assigned to Beat Club
- monetization? UMG or whomever own the studio songs, but the distribution of income is not important here.

Right now the signature of multimedia depiction of that event (video, audio, and the combination) is stored as owned by Beat Club.
Maiden probably disputed this, so the video got "removed" (e.g. put to private) by the Beat Club.

So what's the problem?

The problem is that Iron Maiden needs to take extra steps at in an extra-judicial, private complaint process, because YT doesn't have a fairness principle like international laws and internationally recognized courts. Until that process is resolved, the "gods of streaming content" believe that shit belongs to Beat Club. Where it matters for us is that Maiden is far into acknowledging unlicensed usage, or pirating, or grey zone of bootlegging, in some cases even supporting it. When you put Maiden-camp owned stuff onto these sites, you can't monetize it, when you put stuff that other publishers "own", you can't even display it, that's the difference.

All this because we allowed private streaming companies to fuel 99% percent of the media consumption. The said companies are even deeply invovled into ISPing, telco stuff, and want to actually shape the internet tubes in a non fair way, which is the anti-pod of what Internet was made for. I love YT, it has shit ton of value for me, but let's face it, the downsides will be extreme in a long run.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top