Unofficial Releases for Sale

There's a on discogs from Greece creating their own bootlegs of rare/uncommon CDs and vinyl and marking them as "unofficial release" editions with a label name they created (the label is AB_06, every listing for sale is from the same ). They're selling them on the platform for anywhere between €30 up to €350. Is this allowed? I know they are technically marked unofficial but it doesn't sit right with me that this person is heavily profiting off of music that they didn't pay for.

I should mention the person was posting pictures of the CDs in a Facebook group and when I reacted they sent me a dm asking if I wanted to buy them. They talked like a scammer from the get go but it seems like they're just making these in bulk to get a quick buck.

coreenthusiast
(the label is AB_06, every listing for sale is from the same

70 items on Database, no one available in the Marketplace.

Sonny.
coreenthusiast(the label is AB_06, every listing for sale is from the same

70 items on Database, no one available in the Marketplace.

Oh good, looks like they were all removed then. Hopefully by discogs and not just temporarily by the

coreenthusiast
Oh good, looks like they were all removed then. Hopefully by discogs and not just temporarily by the

"This item is blocked from sale on Discogs. It is not permitted to sell this item in our Marketplace".

Should these even be in the DB? Feels like someone tracking their own lathe-cut records they make for their own collection.

DarreLP
Should these even be in the DB?

I really don't think bootlegs SHOULD be in the database, but I got a "no" vote once on trying to delete an item I added myself after finding out it was a boot. So idk

Well, we don't allow personal mix-tapes, right? I can't just record a bunch of songs onto a blank cassette and make a cover and call it a release, can I?

But yea, I guess there's no hard/clear line here so will always be debatable.

coreenthusiast
DarreLPShould these even be in the DB?

I really don't think bootlegs SHOULD be in the database, but I got a "no" vote once on trying to delete an item I added myself after finding out it was a boot. So idk

They absolutley should be in the database. Firstly they exist (and the database is information about recorded musci, not a marketplace). But more importantly, it helps massively when identifying the release of a record to be able to see bootlegs and understand how to differentiate them from the original / official version.

A lot of their (now disabled) images (across two s) were mockups (often re-using the same photo of the media), which made it seem possible that some of these were only manufactured if/once someone ordered one. Plus disclaimers like "Please allow about 15-20 days for shipping due to high workload". Those subs may not belong, if they were indeed "documenting" potential releases, but it's not easy to prove.

redmoorvinyl
coreenthusiastDarreLPShould these even be in the DB?

I really don't think bootlegs SHOULD be in the database, but I got a "no" vote once on trying to delete an item I added myself after finding out it was a boot. So idk

They absolutley should be in the database. Firstly they exist (and the database is information about recorded musci, not a marketplace). But more importantly, it helps massively when identifying the release of a record to be able to see bootlegs and understand how to differentiate them from the original / official version.

+1

Bootlegs, even if not being allowed for sale, are a critical resource on Discogs, for both archival and consumer-info perspectives. By definition, a bootleg is - hopefully, a vinyl record or a silver CD (sometimes a professional CDR) - a recording comprising unauthorized/unreleased live or studio material, packaged at least semi-professionally. They definitely belong in the database, particularly when the material’s sourcing is evident.

Meanwhile, “counterfeit” and ”pirate” releases are aimed at, respectively, fooling consumers into buying a lookalike item of an official release (see: Beatles, Butcher cover) or home-brewed stuff from fly-by-night labels and fans with CD burners.

I think it’s be good to delineate bootlegs (unofficial releases…typically done in quantity…typically to sell) vs. private one-off home made items (a mix tape, a lathe cut, etc)

That said, I’m sure defining that line between the two is probably impossible.

I bought two albums at auction, both of which were counterfeit (as opposed to bootlegs). Both were identifiable as such because the counterfeit was a distinct release on Discogs and thus I was able to get my money back on both.

I should add that the proverbial “unofficial” designation at Discogs can be wildly imprecise. Artist estates and the artists themselves, for example, often self-release material that may or not include songs that they don’t and copyright, including unreleased live versions of their own previously released material, typically sold via mailorder or at shows. Granted, sometimes the labels and publishers may complain and file. But for my money, if it’s coming directly from the artist, I have no problem handing over my dough directly to the artist. Zappa and the Dead aside, a self released album is neither a boot nor a pirate.

DarreLP
I think it’s be good to delineate bootlegs (unofficial releases…typically done in quantity…typically to sell) vs. private one-off home made items (a mix tape, a lathe cut, etc)

That said, I’m sure defining that line between the two is probably impossible.

That's exactly the distinction Discogs uses, and yes, often it has to be arbitrary. The rule of thumb is that records and silver pressed CDs are more likely to make the cut into the database than cassettes and CDR's, which are of course easier to produce at home. But the criterion is whether an item was "released" - i.e. offered to the public for sale, or as a promotional item - or it was made by a private individual for their own use. Of course, unofficial releases made in the thousands on vinyl are appropriate for the database, and one-off homemade mixtapes are not. The area between the two extremes is gray.

https://www.discogs.sie.com/label/3951318-Rare__-Records

I believe this and AB_06 are the same person creating one-offs

Most of these submissions are also listed as "Special Cut", but no source why

Maybe they're especially cut for you when you order one lol

Think they use special cut because is almost lathe cut and is only option with "cut" but they don't know it's in the menu at level of vinyl - not sure makes sense how I explain

Good morning. Submissions associated can be found here:

https://www.discogs.sie.com/label/135749-Not-On-Label-Duran-Duran

idratherbereading
Think they use special cut because is almost lathe cut and is only option with "cut" but they don't know it's in the menu at level of vinyl - not sure makes sense how I explain

I think you're right