Possible reason for lack of early show DVDs

[UK TimFan]

The quote is of a post MC made in the 'Felder's "Heaven and Hell" Discussion Thread' but I've brought it over to a new thread as I didn't want to go off-topic.

There could be ongoing issues related to technologies that didn't even exist in the 2000s - Pandora, Spotify, iTunes, that Felder is looking for his share of. A well-written settlement agreement would have included language to the effect of "...any technology existing now or developed in the future..." - that's standard. So, who knows what issues remain. If there are issues in 2013, the lawyers did not do a good job for Don and Glenn. They should have been able to pay off Felder and be done with him. But, I'm sure it is very complicated and we don't know the half of it. I'm also sure that none of their current issues, if any, are in the court record and that they are using a private mediator. They don't want to air their Dirty Laundry (see what I did there hahahha!!).

I wonder if this is one of the reasons why the Eagles haven't released DVDs of their early shows?
So we, the fans, can't have legitimate (i.e. excellent quality bearing in mind any recording limitations from those days) DVDs of their pre-HFO shows, either with or without Don F? Though I would have thought that pre-DF shows should be able to be released without problems. On the other hand, are DH and GF going to demand a greater share of the money because they are still Eagles and have 'kept the name alive' while Bernie and Randy are ex-members? If so, DH and GF need to be aware that people would buy DVDs of the early shows because Bernie or Randy are in them and not because Don H or Glenn are.

[VAisForEagleLovers]

Well, they did recently release a DVD of the 1977 Capital Centre concert in DC! I've often wondered the same thing, though not really in terms of money (who would get how much, etc). I've always figured that if such footage still existed, knowing our guys and what perfectionists they are, they figure the quality isn't there and can't be fixed.

[sodascouts]

Another element is that these guys don't necessarily own the distribution rights to these shows.

For instance, the BBC owns that 1973 concert; PopGala (or whoever owns that material now that it's defunct) has control over the 1973 concert in the Netherlands; the Don Kirshner Rock Hour (or whoever owns their material now that it's defunct - was that on ABC?) has control over that 1974 show.

Bootlegs certainly aren't owned by the band, and that's what Houston 1976, Seattle 1976, and other similar shows are.

Think about it. How many shows did the Eagles themselves pay to be filmed? How many weren't filmed for a TV program or by bootleggers, and are thus owned by others?

[Midnight Visitor]

The Houston show exists because that venue recorded all their shows to beam them over to the VIP Bar. I've seen bootleg Houston shows for so many bands I can't list them all. All from the mid to late 70's. So, if the venue paid to do that the Eagles don't hold the right to release it. Of course, no one at that venue was supposed to release those because they don't own the rights to the songs.

[Tiffanny Twisted]

ok so how do you get a "bootleg " copy .lol

[tjh532]

I would be interested in knowing that as well

[UK TimFan]

Another element is that these guys don't necessarily own the distribution rights to these shows.

For instance, the BBC owns that 1973 concert; PopGala (or whoever owns that material now that it's defunct) has control over the 1973 concert in the Netherlands; the Don Kirshner Rock Hour (or whoever owns their material now that it's defunct - was that on ABC?) has control over that 1974 show.

Bootlegs certainly aren't owned by the band, and that's what Houston 1976, Seattle 1976, and other similar shows are.

Think about it. How many shows did the Eagles themselves pay to be filmed? How many weren't filmed for a TV program or by bootleggers, and are thus owned by others?

Ah, there may be a slight misunderstanding on my part. I asked the question because I was under the impression (gained either from here or the HOTE documentary) that the Eagles had filmed (all) their shows. Or do I perhaps mean 'recorded' - which could therefore be video or audio format. (I know Barry Manilow says that he's recorded every show he's done in one of those formats.)

I wasn't including broadcast TV shows such as the BBC one, nor bootlegs in my query.

[VAisForEagleLovers]

What I'd always heard was that they recorded every show. In this day and age you think that's video, but back in the 70s I'm thinking that was audio only? I don't know, of course.

[Midnight Visitor]

No way did they pay for a film crew to film them every night. They must be talking about audio. The expense of filming back then was much greater then it is now.

[Thirsty&Hot]

What I'd always heard was that they recorded every show. In this day and age you think that's video, but back in the 70s I'm thinking that was audio only? I don't know, of course.

I thought I heard that too...maybe here on the Border somewhere...

in any case..this is an interesting thread and you all raise a lot of good points as to why they haven't/can't release footage that isn't theirs etc.