Eagles Mentions in the Press (2006 - 2017)

[Ive always been a dreamer]

According to the articles, what the man is doing is charging admission to allow people to view bootlegs - in other words, he is profiting from illegally obtained video. They would probably overlook the fact that he had the bootlegs if he wasn't cashing in on them.

[VAisForEagleLovers]

Yes, and it's not like they just decided to sue the guy. There was more than one Cease and Desist letter involved and the guy refused. He's obviously not very bright, besides being a crook. The article implies he has concert footage from more than one concert. Now, whether it's more than one HOTE show, more than one Eagles show, or what, we don't know. Anybody who deals with charging people to view bootlegs knows without a doubt they are violating copyright laws. To me, the Cease and Desist letters were warnings, or giving him advance notice of what was coming. They could even be viewed as a kinder, gentler method of asking him to stop. He has to know that what he was doing is illegal, yet he refused to stop. The man either thinks he's untouchable, or, as I said, he's not very bright.

[UndertheWire]

It looks like he's an enthusiast who likes to share his collection rather than out to make money (the ticket prices are from free to $11m so may just cover costs). Apart from copyright, the issue may be that he does his own restoration. It's not just the Eagles, it's The Beatles, Fleetwood Mac, The Kinks, Chicago and so on.

Here's something about a Beatles show he put together
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikje9YS8Lag[/ame]

He doesn't come across as being much different to a fan making bootleg videos available on a website so unfortunately this could end up looking like big, bad millionaire rockstars bullying the little guy.

For me, this is a tricky one. I support an artist's right to protect their copyright and yet I love to listen to and watch the old recordings. If the artist was to release the footage, I'd be willing to pay.

[shunlvswx]

Like I said on Facebook. At least Don and Glenn(and probably Irving too) give you a warning before they sue. I agree, VA. They are being nice with cease and desist letter. IMO They are the stupid ones to continues. People should know by now that Don and Glenn will sue your butt very quick if you continue to use their name or product.

[Freypower]

It looks like he's an enthusiast who likes to share his collection rather than out to make money (the ticket prices are from free to $11m so may just cover costs). Apart from copyright, the issue may be that he does his own restoration. It's not just the Eagles, it's The Beatles, Fleetwood Mac, The Kinks, Chicago and so on.

Here's something about a Beatles show he put together
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikje9YS8Lag

He doesn't come across as being much different to a fan making bootleg videos available on a website so unfortunately this could end up looking like big, bad millionaire rockstars bullying the little guy.

For me, this is a tricky one. I support an artist's right to protect their copyright and yet I love to listen to and watch the old recordings. If the artist was to release the footage, I'd be willing to pay.

He is profiting from the work of others, and he isn't the artist. Just because he is providing a service the Eagles themselves refuse to provide doesn't make it right.

[VAisForEagleLovers]

I think something good can come of this!! If they realize that he's doing this because people WANT to see the HOTE show on film, perhaps they'll release their own DVD (and accompanying CD) of it!! Let's all think positively about this... Maybe one reason they are suing the guy is because they're already planning on it.

For those who say the typical "these guys are all about the money", keep in mind they started with a Cease and Desist. I doubt they are really after the money, they are after the bootleg source files and the principle of the thing. Unfortunately, the only avenue open to them to make him stop is to sue him, since he ignored their request.

[Elizasong]

This is really scary but interesting case. What is the regulation for playing a film at a legitimate movie theatre???? Looks like there is none and if someone doesn't know any better they will go to the theatre and pay money to see this footage. I would definitely go see his films If I didn't know any better. It's even more interesting with the Isley Brother's footage he obtained. They gave it to a church and he got it from them. Could the Isley Brothers then sue if he shows that footage in a theatre??

[UndertheWire]

He is profiting from the work of others, and he isn't the artist. Just because he is providing a service the Eagles themselves refuse to provide doesn't make it right.

I'm sure we all understand that the Eagles own the copyright to the material and that they are unlikely to have given Shelley permission to show it in public. Whether it was for profit is (probably) irrelevant. However, someone attending the event might reasonably assume that neccesary permissions had been obtained.

The second part is how we, as individuals, feel about watching bootleg material. I can only talk about myself. I'm not interested in cheap rip-offs or in shaky footage of recent concerts but I could be tempted by vintage footage. Most people who post to a fansite like this breach copyright - we reproduce photos or blocks of text without the permission of the copyright holder - but that doesn't mean we believe we have a right to do so and I imagine a "cease and desist" notice would be enough to make us stop.

The upside of this suit is that it shows there is a demand and maybe that will encourage Don Henley, Glenn Frey et al to issue official archive material.

[Ive always been a dreamer]

Well said, UTW.

[Funk 50]

This case is surely going to cost the band more money than they can recoup from the "little guy"

I'm kinda pleased he's ignored the Cease And Desist requests. At least he's not pissing off as many fans as the people, who ignore the band's requests not to use their phones and cameras during live shows, do.

The ideal out of court settlement, in my humble opinion, is the Eagles, employ this guy as a promoter, they supply him with authorised concert footage and the band take all the proceeds, or is that too simple?

I can't help thinking that all the bluster about intellectual property is really futile, "the old order clinging to the reins" or "you can't put the Genie back in the bottle" to quote Henley.

All the 70s > 90s musicians should be thankful that they surfaced at just about the only time in history when recording music was actually financially lucrative.