[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Earl's Court Magick at Anniversary Daze


I read your posts with interest and I have sympathy with some of what
you said.  I would like to reply to a few of your points.

Firstly, some of your argument is based on the suggestion that the Earls
Court footage was stolen from Jimmy or from Led Zeppelin:

>Last time I checked this was the artistic work of Led
>Zeppelin...that was stollen from them and then hoarded

>What I was saying was that it seems like this guy
>stole what is rightfully the property of Led Zeppelin,
>their music,

It is fairly well known that copies of the Earls Court video have been
given to certain individuals who are, or have at some time been, close
to the band.  It is also very possible that there are some "stolen"
copies in existence.

To be perfectly honest, I don't know the exact history of how our friend
came to have a copy of the video, but I am not aware of any theft being

You accuse the AD organisers of hypocrisy:

>I really don't care if I ever see the tapes...I just
>thought that it was that height of hypocracy for the
>London crew to "respect the rights" of a horder, but
>not the rights of J. Page.

>I'm not really that upset over him not releasing the
>tape...frankly I could care less...I think it is
>hypocritical of the London crew to say that they need
>to respect the Hoarder's rights over Jimmy's ...thats

These references to "respecting the rights of the hoarder" do not really
relate to anything that the organisers have said.  I said earlier that
"everybody respected the situation", by which I meant that the fans at
AD IV respected the request from the organisers not to attempt to film
the video screen.

The person with the Earls Court video agreed to let some of it be shown
at AD IV under certain conditions.  No copies were to be given out or
sold and nobody was allowed to film the video screen.  There was really
no respecting of rights involved here; we had a choice of agreeing to
these conditions or not showing the film.

Having chosen the former option, we had to state these conditions in the
programme and, if anybody had been seen to be ignoring our request, we
would have had to do our best to enforce them.  Of course, it is
possible that somebody did film the video screen without our knowledge.
If they did, good luck to them!  If I were to condemn somebody for that,
then I *would* be a hypocrite.

You make numerous derogatory comments regarding "the hoarder":

>and I bet the guy that owned it was jerking to the
>fact that he was king for the day.
>"yea, you wankers can only see an hour of it...but 'I'
>own it....bwahahahaha"

>for the sole purpose of buffing up his
>own ego...showing an hour here and an hour there.

>This guy who has Earls court obviously likes the power
>of being able to show this video to people...waving it
>in front of our noses.

As we all know, there are a few people who have the Earls Court video
and probably other Zep videos.  For reasons that are regularly discussed
on this list and elsewhere, these people have kept the tapes to
themselves and copies do not normally get out to the trading circles
(the major exception being the second Knebworth show).

This person is not in a position where he can sell, trade or give away
copies of his video.  However, he thought it would be ok to show some of
it at a public event so that some other fans could get to see it.  To
you, this means he's a jerk on a power trip and is rubbing people's
noses in it.  I can only say that that is a very unfortunate way of
looking at it.

>I guess you all just had a stroke of bad
>luck with this one, that the EC tapes fell into the
>hands of a jerk :0)

I don't think many of the fans at AD IV felt that it was bad luck at
all.  And I didn't hear anybody calling him a jerk.  As far as I am
concerned he did a good thing in sharing the video, albeit in a limited
way, with the fans.  Nothing that anybody should bow down and lick his
boots about, but certainly not something that deserves those kind of