 Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is free.
| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Poolecore |
The other day i found on instagram an account called @Bonkerswillneverdie. It?s a guy or a girl... i don?t know that has been uploading since a few months a lot of stuff related with Bonkers. All the covers and a lot of videos with the best songs of each mix. Great work!!
What do you think about him? Maybe somebody is preparing Bonkers 20 launch...
---------------------------------
Staaaay heeeere foreveeeeeer |
| Samination |
well they can be prepared for a copyright infrigment lawsuit |
| Poolecore |
Well... haha, maybe not copyright problem. Its just a tribute and a kind of promotion for free i think. He is always writting the name of the autors and mentioning real dj. |
| Smoogie |
quote:
Originally posted by Poolecore:
Well... haha, maybe not copyright problem. Its just a tribute and a kind of promotion for free i think. He is always writting the name of the autors and mentioning real dj.
I was thinking he other day wondering if Bonkers will ever come back
Interesting name TW, are you from Poole in Dorset by any chance |
| warped_candykid |
I would be ok with a Bonkers Anniversary album again, with Hixxy-Sharkey-Dougal. ....maybe Scott Brown (if he actually played tracks other than 18 of his own). Old skool cover, old skool mixing! |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by warped_candykid:
I would be ok with a Bonkers Anniversary album again, with Hixxy-Sharkey-Dougal. ....maybe Scott Brown (if he actually played tracks other than 18 of his own). Old skool cover, old skool mixing!
Ehm at the end, Hixxy and Dougal where as guilty as Scott Brown in using dominantly their own (label) tracks. |
| Triquatra |
I'm sure the account has nothing to do with the OP ;) lol |
| lurker |
Oh, that's one of my alts I made to get UK hardcore fans' hopes up. I'm surprised nobody has discovered my other accounts, @CubeHardAlbum and @IFoundSharkeysBackup. |
| Mickey Init |
Is the album artwork hi qual? Mine are all grainy. I was actually gonna post about album artwork recently but held off. I have a thing for album artwork  |
| GrahamC |
I have decent scans of the artwork, I scanned it all in the other day to load into iTunes, about 4-5Mb per cover! |
| arpz |
did bonkerswillneverdie die? Can't find anything except references to it
edit: never mind, thought it was a twitter not an instagram |
| robertybob |
quote:
Originally posted by lurker:
Oh, that's one of my alts I made to get UK hardcore fans' hopes up. I'm surprised nobody has discovered my other accounts, @CubeHardAlbum and @IFoundSharkeysBackup.
You bastard, you had me there for a second !!! ;) |
| trippnface |
somebody revive the something; wheres the fkn uk hardcore! |
| Quicksilver |
Maybe someone could reboot the series themselves? Could call it Zonkers...   |
| Captain Triceps |
quote:
Originally posted by Quicksilver:
Maybe someone could reboot the series themselves? Could call it Zonkers...
What could possibly go wrong? |
| silver |
quote:
Originally posted by Quicksilver:
Maybe someone could reboot the series themselves? Could call it Zonkers...
If they made it a parody on bonkers it would be 100% legal, the reason it wasn't legal before was because they tried to emulate it. |
| Samination |
quote:
Originally posted by silver:
quote:
Originally posted by Quicksilver:
Maybe someone could reboot the series themselves? Could call it Zonkers...
If they made it a parody on bonkers it would be 100% legal, the reason it wasn't legal before was because they tried to emulate it.
They didnt try to sell it, so how was it emulating it? The Artwork? Please, there so many that copy other styles. Sharkey should have sued other artists for making eerily similar music, so why doesn't he do that?
I don't think in any way would Zonkers get that big of a recognition, that it would consititute any kind of damage on the Bonkers brand, than Bonkers did to itself already... |
| Elipton |
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by silver:
quote:
Originally posted by Quicksilver:
Maybe someone could reboot the series themselves? Could call it Zonkers...
If they made it a parody on bonkers it would be 100% legal, the reason it wasn't legal before was because they tried to emulate it.
They didnt try to sell it, so how was it emulating it? The Artwork? Please, there so many that copy other styles. Sharkey should have sued other artists for making eerily similar music, so why doesn't he do that?
I don't think in any way would Zonkers get that big of a recognition, that it would consititute any kind of damage on the Bonkers brand, than Bonkers did to itself already...
I've mulled over it all in the past, and ever since the original debacle I've been convinced that the parodical nature of Zonkers fell well within the fair use remit. It didn't attempt to cut in on revenue, market share or anything that Bonkers needed to continue. It was free material that stood as a parody, and Hardcore has seen hundreds of them before, and since.
However, the reason it inflamed so much was because I was being accused of breaking copyright laws by using tracks in a mix. I know that's copyright infringement, my argument was, at the time, why it mattered when downloadable mixes using everyone's tracks are available everywhere all the time. Everyone's infringing everyone's intellectual property.
Quite frankly, if it happened now, the older and wiser me would've pushed on and called the bluff of court threats and all that bollocks. Looking at Sharkey now, he hardly looks capable of risking the fees. All the respect to him, he's a great producer, but he's also a royal dick. Before anyone argues, he refuses to release his back catalogue to spite us and the whole industry for apparently file sharing.
It doesn't worry me that it went south. My short time producing fulfilled every challenge I set myself and I'm happy that my music has set itself up to be heard thousands of time a day for years to come. As a matter of fact, Sam is right. Zonkers would have been tiny. The attention Zonkers brought me thanks to drama was a catalyst to all my personal achievements, so I have a lot to thank Sharkey, Al Storm and whoever else got involved for
Now can we forget about it? Loool |
| latininxtc |
quote:
Originally posted by Elipton:
quote:
Originally posted by Samination:
quote:
Originally posted by silver:
quote:
Originally posted by Quicksilver:
Maybe someone could reboot the series themselves? Could call it Zonkers...
If they made it a parody on bonkers it would be 100% legal, the reason it wasn't legal before was because they tried to emulate it.
They didnt try to sell it, so how was it emulating it? The Artwork? Please, there so many that copy other styles. Sharkey should have sued other artists for making eerily similar music, so why doesn't he do that?
I don't think in any way would Zonkers get that big of a recognition, that it would consititute any kind of damage on the Bonkers brand, than Bonkers did to itself already...
I've mulled over it all in the past, and ever since the original debacle I've been convinced that the parodical nature of Zonkers fell well within the fair use remit. It didn't attempt to cut in on revenue, market share or anything that Bonkers needed to continue. It was free material that stood as a parody, and Hardcore has seen hundreds of them before, and since.
However, the reason it inflamed so much was because I was being accused of breaking copyright laws by using tracks in a mix. I know that's copyright infringement, my argument was, at the time, why it mattered when downloadable mixes using everyone's tracks are available everywhere all the time. Everyone's infringing everyone's intellectual property.
Quite frankly, if it happened now, the older and wiser me would've pushed on and called the bluff of court threats and all that bollocks. Looking at Sharkey now, he hardly looks capable of risking the fees. All the respect to him, he's a great producer, but he's also a royal dick. Before anyone argues, he refuses to release his back catalogue to spite us and the whole industry for apparently file sharing.
It doesn't worry me that it went south. My short time producing fulfilled every challenge I set myself and I'm happy that my music has set itself up to be heard thousands of time a day for years to come. As a matter of fact, Sam is right. Zonkers would have been tiny. The attention Zonkers brought me thanks to drama was a catalyst to all my personal achievements, so I have a lot to thank Sharkey, Al Storm and whoever else got involved for
Now can we forget about it? Loool
My opinion is that you were completely wrong in believing that the Zonkers album is a parody. Here's the definition of parody:
"an imitation of the style of a particular writer, artist, or genre with deliberate exaggeration for comic effect"
You imitated the style of font and the graphics of all the participating DJs drawn as caricatures, but where was the exaggeration, and where was the comic effect? There was nothing exaggerating or funny about the tracklisting, and the graphics and font style weren't any more amusing than the original series. Changing the name from Bonkers to Zonkers doesn't really count.
An example of a real parody album is "The Gutter Techno Experience - A Tribute To The Gods Of Hardcore: Scooter."
https://www.discogs.com/Various-The-Gutter-Techno-Experience-A-Tribute-To-The-Gods-Of-Hardcore-Scooter/release/451117
It's supposed to be a parody of this album, "The Stadium Techno Experience"
https://www.discogs.com/Scooter-The-Stadium-Techno-Experience/master/13462
But it also parodies a lot of the work that Scooter did at the time. It sampled and remixed some of their tracks, and even re-worked the names of some tracks. It's an exaggeration of what Scooter has produced up to that time, and it's also funny that it isn't a tribute album at all but a take on how crap the people involved in the project believe Scooter's music is.
And your use of tracks in your album goes beyond the fair use policy that most tracks would allow. I can't remember what tracks you used, but if they were paid for tracks then those tracks already come with a fair use policy in that they can only be for personal use only. Free tracks, however, that's a bit of a slippery slope and usually is up to the owner of those tracks what you can and cannot do with those tracks. From my understanding, Crush On Hardcore got every single one of the tracks used in their albums approved by the track owners for every single one of their volumes. I could be wrong on that. But I have a feeling you didn't need to do that because it fell in lines with what you believed was a parody album, which IMO it wasn't.
You're right though that the use of tracks that you don't own in material such as free mixes, podcasts, and even live DJ performances at gigs is breaking copyright infringement laws. As mentioned before tracks purchased are for your own personal use only, and playing them publicly is considered illegal without the consent of the producers of those tracks. In the US it's so strict that any business that plays music, like a restaurant or a retail store, has to pay a subscription fee to a record label in order to legally play music from that record label. But of course for podcasts, free mixes and live DJ performances no one enforces that law. I think had Zonkers had not included the tracklist and you hadn't created artwork for it, there would have never been an issue to begin with.
I think everything with Zonkers wouldn't have gone so downhill if you hadn't reacted so negatively towards Sharkey's actions as well as from those involved with the project. You told one of the DJs on the project to fuck off after he kindly asked you if he can be removed from the project lol. You also let that massive cunt Rhythmics get to you as well. If you hadn't had reacted the way you did, then people probably would have seen the massive cunt that Sharkey can be.
I'll be one of the few people to publicly agree with you though what a royal dick Sharkey is. Yes he's done a lot for the hardcore scene, especially build freeform to the level it is now, but he's far from the legendary personality people fist themselves over. And he's certainly not above scrutiny either. Most recently he left HU hanging and stopped contact with them before finalizing everything for his artist album that Jon and Gaz invested a lot of man-hours and a large sum of money over. All of us here were thinking it was responsible for the album being stalled, as well as a proper release for Darwin's remix of ToyTown, but nope all Sharkey.
I especially got annoyed with a comment he made a few months ago about the scene being too serious. Maybe it's not the scene that's too serious, it's that Sharkey wasn't taking the scene seriously enough. Maybe if he took the scene more serious he'd understand how fucked up a decision it was to stop contact with HU. They could have invested more time and money on other projects that would actually be completed and released. He said the scene used to be fun, it still is. It may not be as "fun" as it used to but there are still a lot of people who have been around as long as he has that still have a lot of fun.
And while it would be nice if everyone had as much fun to party night after night without taking any responsibilities, nothing would get done in the scene if everyone was out there having fun and not taking it serious. The scene would have died out long ago without people taking it "too serious." And perhaps the reason why people take it "too serious" is because people in the scene like Sharkey are royally fucking up. I know the topic of making money in the scene has been had so many times on here and I think everyone agrees that this scene is not the place to get rich. But that doesn't mean the scene can't at least bring a good balance of fun/enjoyment and financial stability to a DJ/producer/label owner.
|
| djDMS |
Bored, Stevo? |
| Triquatra |
 |
| latininxtc |
quote:
Originally posted by djDMS:
Bored, Stevo?
A bit.
quote:
Originally posted by Triquatra:
 |
| djDMS |
I was going to read the whole thing but realised that I need to start my Christmas shopping in November. |
| Elipton |
Yeah see where you're coming from, Steve. I agree with a lot of what you've said. I suppose the parody aspect would have been the most argued grey area. Perhaps the exaggeration wasn't there, and the title could have been taken up a level to establish that clear distinction, but I still believe that it would have fallen within the parody remit.
My reaction was angry, and at the time, kamikaze. The bulk of the argument was held whilst I was on a night out, so that kamikaze effect was amplified. I thought I had nothing to lose, and whilst I could have handled it better, the rate of the retaliation and drama drew a lot of people in.
I'm being told to put my phone away. No doubt I had a lot to learn, but I'm not hung up on regrets. After all, it's a hobby for me, not a career. |
|
|
