Over 1000 posts
True. I hear more about copyright now amongst my academic contacts than I did back when I was in college. In those days, if you wanted to reprint something, you just did it.
This is interesting. How come Groff's is listed in Krumhansl and Stodolsky's is not? Did K. miss Stodolsky's?You are right. I'm loopy from lack of sleep. Groff published "Aftermath", Stodolsky published the reprint of 20 tanks....
Uh... I've just done my civic duty and informed the editors thatNot sure if this was posted.
Hi,This is interesting. How come Groff's is listed in Krumhansl and Stodolsky's is not? Did K. miss Stodolsky's?
It's listed in Water Row Books Catalogue #64 and priced $195: "Xerox reprint of the broadside story originally issued by Black Sun Press [...] One of 25 numbered copies (total edition) signed by Bukowski [...] Very scarce."
Richard Peabody reprinted it in 1981 in one of his cool, slick books.It would actually be a nice little item if it weren't so poorly produced. At the time that Red and Bukowski did this, Twenty Tanks had not yet been reprinted anywhere as far as I know.
Is a sanctioned bootleg a bootleg?I think a copy of someone else's work is a bootleg by definition. My definition, anyway.
But since Bukowski was in on it from the start, and it was his work, I think bootleg is the wrong word.I think a copy of someone else's work is a bootleg by definition. My definition, anyway.
I wasn't aware of that. Red's reprint would have been right around '85.Richard Peabody reprinted it in 1981 in one of his cool, slick books.
In this case, if Red xeroxed another publishers layout, he would also technically need permission from that publisher too. Buk owned the words, but the published would have owned the layout and design...You have a point (sort of). In music, when a band like the Grateful Dead or Pearl Jam say it's okay for fans to record and distribute their concerts, the term bootleg takes on a different meaning. While the recordings may have been done without the express permission of the band, the band does tacitly approve of them. However, they never say that it's okay to sell them.
If someone were to make a copy of one of these band's official releases and then sell them, that would be a bootleg in the traditional sense and you can be sure that the band(s) would not be okay with that.
Bootleg usually means to copy something without explicit or tacit permission and then sell it, so since 20 Tanks was a copy of someone's work (in terms of copying the original layout), but was done with permission of the author, I guess that it's sort of a half-bootleg. Had Red done this without any permission, then yeah, it would be a bootleg.