Costs and Logistics
Anyone can make a digital compilation and “distribute” it to millions (see above playlist). Creating CDs, however, has a much higher cost, and they still need to be distributed.
How are you going to do that? Offer them on eBay and hope someone buys them? Or offer them for free, then package and ship them (also for free), because no one would be willing to pay for home-burnt CDs with pirated music?
I think these make more sense as playlists in ListenBrainz
There’s still a difference between Youtube playlists (which by definition can only contain songs that are available otherwise) and collecting and distributing actual audio files (which might not be available anywhere else).
It’s true that digital bootlegs are easier and cheaper to make but I don’t think that (lack of) effort should be a reason to exclude something from the database.
Bootlegs are, by definition, illegal. I don’t think MB should be legitimizing them by including them in the database at all. By doing so, MB is actually participating in the illegal activity, IMO. Certainly encouraging it.
The same can be said about a lot of samples and remixes in music, or cover art including copyrighted material. There is music that is illegal in some countries but fine in others, I don’t think that legality should be a reason to exclude a release either.
No they are not. There is a difference between unofficial and illegal. Concert bootlegs are perfectly legal. Some artists have actively encouraged concert bootleggers. MB uses “bootleg” to cover a wide area of unofficial releases. Unofficial does not mean illegal.
These CDs are released in Russia. Copyright laws are different. They are not official, but I don’t think they are directly illegal in Russia.
(Note: I am not a copyright lawyer… 
but pretty certain I can’t be arrested for being in possession of a bunch of bootleg CDs. I think the problem is more likely to appear if I tried to sell them…)
Are concerts and live performances recorded with a smartphone considered bootlegs or pirates?
Yes, they are.
You are quoting USA law to a British person. USA law is not worldwide. Each country has different laws. Even that USA law does not say possession is illegal “Federal law generally does not prohibit an individual from purchasing or possessing a single counterfeit product for personal use.”
In MB categories, they are “bootlegs”.
Well, of course. Yes, I’m aware that laws vary by country. Even in the US, some laws vary by state. I didn’t think I needed to state the obvious.
But UK law also outlaws them. I haven’t found a site that is as focused on UK law as LegalClarity is on US law, but I found this site that discusses it:
Are bootleg records legal? - All For Turntables
The legality of bootleg records varies from country to country. In some countries, such as the United States, bootleg records are illegal to manufacture, sell, or distribute, even if the recordings are not copyrighted. In other countries, such as the United Kingdom, it is illegal to manufacture, sell, or distribute bootleg records of copyrighted works without the permission of the copyright holder.
Neither did I. I said bootlegs are illegal.
Nice cherry-picking. The complete context of that statement:
While commercial production and distribution of bootlegs carry severe penalties, personal ownership has different legal implications. Federal law generally does not prohibit an individual from purchasing or possessing a single counterfeit product for personal use. However, owning a bootleg still constitutes an infringement of copyright or trademark.
Law enforcement primarily targets those who manufacture, distribute, or sell bootlegs for profit. Although direct criminal prosecution for personal possession is rare, the items themselves are considered illegal and could be seized by authorities. The focus remains on disrupting the commercial supply chain rather than prosecuting individual consumers.
The incontrovertible truth is, bootlegs are illegal to some degree in any locale that respects copyright protection. I stand by my original statement.
Then what about the few areas that don’t have copyright law, like South Sudan (according to this article). If somebody there makes a few bootleg CD’s there, they can add it to MB because it’s legal, but if they move to a bordering country and do the same, they can’t? Ofcourse it’s illegal in most countries, but there are still a lot of bootlegs out there and people who might want to tag them using MusicBrainz.
The law should be black and white, 0-1, binary. However, life shows otherwise.
What about them? Look, I posted my opinion, and I’ve seen nothing that remotely inspires me to change it. It’s none of my business what others do – I think I’ve made my position clear, and I stand by it. You all can disagree, Metabrainz can disagree, your interpretations are your own. I won’t be editing or voting on edits relating to bootlegs, one way or the other. As far as I’m concerned, that’s the end of it.
I think I answered the “What about them?” in the follow-up question, whether the MB rules should allow people to add bootlegs from there but not from the rest of the world.
Fine, let’s agree to disagree then 