I just wanted to take a moment and clarify something that has recently come up. The term bootleg is used around here quite a bit, and I wanted to elaborate on it.
As far as I am concerned with MY blog posts(I think Murphy and JayBil agree but I won’t speak for them), a bootleg shirt does not just refer to a crust punk pumping out Youth of Today 4 sided shirts in his basement in Chile. As far as I am concerned, even if the shirt is “licensed” by the band years later, that does not make it official. It’s remake. A bootleg.
Questions, comments? Let’s hear them!
Well, you know my take, but let me elaborate. If a shirt is reprinted by someone in the band, like the Bl’ast! hoodie which is reprinted by someone in the band, it’s a remake, not a bootleg. In my opinion, a band can remake shirts at any time and it’s not a bootleg. However, if someone with no affiliation with the band makes the shirt, it’s a bootleg. I don’t lump the words remake and bootleg in the same category, but that’s just me.
What if Courtney Dubar set up the old WW screens and started making shirts again, are they bootlegs since they were made years later, and not by the band?
OK, I can understand that a band can do a “remake”, but when it is the exact same design, it is not cool. If Courtney Dubar did set up the ww screens, I would not buy one. I would try to buy the old screens for my collection however :)
Let me fix Casali’s statement.
I would FORCE COURTNEY TO SELL ME the old screens for my collection however
Done
I liked the Bl’ast! remake since the font was different for “The Power of Expression” on the back, thus making it different. I’m all for remakes that are slight different (see the Descendents remakes on their site, just slightly different). If Courtney set up the screens, let me buy one of each before you go to his house and buy the screens. Most of my UC shirts are in bad shape, or cut at the buttom.
Great points. From my experience a bootleg is a shirt that is unlicensed by those who have the intellectual property rights, which could in fact be a reprint of a licensed design by bootleggers, or entirely new creative without licensing.
This is where it gets confusing because there are bootleg vintage shirts, manufactured 15+ years ago so true vintage but not licensed and sold in parking lots.
Then there are vintage bootlegs which are modern day reproductions of vintage designs, printed on vintage blanks or vintage-esque t-shirts and passed off as genuine vintage shirts.
Phew.
JJ
I mean I dont really consider them bootleg but i also dont consider them original or desirable(for the most part…I did cop a sweet ML killer beers shirt on st marks before seeing civ at CB’s)
Also all these 1 color bootlegs on different colored shirt totally bum me out. they suck. they are so half assed. at least when Lost and Found made a weirdo bootleg, it may not have been cool looking but at least they used multi screens and printed both sides. put some effort in it.
On a personal note I have made bootlegs myself but ONLY for personal use. I dont have a unit pride shirt so i made some screens in my bathroom and printed up 2 shirts and gave one away to my friend. no profit and no trying to scam people into thinking its OG. it looks goos and i dont have to worry about it getting trashed when im diving. maybe that makes me a hypocrite?!?