Official bootleg

What's your opinion on 'official bootlegs'? According to the rules, we can't include them because they're bootlegs. On the other hands, they've been officially released so what do we do with them?

E.g. Dream Theater has a whole bunch of those records available through this website: [www.ytsejamrecords.com] http://www.ytsejamrecords.com/

Ytse Jam Records is their own label so strictly: the band itself makes the recordings available to the general public so they should count as official.

Secondly: before they were Dream Theater, the band was known as Majesty. This record [www.ytsejamrecords.com] http://www.ytsejamrecords.com/ProductCart/pc/viewPrd.asp?idproduct=11 is called 'The Majesty Demos' but is released by Dream Theater. Would you include this in the db as
Majesty - s/t
Dream Theater - The Majesty Demos
Majesty - The Majesty Demos (released by Dream Theater)
??

I've already gotten an "official bootleg" in for the Rudess Morgenstein Project. I think the "official recording" nature of "official bootlegs" negates the sense of the word "bootleg" in the title. I don't know why the Dream Theater-related personnel like to name things this way, but the albums are recorded by band crew rather than by fans, and released publicly, so I see no problem with them.

As for the naming of the Majesty demos, the original unreleased demo looks to have been called "Majesty - s/t", but this release is clearly titled "The Majesty Demos" and is being released by Dream Theater. So I'd go with your last option, "Majesty - The Majesty Demos (released by Dream Theater)".

I agree with PK on both of those issues.