Sign In
Register
Help
Hilarious.
This post has been edited by Orion1806: Jun 07 08 - 06:12 AM
Thats right Bloggers, Metallica's comin' for ya - LAWSUIT COMIN'? LOL, New album reviewers, threatened with a lawsuit
Back to top
MultiQuote
#3
mahimahi23 
Posted Jun 07 08 - 06:18 AM
This doesnt make any sense, why else would they have this listening party other than to create a buzz from people reviewing the songs?
#5
1randy1
Posted Jun 07 08 - 06:31 AM
I would like more information, but judging from what the article said.
I am disappointed and would not personally do the same. However, whether it was Metallica or the record label (keep in mind that the label has invested money into Metallica to produce the most profit) they have every right to prevent their music/lyrics/whatever from being spread as it is THEIR property. If nothing was signed, the writers have every right to keep it up. The deal is, the writer(s) should be respectful to what Metallica or their managment's wishes are.
I am disappointed and would not personally do the same. However, whether it was Metallica or the record label (keep in mind that the label has invested money into Metallica to produce the most profit) they have every right to prevent their music/lyrics/whatever from being spread as it is THEIR property. If nothing was signed, the writers have every right to keep it up. The deal is, the writer(s) should be respectful to what Metallica or their managment's wishes are.
#6
Technetium
Posted Jun 07 08 - 06:32 AM
Now THAT'S an ugly story.
Am I gonna get sued for my "That's what we know so far" thread? lol.
Am I gonna get sued for my "That's what we know so far" thread? lol.
This post has been edited by Technetium: Jun 07 08 - 06:34 AM
#7
1randy1
Posted Jun 07 08 - 06:34 AM
Did a quick Google news search and this popped up: http://idolator.com/...-blog-new-album
Same article, but some of the users make some witty title names...
"For Whom The Blog Tolls"
"Don't Blog On Me"
"Seek & Destroy Blog Posts"
Fight Bloggers With Fire
Same article, but some of the users make some witty title names...
"For Whom The Blog Tolls"
"Don't Blog On Me"
"Seek & Destroy Blog Posts"
Fight Bloggers With Fire
#10
sober
Posted Jun 07 08 - 06:42 AM
Don't tell me that there is anyone among as that believe 'the boyz' had some kind of problem with these reviews or had anything to do with the removing of these articles.
It's clearly a matter of their management. Their management did this move and it's a quite wrong move...
It's clearly a matter of their management. Their management did this move and it's a quite wrong move...
#11
Worlock
Posted Jun 07 08 - 06:50 AM
sober, on 06/07/08 09:42 am, said:
Don't tell me that there is anyone among as that believe 'the boyz' had some kind of problem with these reviews or had anything to do with the removing of these articles.
It's clearly a matter of their management. Their management did this move and it's a quite wrong move...
It's clearly a matter of their management. Their management did this move and it's a quite wrong move...
You do realize that Q-Prime works for Metallica and not the other way around right? They may advise, but they're not going to act of the band's behalf without the band's say so.
As for the article, nowhere on that article did I read anything about a lawsuit. Plus I'm inclined to wonder if this isn't another hoax like that supposed suit they filed against the makers of Guitar Hero (or was it Rockband?).
#12
LosingMyPants
Posted Jun 07 08 - 07:02 AM
Metallica do not want any fans? Because positive reviews are just simply unacceptable and can not be tolerated.
#13
pmerrill
Posted Jun 07 08 - 07:10 AM
The thing that's so suspicious to me is that there are links to the reviews on Metallica.com :confused:
http://metallica.com...d...&searchval=
I mean, maybe that's an automated list, ike a "Google Alert" type of thing, but I would think that the administrators would want control over which articles are linked to.
Something is very fishy about all this. Why have a listening party, NOT enforce a non-disclosure agreement, and then ask that the reviews be taken down?
:ph34r:
http://metallica.com...d...&searchval=
I mean, maybe that's an automated list, ike a "Google Alert" type of thing, but I would think that the administrators would want control over which articles are linked to.
Something is very fishy about all this. Why have a listening party, NOT enforce a non-disclosure agreement, and then ask that the reviews be taken down?
:ph34r:
#15
When Yer Strange
Posted Jun 07 08 - 07:14 AM
Worlock, on 06/07/08 06:50 am, said:
You do realize that Q-Prime works for Metallica and not the other way around right? They may advise, but they're not going to act of the band's behalf without the band's say so.
As for the article, nowhere on that article did I read anything about a lawsuit. Plus I'm inclined to wonder if this isn't another hoax like that supposed suit they filed against the makers of Guitar Hero (or was it Rockband?).
As for the article, nowhere on that article did I read anything about a lawsuit. Plus I'm inclined to wonder if this isn't another hoax like that supposed suit they filed against the makers of Guitar Hero (or was it Rockband?).
I hope this is. It wouldn't surprise me if it's just someone hopping on that old Napster bandwagon.
Metallica would probably lose a lot more respect/credibility for this if it's true.
#16
Mustakrakish
Posted Jun 07 08 - 07:32 AM
When Yer Strange, on 06/07/08 04:14 pm, said:
Metallica would probably lose a lot more respect/credibility for this if it's true.
I did not know they had any left to lose....
But it dose not make sense.Why the hell do you invite a bloger on the listening party and then what did you excpect?
This is retarded.
#17
larscandrum
Posted Jun 07 08 - 07:33 AM
I say this story is full of horse $h!t.
It makes no sense. The reason you have people in to preview it is SO THEY WRITE ABOUT IT! Thats the point, to create interest. I can't see this story being true, or at least whatever little truth behind it has been completely lost.
It makes no sense. The reason you have people in to preview it is SO THEY WRITE ABOUT IT! Thats the point, to create interest. I can't see this story being true, or at least whatever little truth behind it has been completely lost.
#18
Warhammer
Posted Jun 07 08 - 07:43 AM
We all know that reviews positive or not are doing more wrong to Metallica than good. Positive reviews get bashing because people don't believe them anyway, negative get bashing because it will be said that the reviewer has a biased opinion depending on what he likes from Metallica. Unfortunatelly, and as incredible as it seems, the two kind or reviews are almost always bad publicity to sell a product. The only good reviews we'll get will be the ones that comes from the fans themselves only after the official album will be released. Reviews from people that are not fans cant put up a good review, they will only express the general opinion about Metallica, not their. No one should have the right to publish something too much detailled from a unfinished product yet. And maybe those reviews were only not telling the truth about song titles. Maybe they were just fake reviews that could have misleaded us to think they were genuine. It's a good thing that someone is watching over this.
That's one reason why Metallica could have stopped them to post their reviews.
That's one reason why Metallica could have stopped them to post their reviews.
#19
Wakers
Posted Jun 07 08 - 07:50 AM
Eh no, Metallica work for the management, hence the name "management", and hence all the calls we saw in SKOM, and the one on M:M where the management try to tell Metallica what they should be doing.
Its amazing how hard people find it distinguish between Metallica's management and Metallica themselves.
Its amazing how hard people find it distinguish between Metallica's management and Metallica themselves.
#20
sober
Posted Jun 07 08 - 08:06 AM
Worlock, on 06/07/08 04:50 pm, said:
You do realize that Q-Prime works for Metallica and not the other way around right? They may advise, but they're not going to act of the band's behalf without the band's say so.
As for the article, nowhere on that article did I read anything about a lawsuit. Plus I'm inclined to wonder if this isn't another hoax like that supposed suit they filed against the makers of Guitar Hero (or was it Rockband?).
As for the article, nowhere on that article did I read anything about a lawsuit. Plus I'm inclined to wonder if this isn't another hoax like that supposed suit they filed against the makers of Guitar Hero (or was it Rockband?).
Mate i know what your saying. But, just think...
The boys are on tour...no time for promotion issues by them right now. While they are on the road the promotion is managerial stuff. Management thinks and decides the time schedules, interviews, airplays, exclusive listening parties and everything else for the promotion. This is what they get paid for. To do all this ugly job. METALLICA accept their decisions and they usually don't interfere. They suggest, they say what they want and everything theboyz want is taken under consideration by the managers. Now some of their promotional ideas might not be good for the market! The management DECIDES at last - they know "promotion" better.
Are they informed? Of course. Do u remember when they didn't want to do that radio air-shit on SKOM DVD and Cliff Burnstein said to them: You can't say NO. They are gonna fuck as if you say no! You WILL do it. ....and they did it
So,.... he informed them yesterday:
-Hi boys we are gonna... blah blah.... some articles, cause we believe its not yet the right time to show to people, blah blah...
Lars: -I am so tired from last night show Cliff. You know better...do as you wish.
As simple as that might have happened.
Now tell me for real: Do you really think that the guys got up from bed yesterday, show all these wonderful reviews and said: SHIT, WE ARE GONNA START A WAR WITH THESE GUYS!
hell no!
#24
theunforgiven680666
Posted Jun 07 08 - 08:58 AM
First of all there will be no lawsuit. Thats just what the management have to say. It'd be like Warner Bros suing Youtube for the MM vids on there. They are not literally going to sue them, its just the threat procedure they have to use to make them take it down. Goddamn you guys are stupid as shit. And, I'm pretty sure this was an act of Metallica's management seeing as they were touring, oh, I don't know, yesterday??!
#25
Orion1806
Posted Jun 07 08 - 09:03 AM
theunforgiven680666, on 06/07/08 04:58 pm, said:
First of all there will be no lawsuit. Thats just what the management have to say. It'd be like Warner Bros suing Youtube for the MM vids on there. They are not literally going to sue them, its just the threat procedure they have to use to make them take it down. Goddamn you guys are stupid as shit. And, I'm pretty sure this was an act of Metallica's management seeing as they were touring, oh, I don't know, yesterday??!
If they didnt take them down there would of been a lawsuit, open your eyes.