Heart does not suck.

rcain: Heart does not suck.

well, maybe not in the 80's. Gilby Clarke always did though

rcain: Heart does not suck.

I've got something I wish Nancy would suck.......

The Foo Fighters suck? Sorry, subby, turn your Celine Dion up and you won't have to listen.

Don't make Dave beat you, subtard.

That headline fails. It is so -1'ed.

subby, this "suck" you're talking about doesn't mean what you think it means.

...Would like a word with you, Subby.

OUTSIDE.

I wish to engage subby in some sort of combat.

On second thought, I apologize to Trigmitter. There are in fact, a few Foo songs that I am sure the guys would lend to the campaign:

One (new)

Two (new)

Three (new)


/no rolls, 'cause I'm not McCain

Jackson Browne?

Well, I suppose "Runnin' on empty" would be appropriate...

None of them suck subby. But you certainly do.

Dude seriously WTF: /no rolls, 'cause I'm not McCain

"The Pretender" would certainly be appropriate too.

Ah, a thread full of people in denial about their taste in music. Reading comments defending Bon Jovi is going to be wonderful fun. Thank you subby.

I would have to this all of those that schooled you on the Foo, submitter.

pocketrubbish: Ah, a thread full of people in denial about their taste in music. Reading comments defending Bon Jovi is going to be wonderful fun. Thank you subby.

Oh, bite me, Tom Jones really is a god!!

The only thing about the Foo Fighters that sucks is that whole HIV/AIDS thing.

Maybe these bands shouldn't have signed the contracts that allowed for such licensing. I hate John McCain, but I also hate when musicians sell the rights to their creations and then biatch later when people use what they paid for.

chrismac: Maybe these bands shouldn't have signed the contracts that allowed for such licensing. I hate John McCain, but I also hate when musicians sell the rights to their creations and then biatch later when people use what they paid for.

These bands signed contracts with the candidates? No.

/Wants to know what subby listens to.

arghyematey: /Wants to know what subby listens to.

Barry Mannilow and Vanilla Ice.

The nation's getting ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED ADDRESSED by you...

chrismac: Maybe these bands shouldn't have signed the contracts that allowed for such licensing. I hate John McCain, but I also hate when musicians sell the rights to their creations and then biatch later when people use what they paid for.

That's not the issue. The issue is that the McCain campaign didn't go through the proper licensing channels, they used the songs without getting the consent of anyone. That's still a no-no, last time I checked.

obviously subby's having trollish fun

jackson browne's Late For The Sky and The Pretender
are seminal works in the catalog of rok.

heart kinda suck
but only cuz they rip off their rockin contemporaries
without adding anything particularly unique.

foo fighters aren't that bad
when you consider the competition.

ANYBODY WHO USES THEIR MUSIC WITHOUT PAYING DUES
IS AN ARSEHOLE, HOWEVER

LIKE MC CAIN

perma-douche

Sabyen91: chrismac: Maybe these bands shouldn't have signed the contracts that allowed for such licensing. I hate John McCain, but I also hate when musicians sell the rights to their creations and then biatch later when people use what they paid for.

These bands signed contracts with the candidates? No.

No, these bands signed contracts with their labels, which license the music out to whoever they want. At least that's Bon Jovi's case, and I think Heart was along the same lines.

Palmer Eldritch
I believe we have a winrar here. I'd like to buy you a beer.

Matrism: chrismac: Maybe these bands shouldn't have signed the contracts that allowed for such licensing. I hate John McCain, but I also hate when musicians sell the rights to their creations and then biatch later when people use what they paid for.

That's not the issue. The issue is that the McCain campaign didn't go through the proper licensing channels, they used the songs without getting the consent of anyone. That's still a no-no, last time I checked.

From the article:

"Musicians often have little control over how their music is used because of the system that licenses songs for public performance under a blanket fee paid by venues to ASCAP, the firm that collects royalties on behalf of composers and copyright owners.

The Heart song "Barracuda" and Bon Jovi's "Who Says You Can't Go Home" are both licensed for public performance on the ASCAP site."

chrismac: Sabyen91: chrismac: Maybe these bands shouldn't have signed the contracts that allowed for such licensing. I hate John McCain, but I also hate when musicians sell the rights to their creations and then biatch later when people use what they paid for.

These bands signed contracts with the candidates? No.

No, these bands signed contracts with their labels, which license the music out to whoever they want. At least that's Bon Jovi's case, and I think Heart was along the same lines.

Sorry, the labels did not license their music out to campaigns either.

Just like McCain, all fairly mediocre, middle-of-the-road and boring.

Sabyen91: chrismac: Sabyen91: chrismac: Maybe these bands shouldn't have signed the contracts that allowed for such licensing. I hate John McCain, but I also hate when musicians sell the rights to their creations and then biatch later when people use what they paid for.

These bands signed contracts with the candidates? No.

No, these bands signed contracts with their labels, which license the music out to whoever they want. At least that's Bon Jovi's case, and I think Heart was along the same lines.

Sorry, the labels did not license their music out to campaigns either.

Yes, ASCAP or BMI does the licensing, but that is mostly imposed on the artists by the labels. The labels want to know that they have a revenue stream that isn't going to get bungled by musicians who want to handle their own licensing. This isn't that complicated.

So, you know, you can stop being a condescending twat now.

Digital_Addict

You live a little far away, but I appreciate the praise.

chrismac: Sabyen91: chrismac: Sabyen91: chrismac: Maybe these bands shouldn't have signed the contracts that allowed for such licensing. I hate John McCain, but I also hate when musicians sell the rights to their creations and then biatch later when people use what they paid for.

These bands signed contracts with the candidates? No.

No, these bands signed contracts with their labels, which license the music out to whoever they want. At least that's Bon Jovi's case, and I think Heart was along the same lines.

Sorry, the labels did not license their music out to campaigns either.

Yes, ASCAP or BMI does the licensing, but that is mostly imposed on the artists by the labels. The labels want to know that they have a revenue stream that isn't going to get bungled by musicians who want to handle their own licensing. This isn't that complicated.

So, you know, you can stop being a condescending twat now.

I can, but I won't. The labels do NOT say anybody who wants to can use these songs. That wouldn't be good business sense, would it? Free market, you know?

If these crybaby artists wanted to be able to tell people whether they could play their song or not, why did they sell off the rights to their songs?

chrismac: Matrism: chrismac: Maybe these bands shouldn't have signed the contracts that allowed for such licensing. I hate John McCain, but I also hate when musicians sell the rights to their creations and then biatch later when people use what they paid for.

That's not the issue. The issue is that the McCain campaign didn't go through the proper licensing channels, they used the songs without getting the consent of anyone. That's still a no-no, last time I checked.

From the article:

"Musicians often have little control over how their music is used because of the system that licenses songs for public performance under a blanket fee paid by venues to ASCAP, the firm that collects royalties on behalf of composers and copyright owners.

The Heart song "Barracuda" and Bon Jovi's "Who Says You Can't Go Home" are both licensed for public performance on the ASCAP site."

Do you have a link proving that the McCain campaign has paid for a public performance license?

Memo to all bands out there: if you produce middle-of-the-road shiat, Conservative parties across the world will play your insipid non-offensive 'rock' at their rallies.

You have only yourselves to blame.

I'm talking to you, Coldplay. Yeah, you heard me. Be more like Radiohead and get experimental, pussies.

i apologize if i have misunderstood.

i thought the problem was McCain using the songs
WITHOUT paying for them.


if he paid, then fark everybody

Sabyen91: chrismac: Sabyen91: chrismac: Sabyen91: chrismac: Maybe these bands shouldn't have signed the contracts that allowed for such licensing. I hate John McCain, but I also hate when musicians sell the rights to their creations and then biatch later when people use what they paid for.

These bands signed contracts with the candidates? No.

No, these bands signed contracts with their labels, which license the music out to whoever they want. At least that's Bon Jovi's case, and I think Heart was along the same lines.

Sorry, the labels did not license their music out to campaigns either.

Yes, ASCAP or BMI does the licensing, but that is mostly imposed on the artists by the labels. The labels want to know that they have a revenue stream that isn't going to get bungled by musicians who want to handle their own licensing. This isn't that complicated.

So, you know, you can stop being a condescending twat now.

I can, but I won't. The labels do NOT say anybody who wants to can use these songs. That wouldn't be good business sense, would it? Free market, you know?

You're right, the labels don't.

ASCAP does, though. I assume you've never read an ASCAP Membership Agreement. As of its latest iteration it starts on page seven of the written application. It gives ASCAP the right to represent the artist in enforcing copyright and licensing public performance. The artist is never asked on these matters.

So in the end, most the artists can do is write letters that say "PLEASE DONT USE THE MUSIC YOU PAID TO USE"

Hey, the first Foo album was pretty good.

chrismac: Sabyen91: chrismac: Sabyen91: chrismac: Sabyen91: chrismac: Maybe these bands shouldn't have signed the contracts that allowed for such licensing. I hate John McCain, but I also hate when musicians sell the rights to their creations and then biatch later when people use what they paid for.

These bands signed contracts with the candidates? No.

No, these bands signed contracts with their labels, which license the music out to whoever they want. At least that's Bon Jovi's case, and I think Heart was along the same lines.

Sorry, the labels did not license their music out to campaigns either.

Yes, ASCAP or BMI does the licensing, but that is mostly imposed on the artists by the labels. The labels want to know that they have a revenue stream that isn't going to get bungled by musicians who want to handle their own licensing. This isn't that complicated.

So, you know, you can stop being a condescending twat now.

I can, but I won't. The labels do NOT say anybody who wants to can use these songs. That wouldn't be good business sense, would it? Free market, you know?

You're right, the labels don't.

ASCAP does, though. I assume you've never read an ASCAP Membership Agreement. As of its latest iteration it starts on page seven of the written application. It gives ASCAP the right to represent the artist in enforcing copyright and licensing public performance. The artist is never asked on these matters.

So in the end, most the artists can do is write letters that say "PLEASE DONT USE THE MUSIC YOU PAID TO USE"

This type of thing does not seem like a thing you "conservatives" would back. Intellectual property is a business type thing, right? What you are talking about sounds like socialism!

suggestive_eye_movement: Hey, all the Foo Albums are pretty good.

FTFE(everyone)

00ghost27: suggestive_eye_movement: Hey, all the Foo Albums are pretty good.

FTFE(everyone)

Yup. I am not a huge Foo fan (I like a handful of their songs) but they are talented, especially Dave Groel (sure that is spelled wrong).

They all provide soundtracks for gay sex?

They're all washed up has-beens?

Ball-Sack doesn't like them? That is a plus in my book.

Sabyen91:
This type of thing does not seem like a thing you "conservatives" would back. Intellectual property is a business type thing, right? What you are talking about sounds like socialism!

1) What part of "I hate John McCain" did you not understand?

2) How is this socialism? The musicians are getting paid royalties because they intentionally entered into these agreements.

3) You're not too big on that whole "thinking" thing, are you?

chrismac: Sabyen91:
This type of thing does not seem like a thing you "conservatives" would back. Intellectual property is a business type thing, right? What you are talking about sounds like socialism!

1) What part of "I hate John McCain" did you not understand?

2) How is this socialism? The musicians are getting paid royalties because they intentionally entered into these agreements.

3) You're not too big on that whole "thinking" thing, are you?

They are NOT paid royalties for politicians using their songs. You are really new to the politician using the song thing, aren't you? The first one I remember is the Boss and Reagan.

Strangely enough, "Born in the USA" is NOT a jingoistic anthem.

Sabyen91: chrismac: Sabyen91:
This type of thing does not seem like a thing you "conservatives" would back. Intellectual property is a business type thing, right? What you are talking about sounds like socialism!

1) What part of "I hate John McCain" did you not understand?

2) How is this socialism? The musicians are getting paid royalties because they intentionally entered into these agreements.

3) You're not too big on that whole "thinking" thing, are you?

They are NOT paid royalties for politicians using their songs. You are really new to the politician using the song thing, aren't you? The first one I remember is the Boss and Reagan.

Where has it been stated that the McCain campaign didn't license anything through ASCAP?

chrismac: Sabyen91: chrismac: Sabyen91: chrismac: Sabyen91: chrismac: Maybe these bands shouldn't have signed the contracts that allowed for such licensing. I hate John McCain, but I also hate when musicians sell the rights to their creations and then biatch later when people use what they paid for.

These bands signed contracts with the candidates? No.

No, these bands signed contracts with their labels, which license the music out to whoever they want. At least that's Bon Jovi's case, and I think Heart was along the same lines.

Sorry, the labels did not license their music out to campaigns either.

Yes, ASCAP or BMI does the licensing, but that is mostly imposed on the artists by the labels. The labels want to know that they have a revenue stream that isn't going to get bungled by musicians who want to handle their own licensing. This isn't that complicated.

So, you know, you can stop being a condescending twat now.

I can, but I won't. The labels do NOT say anybody who wants to can use these songs. That wouldn't be good business sense, would it? Free market, you know?

You're right, the labels don't.

ASCAP does, though. I assume you've never read an ASCAP Membership Agreement. As of its latest iteration it starts on page seven of the written application. It gives ASCAP the right to represent the artist in enforcing copyright and licensing public performance. The artist is never asked on these matters.

So in the end, most the artists can do is write letters that say "PLEASE DONT USE THE MUSIC YOU PAID TO USE"

Again, show proof that the McCain campaign paid to use them.