Is this getting out of hand now?

pdalowsky

einatshaul wrote:

pdalowsky wrote:

so that makes it all alright?

apathy changes nothing.

respect the artists is the message hear and an important one. Of course PJ are already set for life so maybe it doesnt seem important to you. But I for one can hold up my hands and say i have never downloaded an album illegally on the internet. or legally for that matter. Music is about the physical medium for me.

No, I did not say that, in fact on my first post here I said this was basically illegal. I am just trying to form an opinion on the matter, as this is, as you've said, something we all struggle with (you too listened to the leaked recording) and for a good reason.

Society is dynamic, ways of listening, buying, sharing music have changed tremendously and capitalist corporations along with the backing legal system must acknowledge and re-deploy.

This is not to take back from the fact that on the micro level, posting unreleased material for the world to see and share was wrong.

It must be acknowledged though that these forces are bigger than one little excited blogger, and on a macro level – there is simply no way to enforce them.

quite right but I certainly understand the managements response to the matter at hand.

was it harsh? I really dont think so? heated maybe, but I imagine behind closed doors they are working very hard to protect this thing, so I totally get it.

The only question I have to ask is why they didnt make sure they recorded the video out of earshot.

Danimal

einatshaul wrote:

Well, she did not start an "Ed looks fat" thread, so that's beside the point, no?

That's not what I was saying.

einatshaul

IGotShit-76 wrote:

I can understand PJ wants to protect their material as much as possible (even though this mp3 has the worst quality I've ever heard). I also think that PJ don't owe us anything. But in this case, what bothers me the most, is the disrespect from PJ representative towards the blogger. Calling it a shitty blog is just a plain stupid move. If this guy didn't treat her like rubbish just with this simple sentence, this story would have already been put to an end.

If in fact true - I agree with you.
I am very saddened to know that someone from the 10c would speak that way to a fan. Business and legal issues aside – they have no personal beef with her and shouldn't take the argument to those lines.

Cosmo

einatshaul wrote:

Well, she did not start an "Ed looks fat" thread, so that's beside the point, no?
She wrote very favorable reviews of the band from a fan's standpoint and brought many music lovers together to know and fall in love through her writing with the band and it's music.

There is a whidening grey area in the music business since the rise of the internet and new game rules must be applied, as public demand has changed - music industry should change with it, can't be fighting it to death.

...
I like Heather... I like reading her blogs and I know she is a fan and loves them.
But, she is still... just a fan... like you and me. There's a line between the two... artist and fan... and a fan should know not to cross that line.
...
Me... personally... I love the art and the artist who creates it. I can see how sometimes fans can blur the line. But, think of it like this:
Say Vincent Van Gogh was painting and got a following of loyal, dedicated fans (although, his paintings didn't sell very good til after he died.. but, stay with me). He sketches out a painting and one of his fans makes a Xerox of it (I know.. no Xerox Machines in the 1800s... bear with me) and posts it in the town square for others to see.
I can see how Van Gogh would feel... the painting is not done yet and he wants to unveil it in the manner he feels it should be... because, he is attached to the painting.
The fan.. being a fan should understand this and not put up a fuss when Van Gogh takes it down. even if she is spreading the word about how great this painting is... it is not her choosing to disclose it.
I know.. a bad analogy, but it is late and i'm getting tired.
The point i'm trying to make is the fans are the fans... and not a part of the artist. The only way you can cross that line is with an invitation by the artist. Loving the art and artist isn't enough to get you across that line... you have to be invited over.

einatshaul

Good point Cosmo!

I know at least every single found 1 minute pencil Sketch by Picasso is worth Hundreds of thousands of dollars; however, they might have had to wait a while to trade, collect and display them after he was long gone..

My point is, music is alive, it is immediate. It was shot at the Showbox downtown, the heartbeat of the city – not a lonely island or the late 18 hundreds

Both sides must respect and learn to live at peace with the other, no one really wants to cross the lines, could you imagine the pressure the band is going through and has been going through for 19 years?

We're very lucky to witness their creativity while they are alive and in front of us, and we might need to learn to Deferre gratification for the sake of their artistic judgement and what they consider is the final product they wish to display. The way it is delivered though - could undergo some changes, as it is important and efficient to learn how to change with the times. Both for artists - and their business managers.

SolarWorld

jimed14 wrote:

Not cool that he called it a shitty blog ... so not cool ...

that said ... I'm glad she backpedaled a bit, I posted on her blog yesterday and she responded to me. Her message today sounds pretty much in line with my thoughts yesterday.

I understand she is just a crazed fan, longing for the days of tape trading ... but, this was different.

In this a.d.d., throw away society ... there are plenty of people that will take that recording at face value, make a decision and move on. That's not what the band really wants. They'd like to release the material when it's finished.

I understand, everyone wants to be the first to break the story, to get it out there ... I think a lot of bloggers feel one big scoop could get you noticed, and potentially, famous (see that shitty Perez Hilton for one).

Not saying she's a part of that mentality ... but, I do agree with the band that having a crappy ass recording of a song being leaked, which is part of a contractual agreement no less, needs to be dealt with.

I hope they pay her back with an exclusive (interview, some band news, etc) ... that would be cool.

But, yeah ... this completely got overblown.

You know what dude? If this was such a big fucking deal... they shouldn't have thought someone WASNT going to try and record it. Management fucked up and they wanted to throw this girl and her blog under the bus. It's messed up. None of the "extras" signed NDAs. They played the stupid song ten fucking times.

Hmmmm.... "lets give these extras an hour of chances to get this recorded on their phones in their pockets"

They didn't have the security in place to protect the precious NDA, but lets harass this super fan over here, that will do some good :roll:.

SolarWorld

Eduardo Veduardo. wrote:

I think all of this is just silliness, from both sides.

Pearl Jam management completely has their head up their asses, and completely doesn't get how to deal with leaks and the internet in 2009. First of all, they need a reality check. None of this shit matters. Anyone who is going to go out of their way to listen to twenty seconds of poorly recorded audio is a big fan, and is a lock to buy the album. Leaks only fuel the excitement for those people, the rest of the world doesn't give a shit and will make their decision on whether to buy the album based on the upcoming media blitz or a song on the radio, etc.

So why spend money paying attorneys to get this stuff taken down? The sales won't be affected in any way. It sucks for PJ that they weren't able to contain the leak, but it's 2009. It's out there. Once it's out, it's out. They are wasting money and resources trying to fight it, and only making people MORE interested in hearing some shitty 20 second audio clip by their actions. With the added bonus that they are alienating some of their hardcore fans. They need to learn to roll with these punches and act accordingly. There is a way to embrace this kind of stuff. They need to find it.

As for this blogger, you got caught posting stuff that hasn't been released yet. Take it down and move on. No need to make a federal case. Pearl Jam's gripe in this is legitimate, even though they are shortsighted, behind the times, and apparently short tempered.

well said... the argument would be, well they have to protect the business deal with Target. And as I said above.... THEY SHOULD HAVE SECURED THE VENUE if it was such a "thrash and burn issue".

sward

einatshaul wrote:

IGotShit-76 wrote:

I can understand PJ wants to protect their material as much as possible (even though this mp3 has the worst quality I've ever heard). I also think that PJ don't owe us anything. But in this case, what bothers me the most, is the disrespect from PJ representative towards the blogger. Calling it a shitty blog is just a plain stupid move. If this guy didn't treat her like rubbish just with this simple sentence, this story would have already been put to an end.

If in fact true - I agree with you.
I am very saddened to know that someone from the 10c would speak that way to a fan. Business and legal issues aside – they have no personal beef with her and shouldn't take the argument to those lines.

I agree on this. My whole issue is not Pearl Jam and their music. Its how this situation was dealt with, if it is accurate. The reality is this: I still love Pearl Jam, I love their music, I even love the new song! ;-) But what I don't love is the crack down on sharing music that is NOT an official release. If she was posting download ready copies of any of their official releases, including all of the boots, then yes, stop her, get the lawyers involved, whatever. But when they get to the point where they are combing the earth for fan made recordings, then I think it is being hypocritical. The thing is, as shitty as that target commercial mp3 was, it got me excited about hearing it on the official release. So why the fuss? Frankly, if you don't want it getting out, pat down every single person who went into that taping and make sure they can't record it.

As far as the name calling..well..we weren't part of the conversation...and we don't know how confrontational she was in this whole thing, because we only get her side. But if it is truthful, then PJ and its team need to take a closer look at who is representing them.

skyeriverwinter

ARazorbackguy1 wrote:

skyeriverwinter wrote:

I would like to say a few things on this subject....I do understand and accept that, Pearl Jam as a business, has a right to do with their art as they will...I haven't an ounce of knowledge on what goes into protecting your work or what it takes to send it to the masses. Sounds as though it's a daunting task. As someone who touches on creative things...if my artistic endeavors were passed around without my knowledge...I'd be a bit ANGRY to say the least...



Also...regardless of your position in Public Relations or not...when the pressure comes down on you...I am sure it might make it a little bit easier to crack. Can anyone say they've never said something they wish they could take back? I know I have...and there were many instances over the past three days...I can not back space over them...I can only imagine the kind of stress the band and it's whole company have been under over the past few days. For my part in upsetting them...I am utterly sorry...and I hope I have not lost the respect and love that the band gives...These people are a big part of my life and have been since 1991 or 1992...I can't remember, I am getting old ...I feel as though I've hurt a very good friend and they may never forgive me... this breaks my heart tremendously...

THIS

Thank You!!!

redrock

vedderfreak12 wrote:

I too am having difficulties with them right now but on a much smaller scale.

My problem lies within fan club seating. My membership expires in three days. I’ll be seeing Eddie in 18 days in Memphis. Call me a crybaby, call me whatever, but if my seats are not in the first 1/3 of the concert hall I will not be renewing my membership. If I’m seated anywhere else I refuse to believe there are that many Ten Club fans who have lower numbers than I, and are at the same show as me, especially at such a small venue.

:roll:

redrock

Zoso wrote:

if someone at the 10c was THAT rude to you it wouldn't bother you? I d/l that leak also as well as many other around here. Whoever it was at 10c went too far I feel.

There's always two sides to a story. And don't even go down the route that 10C should then refute/explain/come clean/tell their side of the story, etc., they have absolutely no obligation/need whatsoever to respond publicly to everything that has ever been written/posted about them. They would need a room full of people who's job would entail only that.

vduboise

I think this is being blown out of proportion.
As someone posted, we will not truly know what was in the conversation between 10c and the blogger. I bet things got heated on both sides, and words were said by both sides that were not cool or professional. And maybe she posted the worst of the conversation to get more people to look at her blog (its now a money making way of life- the more traffic, maybe a book, an article with a big company, etc)

If someone asks you to take something down, not once, but 3 times, have some respect for them and do it. If she had done it the first time, then she would not have gotten the "shitty" comment and rant.

As a fan who loves the band, why hurt them just for some fame?

Spencer

Hey, say whatever you like, but the situation is extremely black and white: the band have every right to protect their intellectual property to the fullest extent of the law.

I can't see the relevance of tape trading in days gone by, the band are being very kind in allowing public downloading of previous official bootlegs and audience recordings already. That's previously recorded material, I guess they figure the impact on future sales will be negligible.

Nobody except the band has any kind of "right" to post a Pearl Jam song anywhere. It's the truth, just because they've let someone get away with it in the past doesn't mean they will in the future (or that they have to).

Sorry, I'm definitely on the band's side this time - the side of the law, in other words...I honestly can't see how anyone can argue otherwise.

RedMosquito02

vduboise wrote:

I think this is being blown out of proportion.
As someone posted, we will not truly know what was in the conversation between 10c and the blogger. I bet things got heated on both sides, and words were said by both sides that were not cool or professional. And maybe she posted the worst of the conversation to get more people to look at her blog (its now a money making way of life- the more traffic, maybe a book, an article with a big company, etc)

If someone asks you to take something down, not once, but 3 times, have some respect for them and do it. If she had done it the first time, then she would not have gotten the "shitty" comment and rant.

As a fan who loves the band, why hurt them just for some fame?

Well put. This chick was trying to benefit from the leak. Period. End of story.

C'mon now heather, it takes three times to get you to pull it from the site?

How could you NOT expect to hear from your "boyfriends" legal team????

You gotta love how professionally she explains under her personal info to just reach out to her if an mp3 needs to be yanked from her site. Apparently you don't listen very well, Heather. 3 times is absolutely redonk.


A

Bush, Heather.

slightofjeff

It's hard for me to muster much outrage about this one way or another. This board wears me out sometimes.

Jeanwah

sward wrote:

As far as the name calling..well..we weren't part of the conversation...and we don't know how confrontational she was in this whole thing, because we only get her side. But if it is truthful, then PJ and its team need to take a closer look at who is representing them.

This is the clincher. Granted, we don't know what really happened, but TC's business behavior of late has been nothing to gloat about. If they can't be professional (with anyone, not just bloggers), word will get out, and essentially it gives them a bad image.

redrock wrote:

There's always two sides to a story. And don't even go down the route that 10C should then refute/explain/come clean/tell their side of the story, etc., they have absolutely no obligation/need whatsoever to respond publicly to everything that has ever been written/posted about them. They would need a room full of people who's job would entail only that.

That's right, they have no obligation to explain anything. But it certainly would be very professional of them, now wouldn't it? Keeping everything secretive and trying to keep everything under tight control only gives the public an uneasy feeling. If they know business, they know that they need to stay professional and upfront with the public or their image will get bad very quickly.

redrock

Jeanwah wrote:

That's right, they have no obligation to explain anything. But it certainly would be very professional of them, now wouldn't it? .

No. Why would it be? Responding to a blog? Why would that be 'professional'? Would it then be 'professional' to respond to every article/snippet written about them? Because that's what you're implying.

Jeanwah wrote:

Keeping everything secretive and trying to keep everything under tight control only gives the public an uneasy feeling. If they know business, they know that they need to stay professional and upfront with the public or their image will get bad very quickly.

Keeping a conversation secret? Obviously not so secret but they don't have to stoop at Heather's level - 'well, we said this but she said that....' 'Tight control' of an unreleased song, uploaded illegaly - damn, how 'precious' of them.

Jeez... conspiracy theories here!

The OP is asking 'Is this getting out of hand now?' YES!!! These threads ARE getting out of hand!

redrock

SolarWorld wrote:

None of the "extras" signed NDAs.

From Curtis' interview:
"There's a lot of unemployed actors in Seattle," says Curtis, "and we wanted to go through all the proper unions and make sure everyone got paid" -- and that all those in attendance signed non-disclosure agreements"

This lady did something she was not supposed to do, was asked to take the song down several times and basically got her nose put out of joint so she vents....

ewokpelts

Zoso wrote:

http://www.fuelfriendsblog.com/ - i think so. discuss

no. just an internet crybaby

HermanBloom

I'm glad the TC told her what they did. She' s a pretentious baby that deserves nothing. I am tired of all the fans on here that think they are owed everything. I won't be surprised if the band dismantles the TC after all of this nonsense.