Is Metallica Greedy?

Posted by Neil Shedden on Sat, 05/20/00 - 04:18:03.

There is a lot of discussion on the web about the Metallica/Napster lawsuit. What are your opinions on this whole business? Did Metallica "sell out" when they initiated this lawsuit, or are they just protecting their rights to control their own music?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

: There is a lot of discussion on the web about the Metallica/Napster lawsuit. What are your opinions on this whole business? Did Metallica "sell out" when they initiated this lawsuit, or are they just protecting their rights to control their own music?

I think Metallica lost 300,000 paying customers when they had 300,000 of their fans barred from Napster.

Do you think the 300,000 Metallica fans that the Band had barred from napster are every going to purchase another Metallica CD?

These 300,000 Metallica Fans they had kicked off of Napster were some of their Highest Paying customers, having Purchased many Metallic CDs. Will they continue buying Metalllica CDs? I don't think so.

When you can afford to get rid of 300,000 fans who purcahse your CDs, you must be very wealthy.

Robert Lee Johnson
The Guitar Man
htt://www.mp3.com/theguitarman

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

: : There is a lot of discussion on the web about the Metallica/Napster lawsuit. What are your opinions on this whole business? Did Metallica "sell out" when they initiated this lawsuit, or are they just protecting their rights to control their own music?

: I think Metallica lost 300,000 paying customers when they had 300,000 of their fans barred from Napster.

: Do you think the 300,000 Metallica fans that the Band had barred from napster are every going to purchase another Metallica CD?

: These 300,000 Metallica Fans they had kicked off of Napster were some of their Highest Paying customers, having Purchased many Metallic CDs. Will they continue buying Metalllica CDs? I don't think so.

: When you can afford to get rid of 300,000 fans who purcahse your CDs, you must be very wealthy.

: Robert Lee Johnson
: The Guitar Man
: htt://www.mp3.com/theguitarman

Metallica have just as much right to sue for copyright infringement as any software company or any other business. Would you rather Metallica just go back to work at a 'real' job and do music as a hobby only on the weekends? They could, but then they wouldn't be able to tour, and since they'd be paying bills with all their 'job' money, that wouldn't leave much for equipment repair, etc.
Theft is theft - wake the hell up and stop siding with Napster and all the 'poor downtrodden fans' who wouldn't have bought the CD as long as they can get it for free.
Copyright means what it says - the RIGHT to COPY something. You cannot copy someone else's material and pass it around the net - that's called piracy (you know, where 80% of Photoshop users got Photoshop)
If anyone's too stupid or lazy to spend a little cash for a CD, you really don't need to be on a computer - you're taking up valuable bandwidth that can be used for more important things.

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

: : : There is a lot of discussion on the web about the Metallica/Napster lawsuit. What are your opinions on this whole business? Did Metallica "sell out" when they initiated this lawsuit, or are they just protecting their rights to control their own music?

: : I think Metallica lost 300,000 paying customers when they had 300,000 of their fans barred from Napster.

: : Do you think the 300,000 Metallica fans that the Band had barred from napster are every going to purchase another Metallica CD?

: : These 300,000 Metallica Fans they had kicked off of Napster were some of their Highest Paying customers, having Purchased many Metallic CDs. Will they continue buying Metalllica CDs? I don't think so.

: : When you can afford to get rid of 300,000 fans who purcahse your CDs, you must be very wealthy.

: : Robert Lee Johnson
: : The Guitar Man
: : htt://www.mp3.com/theguitarman

: Metallica have just as much right to sue for copyright infringement as any software company or any other business. Would you rather Metallica just go back to work at a 'real' job and do music as a hobby only on the weekends? They could, but then they wouldn't be able to tour, and since they'd be paying bills with all their 'job' money, that wouldn't leave much for equipment repair, etc.
: Theft is theft - wake the hell up and stop siding with Napster and all the 'poor downtrodden fans' who wouldn't have bought the CD as long as they can get it for free.
: Copyright means what it says - the RIGHT to COPY something. You cannot copy someone else's material and pass it around the net - that's called piracy (you know, where 80% of Photoshop users got Photoshop)
: If anyone's too stupid or lazy to spend a little cash for a CD, you really don't need to be on a computer - you're taking up valuable bandwidth that can be used for more important things.

Although I know Metallica and the RIAA are on firm legal footing and that most any recording artist would be quite irate to see their stuff go flying freely in bits and bytes over another medium without due recompense, this matter is being carried out in such a vengeful, spiteful and even threatening way that I'm just barely tipping toward the side of "illegality" having witnessed their ferocity. Is this meant to be an "object lesson" to anyone who may have similar ideas in their heads for the future?

No, Virginia, there is no free lunch, but yes, Virginia, Metallica *does* suck.

--George C. O.
BTW> Aren't *these* the guys who only eights tears ago *encouraged* concert-goers to bring whatever recording equipment they could manage to haul along with them to just go right ahead and do it? A strange 180 degree turn for them! (But they *were* different in their "old" days of ripped jeans, sweatty t-shirts, long swinging hair and minimal stage props -- that is before they re-invented themselves and did "fashion photo shoots" in their very finest "faux-gay" attire.)

Metallica is not Greedy.

: : : There is a lot of discussion on the web about the Metallica/Napster lawsuit. What are your opinions on this whole business? Did Metallica "sell out" when they initiated this lawsuit, or are they just protecting their rights to control their own music?

: : I think Metallica lost 300,000 paying customers when they had 300,000 of their fans barred from Napster.

: : Do you think the 300,000 Metallica fans that the Band had barred from napster are every going to purchase another Metallica CD?

: : These 300,000 Metallica Fans they had kicked off of Napster were some of their Highest Paying customers, having Purchased many Metallic CDs. Will they continue buying Metalllica CDs? I don't think so.

: : When you can afford to get rid of 300,000 fans who purcahse your CDs, you must be very wealthy.

: : Robert Lee Johnson
: : The Guitar Man
: : htt://www.mp3.com/theguitarman

: Metallica have just as much right to sue for copyright infringement as any software company or any other business. Would you rather Metallica just go back to work at a 'real' job and do music as a hobby only on the weekends? They could, but then they wouldn't be able to tour, and since they'd be paying bills with all their 'job' money, that wouldn't leave much for equipment repair, etc.
: Theft is theft - wake the hell up and stop siding with Napster and all the 'poor downtrodden fans' who wouldn't have bought the CD as long as they can get it for free.
: Copyright means what it says - the RIGHT to COPY something. You cannot copy someone else's material and pass it around the net - that's called piracy (you know, where 80% of Photoshop users got Photoshop)
: If anyone's too stupid or lazy to spend a little cash for a CD, you really don't need to be on a computer - you're taking up valuable bandwidth that can be used for more important things.

JD:
There are two completely different views on this topic, it's kind of hard to side with one or the other. But, as someone up there put it blantly, Theft is theft, and it IS no different than stealing, these guys worked their asses off for 18-19 years, WOULDN'T YOU BE PISSED if someone was stealing all your shit that you worked so hard for???? Then again, this lawsuit does make Metallica look greedy, MP3's were never meant to illegally copy copyrighted music easily, they're there for the littler bands to get their music out and to promote themselves, if you want a metallica song, go out and buy it, there's no need to copy it into an MP3 and spread it all over the world. Just about every music store in the world carries metallica in some for or another, so get off your lazy ass and go spend $15 for any of their awesome CDs, you won't be dissappointed. I absolutely can't stand it when someone walks out and buys a CD just for one stupid 3 min pop shit song. That's why they copy these stupid things into mp3s, because that's what they think is the only good song. try listening to the un-"overplayed songs on the radio." give metallica a break, besides, they're not the only ones sueing...

Re: Metallica is not Greedy.

: : : : There is a lot of discussion on the web about the Metallica/Napster lawsuit. What are your opinions on this whole business? Did Metallica "sell out" when they initiated this lawsuit, or are they just protecting their rights to control their own music?

: : : I think Metallica lost 300,000 paying customers when they had 300,000 of their fans barred from Napster.

: : : Do you think the 300,000 Metallica fans that the Band had barred from napster are every going to purchase another Metallica CD?

: : : These 300,000 Metallica Fans they had kicked off of Napster were some of their Highest Paying customers, having Purchased many Metallic CDs. Will they continue buying Metalllica CDs? I don't think so.

: : : When you can afford to get rid of 300,000 fans who purcahse your CDs, you must be very wealthy.

: : : Robert Lee Johnson
: : : The Guitar Man
: : : htt://www.mp3.com/theguitarman

: : Metallica have just as much right to sue for copyright infringement as any software company or any other business. Would you rather Metallica just go back to work at a 'real' job and do music as a hobby only on the weekends? They could, but then they wouldn't be able to tour, and since they'd be paying bills with all their 'job' money, that wouldn't leave much for equipment repair, etc.
: : Theft is theft - wake the hell up and stop siding with Napster and all the 'poor downtrodden fans' who wouldn't have bought the CD as long as they can get it for free.
: : Copyright means what it says - the RIGHT to COPY something. You cannot copy someone else's material and pass it around the net - that's called piracy (you know, where 80% of Photoshop users got Photoshop)
: : If anyone's too stupid or lazy to spend a little cash for a CD, you really don't need to be on a computer - you're taking up valuable bandwidth that can be used for more important things.

: JD:
: There are two completely different views on this topic, it's kind of hard to side with one or the other. But, as someone up there put it blantly, Theft is theft, and it IS no different than stealing, these guys worked their asses off for 18-19 years, WOULDN'T YOU BE PISSED if someone was stealing all your shit that you worked so hard for???? Then again, this lawsuit does make Metallica look greedy, MP3's were never meant to illegally copy copyrighted music easily, they're there for the littler bands to get their music out and to promote themselves, if you want a metallica song, go out and buy it, there's no need to copy it into an MP3 and spread it all over the world. Just about every music store in the world carries metallica in some for or another, so get off your lazy ass and go spend $15 for any of their awesome CDs, you won't be dissappointed. I absolutely can't stand it when someone walks out and buys a CD just for one stupid 3 min pop shit song. That's why they copy these stupid things into mp3s, because that's what they think is the only good song. try listening to the un-"overplayed songs on the radio." give metallica a break, besides, they're not the only ones sueing...

I do believe that metallica has a right to sue them. I however do believe that they are greedy. The only thing is that metallica should not win the lawsuit since Napster is not copying metallica material but providing a medium which allows people to legitimately distribute mp3s. What metallica should be doing since they claim to be doing this for the fans is going after the CD distributers. 15 dollars might seem cheap now but remember the time when CDs were cheaper? The distributers intentinally blocked supply off to those people to raise the price up again. Think about it, if a blank CD costs 2 dollars how cheap is it to make a CD? at most 5 dollars! Metallica is greedy as with every other band..including Pearl Jam so i won't feel any sorrier dl both legal and illegal MP3s.

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

:. You cannot copy someone else's material and pass it around the net - that's called piracy (you know, where 80% of Photoshop users got Photoshop)
: If anyone's too stupid or lazy to spend a little cash for a CD, you really don't need to be on a computer - you're taking up valuable bandwidth that can be used for more important things.

This comment just shows how close minded some people are. I own a 300 disc CD changer, half of which is filled with CD's I've bought at the store and the other with burned CD's. ALL of the burned CD's I have are of live music which cannot be bought in the store AND that the artists allow the taping and FREE recording of thier music (ie. Grateful Dead, Phish, many others)
I have used Napster before for this reason. Do you really think that there are these "too stupid or lazy people to spend some cash for a CD..." people out there who happen to not be "too lazy" or poor to buy a CD, but can spend hours on their $2000 dollar computer with CD burner mastering a CD that costs $15. Do you realize that it's not the "poor bastards" that are making CD's,
it's the people who can afford the equipment to make the CD's. These same people (myself) can thus afford to buy a $15 CD, which we do. Metallica does have the right to sue, but that, in my opinion, is thier biggest mistake they have made of their carreer (next to Load). Did anyone read the article about Santana's new album? Every single song on it was available on napster.
That album sold over 12 million copies, more than all of his others put together. The obvious is happening here. If you are a good musician, napster is great. If you can't play worth shit, you'de better sue because people aren't gonna buy your CD. I think that there will always be someone out there breaking the rules, but the vaste majority are not. If you are too poor to buy the CD
(maybe because you spent all your money on the cable modem bills) then your not going to buy it whether or not you have it on MP3. If I DO have the money, I am going to buy it whether or not I have it on MP3. As for Metallica, they can go to hell because I used to be a fan of theirs, but never again will I buy one of thier CD's (or download an MP3 of thiers!)

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

IN MY OPINION METALLICA IS VERY GREEDY. THERE ARE BANDS LIKE BLINK 182, MXPX, AND THOUSANDS MORE WHO HAVE NOT MADE HALF THE MONEY METALLICA HAS MADE AND THEY ARE ALL FOR NAPSTER. THEY PRMOTE IT. I HEARD THEY ARE ALSO SUEING A CLOTHING STORE IN LA BECAUSE THEY NAMED IT METALLICA. GIVE ME A BREAK. METALLICA IS OLD THEY NEED TO JUST GIVE IT UP.

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

Absoloutly,metallica seem to have forgot who made them rich in the first place,the fans,they should stop bitching and get back to making good music

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

: Absoloutly,metallica seem to have forgot who made them rich in the first place,the fans,they should stop bitching and get back to making good music

Metallica has made a lot of their most devoted fans angry, 300,000 of them. They must be rich or they could not afford to get rid of 300,000 of their best paying customers.

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

i think it's their right. its like someone writing up someone elses book and just giving it away. no difference at all. so i think they've got every right to

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

I think that Metallica should have the right to SELL thier music that they spent a lot of time to
make, rather than letting poeple take it. I wouldn't want to go to work and not get paid.
Whould You?

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

ohh poor Metallica, they are SO POOR!!!!!

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

: There is a lot of discussion on the web about the Metallica/Napster lawsuit. What are your opinions on this whole business? Did Metallica "sell out" when they initiated this lawsuit, or are they just protecting their rights to control their own music?

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

A lot of people say that metallica sold out. They say metallica is greedy. metallica did sell out several years ago when they came out with load. metallica is not really greedy just arrogant. for some reason they think they write incredible music that everyone wants to steal. The fact is very simply that metallica will not enjoy their success for long. I can remember listining to the call of ktulu when no one even knew who they were. they certainely don't write music like that anymore. now, instead of concentrating on playing their instruments they concentrate on selling records and suing people who download their sucky music. Cliff Burton has got to be rolling in his grave. The reason that people try to download the music for free is because it is not worth buying.

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

You are absolutely right! Everything you said was true Metallica is a bunch of old wrinkled bitches!

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

you faggot

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

I think that Metallica are trying to set up a scapegoat because they know that they have turned to crap, but want something else to blame for sales drops. Enter Napster!!

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

: There is a lot of discussion on the web about the Metallica/Napster lawsuit. What are your opinions on this whole business? Did Metallica "sell out" when they initiated this lawsuit, or are they just protecting their rights to control their own music?
Of course mephallica is greedy. do you think they were motivated to sue napster out of concern of their fans or raising the world consciousness through music? no. it is greed pure and simple. totally self-centered greed, selfishness, foolish pride, narrow-mindedness, thoughtlessness, selfrighteousness, and a great host of truly unethical, immoral, motivations. the culprits here are not napster's mephallica fans, but mephallica itself by their own character flaws. sure mephallica wants to get paid for their "music." who wants to pay what they demand. the consumer is getting ripped off every time he purchases one of their lousy cd's. but if music fans want to at least hear their music they must pay, and pay, and pay. mephallica must think every music lover is as filthy rich as they are. they live in a fantasy world, completely out of touch with harsh reality of most people just trying to find a reason for living, much less any true happiness, and there are billions of people facing this reality. no money, no resources, and no hope. remember, napster is worldwide. people in villages in china, india, and other third world countries have access to a government supplied computer, but no cd stores, and more importantly, no money. do they really deserve to be denied the experience of music? poverty is an overwhelming problem in many first world countries too, but nobody notices. it seems to me that when you have so muc h money that you can't count it, it would be righteous to give something for free to those less fortunate. but mephallica is not righteous. they are eaten up with greed. no better than animals. but who cares about mephallica. somehow now that they are rich, they also think they are important. what fools they are. greedy fools. not geniuses. not music masters. just lost souls. too bad i can't feel sorry for them. napster is a mode for people to hear music they have not heard before. nobody wants to pay good money for something they have never heard. mephallica should be grateful to napster for increasing their cd sales. instead they chose to be malicious and vindictive. greedy, yes. but that is the tip of the iceburg so to speak. they are evil. but then again, many are attracted to evil. i will never buy anything related to them. never have. never will. never liked them anyway. loathe them now. no malice. just avoidance. let them reap what they sow.

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

technically napster is doing nothing illegal. napster is a simple, free program that people can download which gives them the means to search and access millions of mp3s. napster does NOT make the mp3s nor does it have an obligation to monitor what music is sent through the program once it's downloaded. think about this: you can walk into a shop and buy a bong and the person who made the bong bares no legal responsibility if you smoke weed from it; similarly, napster should not be sued.

my point is that metallica, by suing napster, are actually suing their own fans. the issue at stake isn't whether or not we should defend or condemn mp3s...the issue is whether or not they hurt bands financially. CD sales in general are up 7%, music is growning steadily by word-of-mouth, and, last i checked, the main objective in playing music in the first place is so that people will listen.

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

Is Metallica greedy? Sure. But its still their music. Their greed does not justify anyone stealing their music.

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

Yes, they are greedy. They are going about this in the wrong way. You don't sue your fans. Stupid move. Without these fans Metallica would be paying to play in their local bars.
Napster is bringing up a lot of issues that musicians and record companies need to address. One, the prices of CD's are getting so high, to the point that no one is willing to buy them anymore.
Second, musicians don't need record companies anymore. You are nothing but leeches. Get off our backs!! Stop ripping us off.

All musicians are aware of the corruption that pervades the music industry. Napster is nothing compared to that. Clean up the real infection and than things like Napster will work themselves out.

Stephen

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

Personally i think that if metallica was still a garage band they would love napster because it would allow them to get their garage stuff in their let people around the world know who they are. On the other hand metallica is a great band but alot of people listen to old metallica and not new metallica. granted they have a "couple" of good songs on their new cd's but the real metallica lies within ride the lighning and master of puppets. so's in conclusion, metallica needs to right more good stuff so's they won't have to worry about people so called stealing their shit and people would want to go buy the whole cd instead of downloading a "couple" of their good songs off of napster.

no way are metallica greedy

no way are metallica greedy !
If you write a kick ass song and some
asshole stole it off you and gave it away to everyone
who wanted it , wouldn't you be pissed off big time.

Re: no way are metallica greedy

Yes, I would be pissed off, these people that call metallica greedy hae no idea how the music business works, you see you have a thing called record sells and when the record flops you loose a shit and i mean a shit load of money, the record business is like a gambling business, if the album succeeds then on goes your career but if the album flops so do you. Lars had a very great point, napster was killing music, the music world can't go on, bands like metallica,megadeth, etc without money to support there beautiful pieces of work, and what napster was doing was thief! and against the law! Sorry dudes but you have no idea how it really works, you would figure if you guys want some of metallica's older style to come back then you must support them so they pull through and make there older stuff as soon as they get over this shit hole of a phase, whats up with hetfields fucking hair these days?!?! lol

Re: Is Metallica Greedy?

: There is a lot of discussion on the web about the Metallica/Napster lawsuit. What are your opinions on this whole business? Did Metallica "sell out" when they initiated this lawsuit, or are they just protecting their rights to control their own music?

Ha, if metalica wanted to control their own music, they wouldn't be dealing with a record company.
As far as I see it, the only poachers out there are the record companies who screw the artist dry while they sit pretty.

Now that metallica are big, the record company still has their balls in a vice, making them do shit that they wouldn't have done 10 years ago.
So, have metallica sold out. Yes, when they signed with a major record company. But which band doesn't?

However, sueing your fans isn't the way to go about protecting your works.

Yes they fucking are!

They are millionaires, for gods sake!
And when some poor bastards can't buy their CD they sew them. Nice heroes if u ask me.
The only way you can state your oppinion is if you join their fanclub, which is like $40.
Fuck Metallica!

starving kids DIE while these millionaires complain

Metallica are nothing but greedy capitalist extremists imho. There are human beings dying all over the world through poverty, disease and starvation yet greedy multi millionaires are complaining about kids not giving more and more to prop up their lavish lifestyles. I bet a lot of their hoarded wealth is just sat in bank accounts collecting interest.
There is a bigger picture, but people are brainwashed into making mountains of money and being selfish, instead of helping others and saving lives

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. Do not include any spaces in your answer.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.

Contact | Advertise | Contents | Privacy Policy | Forum

This site is published by Hitsquad Pty Ltd. Copyright © 1999 - 2017 , All Rights Reserved.