Closing a thread because you don't like the answers you're getting is wussy.

X

XLR

______
Closing a thread because you don't like the answers you're getting is wussy.

Quicksilvery's recent thread, for instance.

Comments?
 
XLR said:
Closing a thread because you don't like the answers you're getting is wussy.

Quicksilvery's recent thread, for instance.

Comments?
Click to expand...

I agree! So much so, that I'll repeat what I said right as he was closing the other one:

DavidK said:
I'm not being patronizing at all. I've been making records for a quarter-century, I'm just telling ya how it works. If ya wanna make up the rules as ya go, there's really no need to post in a forum and ask for advice. Good luck.
Click to expand...

Submitted for the judges review:

In one corner: I'm doing this for this first time and I don't know how it works--any suggestions?

In the other corner: I've been doing this professionally for a long time--w/numerous actual releases. Here's how it works.

And the judges deliberate...

...


...


...


...


...


...



Ding Ding Ding!!!

DavidK in a unanimous decision!

Now that was patronizing--and downright smart-assed. But c'mon, he knows what he's talking about and he's trying to help. To so readily dismiss his advice suggests that you asked the question having already decided upon it's answer. You didn't want real advice--just confirmation.

So good luck. I hope it works out well for you.
 
And pandamonk is completely wrong about the "poor man's copyright." Mailing yourself a copy doesn't mean a thing to the U.S. Copyright Office or any courts of law. Too bad the thread is closed so I can't challenge his advice.
 
WhiteStrat said:
I agree! So much so, that I'll repeat what I said right as he was closing the other one:



Submitted for the judges review:

In one corner: I'm doing this for this first time and I don't know how it works--any suggestions?

In the other corner: I've been doing this professionally for a long time--w/numerous actual releases. Here's how it works.

And the judges deliberate...

...


...


...


...


...


...



Ding Ding Ding!!!

DavidK in a unanimous decision!

Now that was patronizing--and downright smart-assed. But c'mon, he knows what he's talking about and he's trying to help. To so readily dismiss his advice suggests that you asked the question having already decided upon it's answer. You didn't want real advice--just confirmation.

So good luck. I hope it works out well for you.
Click to expand...

I have some issues with these judges, for taking so long to come up with a decision. ;)
 
cmhansen said:
I have some issues with these judges, for taking so long to come up with a decision. ;)
Click to expand...

They had to take some time to deliberate. Though the decision was obvious, they needed to maintain the appearance of thoughtful consideration.

Truth is, I hear one of 'em took a piss, and the other two checked their email during the "deliberation."

So there ya go...:D
 
Nevermind that the whole thread is based on music business shit that is sadly almost completely irrelevant at this point. The tech companies have convinced the public that asking to be paid for your work is evil and that stealing from "the man" includes right down to the artist
 
MadAudio said:
And pandamonk is completely wrong about the "poor man's copyright." Mailing yourself a copy doesn't mean a thing to the U.S. Copyright Office or any courts of law. Too bad the thread is closed so I can't challenge his advice.
Click to expand...

MadAudio is absolutely right. I got a degree in Advertising 30 years ago and they told me that the "poor man's copyright" is shit.
 
XLR said:
Actually David has a quite fine tone. :p
Click to expand...

I would have to agree with you, XLR. I don't know why the guy took offense. Everybody told him to get paid upfront if he can including me, and I have no experience in the business.

If he didn't close the thread, I would have told him to give away the first recording he does for free and if the band wants more, they should seek out a producer. Someone might want to bet on this band, and it shouldn't be the engineer. It should be the producer.

I think David alluded to the fact that the producer owns the product, which is how it should be.

Just my $:02
 
MadAudio said:
And pandamonk is completely wrong about the "poor man's copyright." Mailing yourself a copy doesn't mean a thing to the U.S. Copyright Office or any courts of law. Too bad the thread is closed so I can't challenge his advice.
Click to expand...


But wait a second... Padamonk and the Quicksilvery reside in the UK. Perhaps copyright laws are different there than what we are accustomed to in the US.

If the Quicksilvery felt jilted because he didn't receive any compensation for his recording efforts, he would have to go before a judge to get relief. And this is what he would have to say, "I swear, your honor, I mailed this cd to myself the day I finished the recordings and I haven't opened it since. It even has a postmark!"

What judge would take that into consideration??? Not in the US, probably not in the UK....

imho....
 
Chili said:
But wait a second... Padamonk and the Quicksilvery reside in the UK. Perhaps copyright laws are different there than what we are accustomed to in the US.

If the Quicksilvery felt jilted because he didn't receive any compensation for his recording efforts, he would have to go before a judge to get relief. And this is what he would have to say, "I swear, your honor, I mailed this cd to myself the day I finished the recordings and I haven't opened it since. It even has a postmark!"

What judge would take that into consideration??? Not in the US, probably not in the UK....

imho....
Click to expand...

If I were the band's lawyer, I would mail an envelope to myself and not even seal it, just tuck the flap inside and it would probably get to me unsealed. What would that suggest?
 
Chili said:
But wait a second... Padamonk and the Quicksilvery reside in the UK. Perhaps copyright laws are different there than what we are accustomed to in the US.
Click to expand...

Nope. Most intellectual property laws are international to varying degrees in certain areas.

If the Quicksilvery felt jilted because he didn't receive any compensation for his recording efforts, he would have to go before a judge to get relief.
Click to expand...


"Dear Judge,

I told this band I would record them for free, and I didnt get paid. My mommy said they are mean.":D

Maybe he is willing to commit perjury over it. He would have to at this point. This is borderline extortion: he promised something for free, and now is contemplating holding that product as ransom. He doesnt even want paid, he wants a CUT. :rolleyes: He would have been much better off just saying he wants a 12 pack of beer, because a percentage of nothing is still nothing.
 
..i've actually had pizza, AND beer! Mommy said clever boy!

mad... it all started from a hyperthetical scenario

oh, not that any of you are interested... The management have listened to 2 tracks and are paying for more.
 
Squiksilvery said:
..i've actually had pizza, AND beer! Mommy said clever boy!

mad... it all started from a hyperthetical scenario

oh, not that any of you are interested... The management have listened to 2 tracks and are paying for more.
Click to expand...

Wow...great response. :rolleyes: You had a chance to apologize and admit that you were being a bit unreasonable--and instead you dug your heels in a bit deeper. Clever boy, indeed.
 
Squiksilvery said:
..i've actually had pizza, AND beer! Mommy said clever boy!

mad... it all started from a hyperthetical scenario

oh, not that any of you are interested... The management have listened to 2 tracks and are paying for more.
Click to expand...

If you were so clever, you'd probably know how to spell hypothetical...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top