Clear Channel's Patent OWNS you!

[Kris]

Originally posted by djwayne:

[QBIn all my years of going to concerts there was only one I wanted a recording of, and lucky for me, it was recorded that night, but it was almost a year before it was released, properly mastered, and mixed.

[/QB]

You need to go see some better shows then I'd guess. Personally I'd love a live recording of most of the big concerts I've been to.

[djwayne]

I've been to many great concerts and have a few concert videos, but don't feel the need to have a recording of every one. After watching Sir Paul McCartney's "Back In The U.S.", I'm totally burnt out on anymore Beatle stuff. Can you say "Over Exposure"??

[koolkid]

Originally posted by Mats Olsson.:

The sports analogy is different, a band or an artist are not part of an enterprise - didn't start up with such a goal (except for scams like Britney Aguilera and Backstreet Girls).

 

I don't doubt that CC are able to make things work smoothly, but it's wrong that they can be in control on so many areas. Artists don't have a choice but to play along.

 

"Agree to all our terms" - or you will not get exposure, will not play at venues/stadiums, will not tour.

that used to be true mats but it isnt any longer.... from a legal standpoint,as soon as they incorporate or trademark or even copyright they are now considered an enterprise and can be controlled like any other ""business that wants to do business"" at the staples center or the pnc bank center or all these other venues that are owned by corporations and that cc will be sucking on

 

for bands signing to a major label..i think the days of getting a major label deal and not getting sucked into this cc type of thing are over