Kelli in TN Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Because the artistic is by nature a more liberal community that is more accepting in general? My point, in bringing up the endowment was pointing out the artistic community might not actually approve of the opposition of the endowment. I wasn't saying "Those mean Republicans! How dare they oppose the Endowment of the Arts!!" I was saying, "I think y'all hacked them off" :lol: Oh. While I am not in favor of gay marriage personally and I am against taxpayer monies being used for nonsense like art and television, and I do understand that the Republican party was within its legal right to use music that it had paid for; I personally think it was bad form to use music by artists that did not want it used. I think it is stupid to make people mad over such an avoidable thing. I think Heart was being petty, but I think the Republican party was being petty too. It was a veritable petty party!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Oh I don't think Heart was being petty. I wouldn't want someone I opposed using my life's work either, no matter now insignificant or nonsensical that work might seem to others. I wouldn't sue without grounds but I would complain and I would attempt to make them look silly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spy Car Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Oh. It was a veritable petty party!!!!! As long as it's not a Tom Petty party :D Or lawyers will have to get involved :tongue_smilie: Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelli in TN Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Oh I don't think Heart was being petty. I wouldn't want someone I opposed using my life's work either, no matter now insignificant or nonsensical that work might seem to others. I wouldn't sue without grounds but I would complain and I would attempt to make them look silly. Well, we can agree to disagree on that. For goodness sakes. How many American soldiers have we lost to a questionable war? How many innocent Iraqis have lost their loved ones, their infrastructure, their limbs, their lives? And what is on the news? Bristol Palin's pregnancy and Heart's temper tantrum? :rolleyes: In light of all that is going on in the world, Heart is being petty to raise a stink. The Republican party is being petty to inist on using music by artists who don't want it used. Just because they legally CAN use it does not mean they SHOULD. Pettiness all around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jen in NY Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 remakes and one powerful original. The CD is ...how shall I say? Pro-peace? Anti-war? Either way it's pretty obvious that her political leanings are not toward the current administration, LOL. It's a rocking good album, I must say. Especially Led Zep's Immigrant Song >>> IT ROCKS! <<< :thumbup: Jen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Well, we can agree to disagree on that. For goodness sakes. How many American soldiers have we lost to a questionable war? How many innocent Iraqis have lost their loved ones, their infrastructure, their limbs, their lives? And what is on the news? Bristol Palin's pregnancy and Heart's temper tantrum? :rolleyes: In light of all that is going on in the world, Heart is being petty to raise a stink. The Republican party is being petty to inist on using music by artists who don't want it used. Just because they legally CAN use it does not mean they SHOULD. Pettiness all around. The war doesn't have anything to do with whether or not the Republicans should be able to play Barracuda. It is ridiculous, the Republicans as a POLITICAL CAMPAIGN RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT are not upheld to the same behavior that a Rock band is. The reason it is in the news is because it is silly and it isn't Heart that is looking silly. Rock band does not = Presidential campaign. They shouldn't even try and go against a Rock band. No telling what Rock band will say and they will end up looking silly. Politician VS Rock band, the Politician loses every time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Well, we can agree to disagree on that. For goodness sakes. How many American soldiers have we lost to a questionable war? How many innocent Iraqis have lost their loved ones, their infrastructure, their limbs, their lives? Believe me, I think about that every day but that's just me. I don't run a news network. In light of all that is going on in the world, Heart is being petty to raise a stink. The Republican party is being petty to inist on using music by artists who don't want it used. Just because they legally CAN use it does not mean they SHOULD. Pettiness all around. If it was just Heart then I would agree. However, the GOP has been caught *illegally* using the work (ed from music to work to be more accurate) of several artists. They are on board with charging teens tens of thousands of dollars in royalty fees for downloading music but they don't want to ask permission and pay royalty fees? That's not pettiness, that's believing you are above a law, a law you are excessively enforcing on the little people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelli in TN Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 If it was just Heart then I would agree. However, the GOP has been caught *illegally* using the work (ed from music to work to be more accurate) of several artists. They are on board with charging teens tens of thousands of dollars in royalty fees for downloading music but they don't want to ask permission and pay royalty fees? That's not pettiness, that's believing you are above a law, a law you are excessively enforcing on the little people. If the GOP truly broke the law, let them have it. Seriously. But it does not sound like a law was broken in the case of Heart's music being played. I think Heart is just P.O.ed and legally they are out of luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elaine Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 If the GOP truly broke the law, let them have it. Seriously. But it does not sound like a law was broken in the case of Heart's music being played. I think Heart is just P.O.ed and legally they are out of luck. I agree. Build a bridge and get over it! (Heart, not you Kelli.;)) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 If the GOP truly broke the law, let them have it. Seriously. But it does not sound like a law was broken in the case of Heart's music being played. I think Heart is just P.O.ed and legally they are out of luck. You're right. In the case of Heart they (the GOP) did everything by the book. I guess if *I* was a member of Heart and had signed away my most famous song when I was young and stupid I would be ticked when it was used in ways I didn't agree with. I would probably say "hey, I don't like these guys, just for the record...in case anyone cares...I'm sure you probably don't." But Heart's response was kind of over the top, I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 But why is it HEART are the ones expected to act like grown-ups?? Not the campaign for President?? Really? I guess the Republicans should "build a bridge and get over it" if musicians don't let them play their songs then. Sheesh, no one else was engaging in that sort of thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 But why is it HEART are the ones expected to act like grown-ups?? Not the campaign for President?? Really? I guess the Republicans should "build a bridge and get over it" if musicians don't let them play their songs then. Sheesh I can honestly see both sides to some extent. I refer everyone to these posts from a resident expert: http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?p=517288#post517288 There are some legalities involved. And maybe people are not aware that in order to *keep* your copyright you do actually have to fight someone when your copyright is violated. Heart was out of line to say "hey, you can't use our music, jerkface!" *after* the proper licenses had been obtained. On the other hand, I think it would be fine (and hilarious) for Heart to use the money to do an Obama commercial. *On the other hand* (how many hands do I have?) Ann Wilson is older than my mom and Nancy Wilson is only slightly younger than my mom. So...yeah....I think she should act like a grownup about it to some extent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 If the GOP truly broke the law, let them have it. Seriously. But it does not sound like a law was broken in the case of Heart's music being played. I think Heart is just P.O.ed and legally they are out of luck. I agree. They are angry but they have no legal recourse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elaine Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 But why is it HEART are the ones expected to act like grown-ups?? Not the campaign for President?? Really? I guess the Republicans should "build a bridge and get over it" if musicians don't let them play their songs then. Sheesh, no one else was engaging in that sort of thing. Because the campaign for President went about using the music in a legal fashion. If Heart doesn't like it fine, but issuing a statement? C'mon? I find it juvenile, hence my bridge building comment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I will agree, btw that a politician having a fight with a rock band is by its very nature failure on the part of the politician to some degree. It just looks bad for a presidential campaign to have to answer for its actions against a rock band (never mind several of them). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I will agree, btw that a politician having a fight with a rock band is by its very nature failure on the part of the politician to some degree. It just looks bad for a presidential campaign to have to answer for its actions against a rock band (never mind several of them). That's my point. :lol: I mean, you are a politician...in a fight with a rockband..over a song named Barracuda Who looks silly here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slartibartfast Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Because the campaign for President went about using the music in a legal fashion. If Heart doesn't like it fine, but issuing a statement? C'mon? I find it juvenile, hence my bridge building comment. So you mean if they don't like it they should shut up?? Their statement seems reasonable Rock Group Heart Condemn The Use of The Song Barracuda at The Republican Convention Ann and Nancy Wilson of Heart have informed the McCain/Palin Campaign that Universal Music Publishing and Sony BMG have sent a cease-and-desist notice to not use one of Heart's classic songs "Barracuda," as the congratulatory theme for Sarah Palin. The Republican campaign did not ask for permission to use the song, nor would they have been granted that permission. "We have asked the Republican campaign not to use our music. We hope our wishes will be honored." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KidsHappen Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Maybe saying that Hollywood types are not known for standing on principle was going too far, but it does seem to me that with all of the rampant drug use, drinking, DUIs, promiscuity, etc. that celebrities are involved with today . . . Erica Couldn't this in fact be seen as proof that they are quite liberal in their leanings and therefore more likely to support the Democrats? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.