Give the mana website....
....and he thinks he can invade the charts by Christmas!
Canadian soft rocker Bryan Adams is the latest star to grumble at fans for plastering his name and face on unofficial websites. The crinkly Eighties star and sometime number one slot hogger has enlisted the help of Web Sheriff to convince the likes of bryanadamsfanclub.nl, bryanadams.nu and badfan.com to play nice and agree to …
Can anyone tell me the difference between an artist wanting to exert some control over their brand and the likes of Easy, Orange, BMW, Coke, Pepsi, Cadbury's, Tesco and any other money-making machine? He's only protecting his ability to make money. Or this this, a bit like his music admittedly, now a crime?
I'm also having a Roger Moore moment at why you think it surprising these fansites are being so eager to comply. It's a bit obvious really - they think they're talking to their demi-God so if he - or she, or it, whatever - says "can you get shot of those pirate links please as they're robbing me", of course they're going to do it. They'd probably jump in dog poo if he sent them a mail asking so. Such is the power of a global rrrrrrrrrock idol phenomena. And to a rather lesser extent Bryan Adams too.
Mind you, having just read this back I do realise that calling Bryan Adams an artist is perhaps stretching things here......
Prince made himself look like an arse, Bryan Adams is going a similar way, and Metallica learnt all about this 10 years ago.
The hardcore fans are what keeps your brand supported when you are out of the limelight recording your "difficult" next album. They are the ones who will buy it even if it is complete excreta.
Actions like this are self defeating
Paris 'cos she knows all about publicity
I lost all respect for the guy when he appeared at a hockey game as a guest to sing the national anthems of the US and Canada -- and forgot the words to O Canada. "I was nervous" he said. Riiiiight.
I wouldn't go to a concert of his if someone gave me the tickets, nor would I even bother to TPB a single song.
I can't stand the guy, and it's obvious he doesn't understand how the WWW can work for him. Anti-fan? Yep!
... which is how he manages to still fill arenas that the likes of todays "bands" have to play to 1/4 or 1/2 of and then claim to have "sold out the venue". There's also a lot more to his music than just Everything I Do, especially when performed live.
Having said that, you'd think he'd of learnt from the problems and bad PR that previous over zealous artists have caused themselves. As someone else said, it's the hardcore fans that buy the 3 copies of an album or single because they have a different track on them - the same kind that run fan sites (and no, they wouldn't just roll over and do exactly as they are told, that's why there's a lot of bad feeling about the fan sites being shut down - even if it does only turn out to be temporary).
Without the fan sites, a great many fans (especially those who aren't English speakers) would not know about half the concerts etc. that happen, or find out well after tickets have gone on sale, so it's somewhat ungracious to go after them in such a way.
Please Mr Adams. Will you issue cease & desist orders against those using your tunes as ringtones. Especially people who leave their mobe at their desk so we all have to hear the first part of summer of sixty blood nine about a dozen times a day. Yes, Dawn, you've got a mention on El Reg...
"happily coexist,” .......They do what we tell them
"We're not anti-fan."........We're not anti-walking-wallets-waiting-to-be-emptied.
"nothing we’ve asked for from the fan sites is unreasonable"...from our point of view...and who cares about their point of view. After all they are only fans.
"using unofficial material".......How dare they use material which we do not control and can therefore charce for.
Strangely Metallica were the first thing I though of too -- well, after "Bryan Adams has fans?!?!?!".
I know and know of a few fans of Metallica's music who won't buy it on general principal -- I, myself, have been looking for a stolen copy of the black album for years -- I followed James' and Lars' instructions and stole "And Justice For All.." from a friend a decade or so ago.
AC 11.45: "you'd think he'd of learnt"
That has to be the most awful, pervasive affront to English usage to appear in recent years. Why is it that people everywhere are doing this to the past conditional? Did English teachers suddenly stop correcting kids' phonetic transcription of the "would've" contraction, or were people always doing this and I'm only noticing it now as I grow older and more cantankerous?
It's not as if it could even be defended by labelling it "modern style" or "part of the natural evolution of the language". Mangled old bollocks is what it is, and it needs to be stopped.
My Canadian brother (in a musical sense 'cos we're both oldish classic rockers) apologised to me on behalf of his nation for Celine Dion and Bryan Adams. Stumped for something to apologise for (such a noble gesture deserves returning, you know?) I apologised on behalf of my nation for the Teletubbies.
Anyone enlisting Web Sheriff's assistance is not going to do their reputation any good. As has already been said Prince showed what a prize specimen he is when he went crying to them. Has he done anything decent lately? As for Metallica, I gave all my Metallica stuff to a local charity shop after Lars Ulrich whinged like a Premiership manager. Not one penny of my cash goes to anything involving them.
Piss the fans off if you like Bryan but they're the ones who still go to shows when you haven't been heard of for years and will decide not to now you've gone to Web Sheriff.
BTW, "Summer of 69" means something very different to me and probably NSFW. And there ain't no way anyone's going to stop my using that to describe a very happy time of my life.
We need an "asshole" icon...
...Bryan Adams.... oh, yeah! He was some flash-in-the-pan from the Empty Eighties, wasn't he? As I recall -- loud, crash-bangy, songwriting about as deep as the crust on Wonder Bread.
With all respect to the Canadians on this thread, I haven't heard a decent band out of there since the second Rush album.
Shit, man, where's the Guess Who when we need them?
...may I suggest BA search archive.org for "Grateful Dead".
They were taped by their audience for years; I should know as I'm one of them. They were doing "viral marketing" decades before some Silicon Valley dipshit coined the term. In the mid-80s they allowed it "officially", and it continued until Garcia died. Tons and tons -- or, should I say, tonnes and tonnes -- of free publicity. No wonder outfits like Phish, et al, followed the Dead's lead and started selling "taper seats" in the sonic "sweet spot" of a hall and allowing people to do "field recordings" from there. Their attitude was: what the hell; they've got our thirty bucks for the ticket, why not let us spread the word to our friends who ask "what do they sound like live" by simply slipping them a cassette (or, from about '92 onward, a home-burned CD-R). Worked like a champ for 'em.
Deadhead since '78, bootleg recordist since '86. Arrrr-rrr.
You may commence the eye-rolling now.
Colloquialisms are fine. Some of my best friends are colloquialisms. "That'll learn 'em" is a cracker.
What I was ranting about is emphatically not a colloquialism. It is a mistake in written English caused by not understanding the contraction "would've" and writing it down as a phoneticisation.
Colloquialisms are words and phrases which arise from the spoken word (not solely "local language"). How can "would of" be a colloquialism when the only difference it has with "would've" is the way it is written down?
Duly noted about "twunt", but I don't see your point. Were you trying to tell me I'd been hoist by my own petard? If so, then sorry guv', I never said you can't go around using made up words. Like colloquialism, neologism produces some of the funniest and most succinctly descriptive language we have, vis. "twunt".
Bryan has carefully crafted his "crustless white bread soaked in lukewarm water" image and he has every right to protect it. It only takes one thoughtless fansite, 'shopping in some warm milk to generate some notoriety, to spoil decades of focused, intensive, blandbranding.
If you get yourself off on warm milk, go Rickroll yourself. If you reckon your bent is a little "crust-on" action then a sick little outfit called The Spin Doctors sounds a little more your kind of perversion. If you think you want to go all the way - milk, full-crust, and even the odd floating currant - then, my twisted friend, you are looking for The Corrs. Just google "Three Girls, One Muppet" and keep browsing till you find yourself wanting to poop and puke at the same time.
Bry-Bry don't play that. In fact, he don't play anything unless its meant to make Kevin Costner look like a plausible romantic lead, or blue jeans look like something your nanna could buy you for your 8th birthday without fear of you taking up the reefer or the jazz music.
Aren't you a big boy now? Long pants and all...
What gives you people the right to mock Bryan Adams and his music? I am not surprised in the slightest that he doesn't want people illegally downloading his stuff - no artist does! However, this artist is definitely NOT washed up - his gig last night at the SECC was phenomenal. The guy (and his band) are legends in their own right. It's time you started respecting real talent when you see and hear it, rather than listening to manufactured rubbish these days.
I believe what Bryan Adams did in this situation is 100% right.
I live round the corner from Mr Adams and that pub is still no more. What's really irritating is that a little bit further along is what's now called the 'Cheyne Brassiere' which used to be a fine traditional drinking establishment called 'The Eight Bells' but is now a poncy French restaurant that regularly catches fire (then all the patrons hang about outside with their glasses of merlot laughing at the firemen and ann neighbours oying the with their braying).
Then there's the Phene Arms (in Phene St), frequented as it was by George Best, sadly fallen victim to 'Gastropub Disease' and has been vacant for over eighteen months. The Chelsea Surprise in Tite St is another victim of this debilitating condition and has been shut for a year. Thank goodness for the Pigs Ear on Old Church St.
Now where was I ... Ah yes, Bryan Adams. I've been in his house. He's very anal and demands that everyone remove their shoes before walking on his white painted floor boards. He likes to get lots of invitations to posh events too. What a twunt.
/Paris because Everything I Do, I Do it All Over Her.
In my day the bands learned the songs and then put their own interpretation on them, often better than the real thing. A big let down once I could afford the records and found they were not as good as the local interpretations.
Nowadays it has to be note perfect - why?! There is an MP3 for that which is cheaper.
Two Passable Bands that did better re-interpretations spring to mind - Who, Hendrix
Jimi stopped a TV performance of his single to play a Cream song, but he did not do it note perfect, he did it his way! And would he have been so famous as a Bob Dylan Tribute act.
Come on lads if you are that good stop the tributes and then you can have your web sites back.
He is a narcassistic egotist devoid of talent, aside from marketing sterile blandness. Could it be that he is trying to suppress the circulation of early images that show him in his true colors, and hurt his ego/image or is he only greedy for more money?
http://www.jimvallance.com/01-music-folder/images-for-music-pages/images-music-pages/img-adams-images/img-adams-train-station.jpg
http://web.archive.org/web/20060615041424/bryanadams.nu/sweeneytodd/s01.html
Annonymous coward, what the hell does his living arrangements have to do with this news article? Sure, if you had the money and a pub annoyed you, you would buy it just to get peace and quiet....
BUT the thing is that he can afford to do all this and getmore power because he has earned his money through hard work, devotion and extreme talent. There is no law against what he can and can't buy in that context!
To the other anonymous coward, Bryan Adams does NOT market sterile blandness.... maybe in your eyes, but alot of people will disagree with you.... namely the SOLD OUT gig he did last night in Glasgow. SO put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Oh ALSO, Bryan Adams is an international star..... he is known and has a huge fan base ALL OVER the world. Not many artists these days can say that!
"Scottishlass", his ability to pull a crown is not being questioned, what is under question is his motive for internet-censorship control freak type behaviour, r.e. the content of the news article.
The size of a crowd is not a measure of talent or quality, only popularity. Next you'll be TELLING US that fast food chains sell really excellent food, the evidence being that they sell huge quantities all over the world.
The post by Peter says it all:
By peter Posted Monday 27th October 2008 13:12 GMT
"happily coexist,” .......They do what we tell them
"We're not anti-fan."........We're not anti-walking-wallets-waiting-to-be-emptied.
"nothing we’ve asked for from the fan sites is unreasonable"...from our point of view...and who cares about their point of view. After all they are only fans.
"using unofficial material".......How dare they use material which we do not control and can therefore charge for.
Not sure which is worse, the article itself or the pathetic comments which I've speed read.
It's virtually impossible to get a ticket to see Bryan Adams in concert - and he tours almost ALL of the year all around the World. He's a MAJOR talented singer/songwriter who I have the greatest respect for - just a shame there aren't more artists like him around these days.
Try getting a ticket to see him at the 02 venue on 5th Nov! His concerts are second to none!
I don't really agree with this web sherrif stuff but at least Bryan had the decency to spend an hour in chat on his website explaining to the fans why it was all happening - he took time to reply to all questions, and that was on the eve of his UK tour opening - he also replied on the forum to individual fans posts. (Most artists can't be bothered with their fans) Bryans fans understand and also want the best for him. It was U Tube that started all this, due to someone stealing his name. So would you be happy with that, if it happened to you??
Your comments on here would be more believable if they were constructive criticism rather than pathetic arrogant and rude comments from people who clearly have never attended a BA concert, but would rather sit on the side and insult the guy.
Wooh! Yeah! Bryan Adams fans of the world unite! We must fight anti-Bryan Adams prejudice wherever it rears its ugly head! Educate the unenlightened ones! Today The Register comments, tomorrow the world! ONWARD!
THUDTHUDTHUDTHUDTHUDTHUDTHUDTHUD (that's the sound of me hitting my head off the desk)