Re: pension

Technically, it's Kurzweil who'll be paying into his pension pot forever

Re: Very strange behaviour indeed

Hasham, you clearly don't care to understand what the Beastie Boy ethos evolved into. The fact you used a phrase like 'you created a few pop songs' shows not only your misguided ignorance, but also how much of a bellend you are.

To borrow from Bill Hicks also. Stop trying to put a dollar sign on everything, you sucker of Satan's cock.

"Beastie Boys songs, they're so deep and pure, man, they make me cry. You just don't understand!"

Re: Very strange behaviour indeed

"You can distribute my message (for profit), but you may not subvert my message" could be one interpretation of the logical disconnect between allowing publishers to profit, and not allowing advertisers to profit, from his works.

I guess what this comes down to is how important one takes that message to be. Yauch created his songs, so no doubt he puts a great deal of importance onto them and thinks they can be made 'impure' somehow. For myself it's just pop songs alongside thousands of others; they're nice and catchy but not to be taken too seriously.

Re: Very strange behaviour indeed

There's a world of difference between having your music play ALONGSIDE an ad (which is The Cost of Doing Business on broadcast radio and MTV, and the artist has no control over this--most people recognize this distinction and shrug) and having your music play DURING an ad (the ad agency has to have permission to use the music at this point, which creates an involuntary statement about the artist's tastes and/or attitudes, which is more significant).

There's a difference certainly, but I wouldn't say there's a world of difference. He has the right to specify his desires relating to his creations, I do not for one second deny that, but that doesn't mean they're not silly.

"I'm happy for my song to play immediately before or after a chicken drumsticks ad, but not during dammit!"

Please Mr Yauch, you created pop songs with the shelf-life of a few decades, not some great philosophical work that will inspire nations to action for centuries to come. Don't fret it, the possibility of their 'corruption' is a total non-issue

Re: Very strange behaviour indeed

The law permits a creator of intellectual property to leave it/them to a literary executor, who/which may be bound by the creator's wishes provided those wishes are legal. I don't know if it's ever been tested in a court, but I don't see anything obviously contrary to public policy in refusing permission for use of music in advertising until the copyright expires (assuming he owns the copyright at death). He's allowed to make that distinction and refusal in life, so why not make his intellectual property subject to that same condition after death?

I'm not saying he doesn't have the right. He may indeed have, or the courts may rule his works as collaborative efforts and the wishes of two live people outweigh the wishes of one deceased person. I'm just saying that his wish is an artistic pretention given that he commercialised his music, companies turned a profit on it directly, and it has already been indirectly used to sell other products. You tune into MTV for his music, and then an advert plays for chicken drumsticks. He didn't know that's why MTV was playing his music, to sell advertising slots?

Re: @ Hasham

Your assertion as to life's purpose is astonishingly blinkered, it is very sad that you feel that way and that your brain is only capable of comprehending the world in such a basic manner.

Based on your comments I would speculate that the world would in fact be a nicer and better place if you had been sterilised at birth.

What a lovely little field of strawmen you have there, Mr Anonymous Coward! The only thing missing is a mention of a certain German political party of the early 20th Century. In your next post perhaps...

Re: Very strange behaviour indeed

"This particular artist appears to consider his product to be music, and that is what he is choosing to sell."

'He' would still be selling music (or licensing its use, I suppose). MTV bought his songs to attract viewers, with the aim of getting companies to advertised goods and services to those viewers. That's his music being used indirectly as a hook to sell other things, but ultimately it's still to sell other things.

Re: Very strange behaviour indeed

"If you have a soul that responds to music, it most certainly is not.

For example, the second movement of Dvorak's "New World" symphony is one of the most sublime musical creations of all time. Unfortunately some soul-dead advertising agency used it to advertise Hovis bread, and now I can no longer listen to it without momentarily wincing at the association. Which incidentally, has negative value for Hovis, because I always buy some other make of bread whenever I have a choice!"

Were it not for that Hovis ad, many millions would never know "New World". So yes, a company used it to sell a product, but as a direct result of that people who would never have known it now know and enjoy it.

However, Dvorak's situation is not Yauch's. Yauch was perfectly fine with iTunes and HMV. There is no reason other than his artistic pretention for this loathing of advertising.

Re: @Hasham

"Really? that's the whole point of your existence? what a sad, sad life you must have."

I'm sorry that the evidence of a couple of billion years troubles you. By all means keep believing you are some beautiful and unique snowflake if it keeps you going.

Re: Very strange behaviour indeed

"He considers using his music in advertising to be compromising the principles or integrity of the music and the image he presented.

Money can still be made in royalties from album sales, digital downloads, or radio/TV plays, but if, for instance, a large restaurant chain that sells chicken wanted to use "Finger Lickin' Good" in an advertising campaign they would be out of luck.

Has the world changed so much that this really needs to be explained?"

But this is my point - it's pure artistic pretentiousness on his part. If he was selling music direct to consumer via his own website then I could understand. But he was perfectly happy for Apple, HMV etc to make profit on something they didn't create. His specific anti advertising hissy fit is a logical disconnect.

Re: Very strange behaviour indeed

"Nobody is complaining about him having or leaving money. The fact is he's left $6m and there will be more coming in from royalties. Why should more be made from advertising by people that didn't create the art if he didn't want it? He has left a good legacy - both musical (to all of us that want to appreciate it) and financial (to his family)."

But his music is already making Apple 30% on iTunes, and for innumerable other companies besides, who didn't create the art. It's an irrational position to specifically rail against advertising when you've not got an issue with Apple et al's 30%

Re: Very strange behaviour indeed

"If anything, I would have expected people to be more incensed that his bandmates Mike Diamond and Adam Horovitz are also being prevented from selling ad rights to work that Mr. Yausch was involved in creating. It's interesting that your first instinct seems to be "think of the children!", rather than realising that this clause is going to limit the other co-creators of the works in question should they decide to sell out at some point in the future."

I see your point also on the co-creators, but band mates are band mates, not blood. Reproducing and maximising the resources available to your progeny is, after all, the only proven purpose to life.

Re: Very strange behaviour indeed

"He left over 6 million.

If that's not enough to 'never have to worry about money' again then tough shit."

I'm sorry it burns you so much that there are people with lots of money out there. God forbid they should make any more...

Re: Very strange behaviour indeed

And what is the obvious exactly, Mr Anonymous Coward?

Re: Very strange behaviour indeed

I did read that bit, but there's only a superficial difference between selling a song to an individual and selling it to a company. In the end, you're still selling songs.

Look how stupid you are

The term Brit has never been used in a pejorative sense. Reg is a place for reasonably smart people. Really, what are you doing on this website?