What modern musical act is the biggest "sellout"?

[RobMoney$]

I use the term "modern musical act" in the title to encompass everything. Be it rock, rap, folk, punk, whatever. Genre doesn't matter much.

The term "sellout" is one that open for debate, so feel free to post your interpretation as well as your pick.



I think the answer is obvious, but I'll let some conversation happen first.

[kaiser soze]

Garth Brookes :(

[lolkat]

beastie boys


but you think its green day

[YoungRemy]

I think the obvious answer is Black Eyed Peas...

[Documad]

I don't know what sell out means. I suppose that to sell out, you have to have some integrity in the first place. Very few modern music acts ever had integrity. I mean, no one expected any sort of standards from Madonna for instance.

I suppose people think Pearl Jam sold out by signing a deal with a store. It doesn't bother me. I'm more upset at U2 for playing stadiums and charging $250 a ticket for shitty seats. It's not selling out though.

[YoungRemy]

or is Metallica the obvious answer?

[yeahwho]

Jonas Brothers, if we're talking this millenium, U2, Metallica are pretty old.

[Documad]

Perhaps Pete Townsend. I hate the CSI songs.

[Documad]

Jonas Brothers, if we're talking this millenium, U2, Metallica are pretty old.

Jonas Bros had no credibility / integrity. How are you defining it?

[yeahwho]

Jonas Bros had no credibility / integrity. How are you defining it?
pre fab and exploit till the cows come home, complete perfect sell out... a boy band Ca-Ching $$$$

[yeahwho]

If we're talking about selling and selling and selling I think the Beatles catalog has been released in at least 7 different formats. Also they have been huckstering multiple products to their songs for decades.

[checkyourprez]

bep is a pretty good answer. they used to be a dope underground group then some how they blew up and added a girl to their group. now they just make real shitty songs.


i cant think right now, but theres others.

[yeahwho]

Iggy Pop selling cruise's with Lust for Life is pretty funny, it's so funny I don't know if I would call it a sellout. Just fucking silly.

Bob Dylan doing Cadillac and Victoria's Secret is not so funny and really sort of embarrassing.

Workingman Springsteen having an exclusive with Wal-Mart sucked.

There are so many easy dollars to be made and I fully understand, but how about giving the fans a break and play smaller venues with smaller ticket prices after raping the corporate world. Is that too much to ask for?

[MCScoobyT]

Selling out doesn't apply to Hip-Hop because that is the goal for Hip-Hop acts.

[RobMoney$]

or is Metallica the obvious answer?


This was who I had in mind for the obvious choice, and they're far and away in first place IMO when you consider where they came from.
Their sellout arc, if you will, is greater than anyone I can think of.
The guys from "Kill 'em All" would kick the everloving shit out of the guys from "St. Anger".

I would classify selling out as shunning innovation/aesthetics/artistry (for lack of a better term) for the easy pay day.
See Metallica changing its sound, any pop or top 40 music on the airwaves today. No innovation. Easy, simple melodies, trite lyrics, etc...

U2 is still popular and definitely works its marketing leverage, but they push themselves artistically. You may not agree with their new sound, but you have to admit they try.

People hated Dylan for going electric, but history showed it was a product of him challenging himself aesthetically, not looking to make an easy payday. I think the same could be said of U2 (even though I'm sure many of you will disagree).





Pearl Jam is the antithesis of a sell-out.

[RobMoney$]

Selling out doesn't apply to Hip-Hop because that is the goal for Hip-Hop acts.


Two words: ICE CUBE.

[Guy Incognito]

any massive act who still does adverts when they clearly dont need to. U2& blackberry for example.


dizzee rascal is kind of on the way to sell out street, changed his sound and gone all comedy cockney.

EDIT - just re-read robs post about marketing leverage and still trying, it doesnt matter in my eyes, there is no need for them to push a product that isnt theirs, no need other than to line theirs and others pockets and coming from someone like bono its a little hard to swallow imo.

they could do an album of white noise but if they are selling crisps or phones or whatever on the back of it then that is selling out.

[kaiser soze]

Pearl Jam is the antithesis of a sell-out.

so I guess doing a commercial for Target Department Stores keeps their rough and tumble grunge style intact?

[Documad]

I don't see the Metallica argument. In fact, I have more respect for them then most. I was never emotionally attached to them though. They didn't make me any promises. Maybe that helps. To my ears, the current album is much much better than the ones immediately before it. I was surprised at how much I enjoyed their concert last month -- I couldn't shut up about it -- I talked about it with friends for over a week! They put on a hell of a show. They never appeared to be phoning it in. They seemed genuine and expressed their thanks to their fans for all the support. I guess I'm a sucker for that shit.

[MCScoobyT]

Two words: ICE CUBE.

I agree ICE CUBE is a super smart sell-out, 1st he said 'Burn Hollywood Burn', then he became a Hollywood Molgue. When he tours he can still bang gangsta shit, and produce 'Are We There Yet?'.

[camo]

Do people like Ozzy,Rev Run and Flava flav count for their cringy descents into reality tv?

[cj hood]

Two words: ICE CUBE.

the bill cosby of hiphop....

1:54 check it...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FmINZFef60

[saz]

the verve

[RobMoney$]

I don't see the Metallica argument. In fact, I have more respect for them then most. I was never emotionally attached to them though. They didn't make me any promises. Maybe that helps. To my ears, the current album is much much better than the ones immediately before it. I was surprised at how much I enjoyed their concert last month -- I couldn't shut up about it -- I talked about it with friends for over a week! They put on a hell of a show. They never appeared to be phoning it in. They seemed genuine and expressed their thanks to their fans for all the support. I guess I'm a sucker for that shit.


One question for you,
Did you ever go to a concert, pre-Black Album?
I guessing the answer to that is no, because if you did, you'd know that they are the biggest sellouts the music industry has ever seen, and they're holding down the #1 spot on that list by a mile.

That being said, Rick Rubin actually was able to make them sound like Metallica again on Death Magnetic.
They're all still pretty much douchebags personally tho, except Trujillo.

[RobMoney$]

any massive act who still does adverts when they clearly dont need to. U2& blackberry for example.


dizzee rascal is kind of on the way to sell out street, changed his sound and gone all comedy cockney.

EDIT - just re-read robs post about marketing leverage and still trying, it doesnt matter in my eyes, there is no need for them to push a product that isnt theirs, no need other than to line theirs and others pockets and coming from someone like bono its a little hard to swallow imo.

they could do an album of white noise but if they are selling crisps or phones or whatever on the back of it then that is selling out.


Well, we all have a different opinion on what the term "selling out" means to us. Someone doing commercials never bothered me too much, unless it's from an artist who is dead and now whoever owns the rights is whoring that music for profit.
Selling your art is not selling out.
I think the dividing line is that the "sell outs'" creative process is guided by what they think will make money.
As in Metallica changing their entire sound and style to be more marketable.
I still laugh my ass off at Hetfield with short hair.

[Kid Presentable]

Selling your art is not selling out.


Fuck yes it is. In the context where you mention "what makes money", fuuuuuuuuuuck yes it is.

[Guy Incognito]

right then, i'm a bit loathed to post a large rant cos its possible this could trigger off a retort but i have to say something although kid p said it very succintly.

1. You should have called this thread, "who thinks metallica are shit now, cos i do", talking about sellouts is a different matter and your opinion of what a sell out is seems to differ from mine and others.

2. Its fairly apparent that u2 can do no wrong in your eyes and you would follow them to the pits of satans lair (somewhere they arent far from imo).

3. to have a go at james hetfield having short hair now is pretty lame. U2 all used to have long hair and now its short, you know why, same reason as hetfield, they got old.

4. People change, bands change. Name me a band that is sounding like they did 20/25 years ago. U2? No. Metallica? No. The Beastie Boys? No. Anybody that is hawking the same shit about after 25 years is considered stale. Bon Jovi, anyone?

5. my limited knowledge of metallica is the big hits, the black album and "some kind of monster". Now from watching that film, its commendable they are still making records at all, regardless of how they compare to their early stuff. The fact is they are still doing it, still playing live ( i have no idea if they still play early stuff live) and they arent doing iphone adverts.
I think the dividing line is that the "sell outs'" creative process is guided by what they think will make money.
As in Metallica changing their entire sound and style to be more marketable.
.
6. Yes, U2 are still making records and "trying" new things but they have always done stuff like that and that could be considered to be selling out. Knocking out dance remixes after the house boom, getting acclaimed dj's in to help produce and ditching it all after "pop" got slammed, and stripping it all away when there was a resurgence of guitar bands. They have altered their sound to fit in with current trends on numerous occasions. Its brought some mixed results but they are still trying to fit in imo.

7. Selling out can be drastically changing your style or appearing to go against everything a band originally stood for AND also hawking other products for the corporate world. I have no problem with bands on adverts for their own stuff or marketing their own stuff but selling blackberry's is blackberrys job, not U2's. Selling out is making huge compromises be it artisitcally or financially imo.

8. It makes it worse that U2 are supposed to be this humanitarian outfit who support great causes and at the same time are sucking the corporate cock. the term "marketing leverage" and rock n roll should not go together and if they do thats selling out

i've said too much but to summarise, i think a lot of the accusations levelled at metallica are true, if not truer of U2.

I realise you will probably have a lot to say and i probably shouldnt take you on but i cant have you accusing one band of doing something when one of your favourite bands is doing similar stuff. I think your view is very biased. I dont really like metallica, metal is not my thing.I have most of u2's albums but havent bought the last 3 cos i got bored. plus i think bono's a bit of a hypocrite. look forward to the reply.

[kaiser soze]

I hardly listen to U2 now. Zooropa is where they lost me. Granted they may be a killer live band and do great stuff on the side, they are pretentious, ego maniacal sell outs nonetheless.

I've never liked Metallica but they stand under the same umbrella as U2 in my eyes

[Guy Incognito]

I hardly listen to U2 now. Zooropa is where they lost me. Granted they may be a killer live band and do great stuff on the side, they are pretentious, ego maniacal sell outs nonetheless.

I've never liked Metallica but they stand under the same umbrella as U2 in my eyes

i really liked zooropa, it was really sudden and unexpected and quite edgy and is prolly my favourite of theirs. It was full of original ideas but then they followed it up with "Pop" which stank. thats where they lost me.

[kaiser soze]

Oh, Zooropa was the last album I checked out. I had the cd, thought it was really cool/weird and an interesting change for them. But it was an end of an awesome era of freedom rock and power ballads and I would consider the beginning of a major commercial shift for them. Even thought the ZOO TV tour/and the FLY persona were interesting I think it was a turning point where U2 lost their soul....

[The Good Heads]

the verve
Wrong. Their last album is practically unlistenable, with only one pop song in about 70 minutes of dirge, not the act of a sell out.

[Freebasser]

Not really a musical act, but Johnny Rotten advertising butter (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mSE-Iy_tFY) is a pretty good shout. Mind you, if he was a real 'punk' he'd never have signed a record deal in the first place.

[Guy Incognito]

Wrong. Their last album is practically unlistenable, with only one pop song in about 70 minutes of dirge, not the act of a sell out.

dirge or no dirge, the verve still got back together for the money. they had massive differences and still dont talk to each other and ashcroft voewd he was never gonna go back (again!) and as soon as his solo career never took off he ate his words.

Not really a musical act, but Johnny Rotten advertising butter (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mSE-Iy_tFY) is a pretty good shout. Mind you, if he was a real 'punk' he'd never have signed a record deal in the first place.

agreed, but like you said he never was a punk, the pistols were technically a packaged boy band. he's done loads of selling out, Lydon would probably tell you that was the most punk thing to do or some bollocks like that. "i'm a celebrity", reforming for the cash (although he admitted that, is it still selling out if you openly admit its for the money?I dunno), butter adverts. massive sell out although he does get marks for doing "open up" with leftfield. that was a good collab.

[yeahwho]

Not really a musical act, but Johnny Rotten advertising butter (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mSE-Iy_tFY) is a pretty good shout. Mind you, if he was a real 'punk' he'd never have signed a record deal in the first place.

lol, living in the States I've never seen that. Doesn't Rotten live in Los Angeles now?

I sort of put his foray into the mainstream commercial world as funny. They did do some good in the day on a much larger international level. The Ramones probably should be classified as sellouts too, even though the beauty of the Ramones they did not go on about politics, just glue, brain disorders and girls.

By definition the Ramones invite buy ins not sell outs.

[Freebasser]

dirge or no dirge, the verve still got back together for the money. they had massive differences and still dont talk to each other and ashcroft voewd he was never gonna go back (again!) and as soon as his solo career never took off he ate his words.

Agreed. Ashcroft was quoted at one point as saying there was a better chance of seeing The Beatles reform than The Verve. When they did come back there was just no effort put into the record at all - but hey... why should they worry about the quality of the record when they were going to sell bargeloads during the week of release anyway, right? :rolleyes:

On another note, I'll be waiting to see what musical direction Kings of Leon go in on their next album. If they continue to produce songs in the vein of 'Use Somebody' then they'll have sold out big time.

[Guy Incognito]

On another note, I'll be waiting to see what musical direction Kings of Leon go in on their next album. If they continue to produce songs in the vein of 'Use Somebody' then they'll have sold out big time.

see, this is where i think i am a bit funny about the concept of selling out, if you are the kings of leon and you do three albums of balls out rock n roll and then on the fourth you think lets try a few different things to keep it fresh or just try summat else, and then every fucker likes it and you go global, thats not selling out.

I think you are right if its the case where the copy the last album then yes, they are pandering to the market but i am not sure if they have just realised they can wirte a few more different types of songs than what they did on the first three albums. its a tricky one, i agree with you , sort of. I dont think they will copy it btw.

It could be worse, they could be the killers, made a great album, forgot how to right tunes, then tried to sound like the pet shop boys and popped out massively. They took from loads of influences originally and yes, they were accessible songs but they lost any edge they had, however small that edge was in the first place.

[RobMoney$]

right then, i'm a bit loathed to post a large rant cos its possible this could trigger off a retort but i have to say something although kid p said it very succintly.

Why would you be fearful of me replying? This is a MB, we have dialogue.
Very strange way to open a post.

1. You should have called this thread, "who thinks metallica are shit now, cos i do", talking about sellouts is a different matter and your opinion of what a sell out is seems to differ from mine and others.

And the reason I left the meaning of the term "sellout" open to interpretation in my opening post was because I didn't want the discussion to degrade into arguing about the definition.

2. Its fairly apparent that u2 can do no wrong in your eyes and you would follow them to the pits of satans lair (somewhere they arent far from imo).

I do like U2. But that doesn't mean I'm unable to see the criticisms people have with them.
My point was that I have more respect for them than Metallica at this point. But that's my opinion. Feel free to express yours.

3. to have a go at james hetfield having short hair now is pretty lame. U2 all used to have long hair and now its short, you know why, same reason as hetfield, they got old.

U2 have pretty much always made pop-type music.
Even when they were "alt", they were "pop/alt.".
They never tried to bill themselves as anything different.
If "1985 Bono" saw "2009 Bono" walking down the street, I don't think it'd be that much of a shock. He's always been completely self-absorbed.

4. People change, bands change. Name me a band that is sounding like they did 20/25 years ago. U2? No. Metallica? No. The Beastie Boys? No. Anybody that is hawking the same shit about after 25 years is considered stale. Bon Jovi, anyone?

No one in Slayer ever cut their hair. Neither has Dave Mustaine.
They're both still making your garden variety Metal music too.
Hell, Slayer just released a new album last month.
Metallica, Slayer, and Megadeth are considered the holy trinity of Metal music.
Which one doesn't fit today?

5. my limited knowledge of metallica is the big hits, the black album and "some kind of monster". Now from watching that film, its commendable they are still making records at all, regardless of how they compare to their early stuff. The fact is they are still doing it, still playing live ( i have no idea if they still play early stuff live) and they arent doing iphone adverts.

THEY SUED THEIR OWN FANS FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.
Even you if give them the huge benefit of the doubt that they truly wanted to change their music for art's sake and not for mass appeal, that still ignores the fact that they went from the biggest advocate of copying/trading of music to suing their fans.
There's no looking back after that - you sold out.

Jason Newsted, while still in Metallica said "Yeah, we are sell outs. We sell out every arena we play"

Can you be anymore of a douche?

6. Yes, U2 are still making records and "trying" new things but they have always done stuff like that and that could be considered to be selling out. Knocking out dance remixes after the house boom, getting acclaimed dj's in to help produce and ditching it all after "pop" got slammed, and stripping it all away when there was a resurgence of guitar bands. They have altered their sound to fit in with current trends on numerous occasions. Its brought some mixed results but they are still trying to fit in imo.

They experimented with electric beats and sounds at the protest of many of their fans as soon as they did it.
They went back to their original sound and playing instruments.
The latest album is experimental again.
I don't see all the intentional trend-following in it that you seem to see.
The Beasties do the same thing, alternating between genre's from album to album. I don't see any concerted effort to follow any trends when they do it either. Quite the opposite actually.
They both make the music they feel like making at the time.

7. Selling out can be drastically changing your style or appearing to go against everything a band originally stood for AND also hawking other products for the corporate world. I have no problem with bands on adverts for their own stuff or marketing their own stuff but selling blackberry's is blackberrys job, not U2's. Selling out is making huge compromises be it artisitcally or financially imo.

Writing a song with the intent of making it catchy enough to catch the attention of the marketing world is wrong.
Writing great music and then having blackberry or whoever say "Hey, we'd like to pay you mad money to use your song in our add" isn't.
Have you heard U2 latest album, No line on the Horizon? There's no way anything on that could possibly be used to market anything.
Again, it's my opinion and mine only.

8. It makes it worse that U2 are supposed to be this humanitarian outfit who support great causes and at the same time are sucking the corporate cock. the term "marketing leverage" and rock n roll should not go together and if they do thats selling out

Every kid who has ever picked up a guitar has done so for two reasons.
1. Girls
2. Money



i've said too much but to summarise, i think a lot of the accusations levelled at metallica are true, if not truer of U2.

I realise you will probably have a lot to say and i probably shouldnt take you on but i cant have you accusing one band of doing something when one of your favourite bands is doing similar stuff. I think your view is very biased. I dont really like metallica, metal is not my thing.I have most of u2's albums but havent bought the last 3 cos i got bored. plus i think bono's a bit of a hypocrite. look forward to the reply.

If we get right down to it, I'd guess all musicians are sell-outs on some level.
Unless an artist is literally starving, the minute they care at all about people trading money for their "art", the art has been compromised.
They aren't just creating, they're creating with the hope that others will like and buy.

[RobMoney$]

On another note, I'll be waiting to see what musical direction Kings of Leon go in on their next album. If they continue to produce songs in the vein of 'Use Somebody' then they'll have sold out big time.

I heard a new single from them on the radio the other day.
It was pretty hard.

[RobMoney$]

so I guess doing a commercial for Target Department Stores keeps their rough and tumble grunge style intact?


No, but their stand against Tickettron buys them immunity from "sellout" accusations 4Lyfe.
That shit cost them millions.
Many casual listeners thought they broke up.

[Guy Incognito]

Why would you be fearful of me replying? This is a MB, we have dialogue.
Very strange way to open a post.

Not fearful, i just thought it would be an invitation for you to make one of those posts where you break it all down and analyse my rant in detail:rolleyes::p:D


No one in Slayer ever cut their hair. Neither has Dave Mustaine.
They're both still making your garden variety Metal music too.
Hell, Slayer just released a new album last month.
Metallica, Slayer, and Megadeth are considered the holy trinity of Metal music.
Which one doesn't fit today?

Hair should have fuck all to do with music.full stop.

THEY SUED THEIR OWN FANS FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.
Even you if give them the huge benefit of the doubt that they truly wanted to change their music for art's sake and not for mass appeal, that still ignores the fact that they went from the biggest advocate of copying/trading of music to suing their fans.
There's no looking back after that - you sold out.


I need to read up on that, i thought they just sued napster, i'll hold me hands up there.

They experimented with electric beats and sounds at the protest of many of their fans as soon as they did it.
They went back to their original sound and playing instruments.
The latest album is experimental again.
I don't see all the intentional trend-following in it that you seem to see.


we are gonna have to differ on that one, getting paul oakenfold in and massive attack to remix on achtung baby was a massive ploy to sell records imo. Getting Will I am to remix get on your boots the same.


Writing great music and then having blackberry or whoever say "Hey, we'd like to pay you mad money to use your song in our add" isn't.
Have you heard U2 latest album, No line on the Horizon? There's no way anything on that could possibly be used to market anything.
Again, it's my opinion and mine only.

The song they are using on the blackberry advert is from that album.
I just dont think they need to do that, especially when you are supposed to be a charitable band fighting causes for the less fortunate.


If we get right down to it, I'd guess all musicians are sell-outs on some level.
Unless an artist is literally starving, the minute they care at all about people trading money for their "art", the art has been compromised.
They aren't just creating, they're creating with the hope that others will like and buy.

This, i pretty much agree with.(y)

[RobMoney$]

Don't get me wrong, Incognito...
I'm not saying that U2 are an example of integrity, I just think Metallica has them beat on the sell-out list.
U2 has yet to sue their own fans.

[Documad]

One question for you,
Did you ever go to a concert, pre-Black Album?

No, I didn't hear them live until the 1990s. I can't compare Metallica shows from the 1980s to the show I saw last month, I just know that I was highly entertained at the show I saw last month. Yeah, it was an arena show with fire and lights that looked like coffins. They're definitely playing to the masses, but it was the most fun arena show I saw in the last 9 months or so. Your comment about their hair is so silly I think you're pulling our legs again Rob.

Metallica as a sell out doesn't make sense to me because I never felt any admiration for them as role models or whatnot. I'm not sure that I've ever felt that about any band. I didn't even feel that way about the Clash. I was sad that Joe Strummer got disillusioned but it didn't bug me that they got $750000 for playing the US Festival. And I liked Rock the Casbah. :rolleyes: It was better than the other hits on MTV at the time. I have a stronger emotional tie to the Beasties than probably anyone else, but I don't even get too invested in what they do.

I don't understand the "suing fans" comment. I know that Metallica's fans went apeshit when Lars came out against napster stealing the band's music. I think that bands should be paid for their music so that didn't bug me. But if there's more to it than that, I'd love it if someone posted a link or explained.


( i have no idea if they still play early stuff live).
When I saw them last month, by my count, they did the four most expected songs off the black album, six songs off the new album, and five songs that were pre-black album. I don't think they played anything in between the black album and the new album.

I saw my first Springsteen show during The River tour. I think I saw at least one show on every tour since except for this last tour. He's entertaining but he's not what he used to be. U2 still puts on a heck of a show but Bono's voice isn't what it used to be and seeing them in a stadium or arena will never come close to seeing them in a theater. I used to be a huge Stones fan but nothing could make me see them again. It's tough to grow old as a rock star. Everyone can't be Thurston Moore. (that's in case Jenny reads ;))

BTW, I've been a very casual metallica fan. I claim no special knowledge. I just have a bunch of the old albums.

[DeeJayZap]

of bands that I originally thought were amazing:

Weezer.

Blue album -> ... -> Raditude... wait, how did that happen?

[Guy Incognito]

I don't understand the "suing fans" comment. I know that Metallica's fans went apeshit when Lars came out against napster stealing the band's music. I think that bands should be paid for their music so that didn't bug me. But if there's more to it than that, I'd love it if someone posted a link or explained.


.

In 2000, Metallica discovered that a demo of its song "I Disappear", which was supposed to be released in combination with the Mission: Impossible II soundtrack, was receiving radio airplay. Tracing the source of the leak, the band found the file on the Napster peer-to-peer file-sharing network, and also found that the band's entire catalogue was freely available.[41] Legal action was initiated against Napster with Metallica filing a lawsuit at the U.S. District Court, Central District of California, alleging that Napster violated three areas of the law: copyright infringement, unlawful use of digital audio interface device, and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.[25][42]


Ulrich led the case against NapsterThough the lawsuit named three universities for copyright infringement, the University of Southern California, Yale University, and Indiana University, no individuals were named. Yale and Indiana complied and blocked the service from its campuses, and Metallica withdrew the universities' inclusion in the lawsuit.[43] Southern California, however, had a meeting with students to figure out what was going to happen with Napster. School administrators wanted it banned as its usage accounted for 40% of the bandwidth not being used for educational purposes.[44]

Metallica hired online consulting firm NetPD to monitor the Napster service for a weekend. A list of 335,435 Napster users who were believed to be sharing Metallica's music was compiled, and the 60,000 page document was delivered to Napster's office as Metallica requested the users be banned from the service.[45] The users were banned, and rap artist Dr. Dre joined the lawsuit against Napster, which resulted in an additional 230,142 Napster users banned.[46]

Ulrich provided a statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee regarding copyright infringement on July 11, 2000.[41] Federal Judge Marilyn Hall Patel ordered the site place a filter on the program in 72 hours or be shut down.[47] A settlement was reached between Metallica and Napster when German media conglomerate Bertelsmann AG BMG showed interest to purchase the rights to Napster for $94 million. Under the terms of settlement, Napster agreed to block users who shared music by artists who do not want their music shared.[48] However, on June 3, 2002 Napster filed for Chapter 11 protection under U.S. bankruptcy laws. On September 3, 2002, an American bankruptcy judge blocked the sale to Bertelsmann and forced Napster to liquidate its assets according to Chapter 7 of the U.S. bankruptcy laws.[49]

At the 2000 MTV Video Music Awards, Ulrich appeared in a skit with host Marlon Wayans that blasted the idea of using Napster to share music. Marlon played a college student sitting in his dorm room listening to Metallica's "I Disappear". Ulrich walked in and asked for an explanation. On receiving Wayans' excuse that using Napster was just "sharing", Lars retorted that Marlon's idea of sharing was "borrowing things that were not yours without asking." He called in the Metallica road crew, who proceeded to confiscate all of Wayans' belongings, leaving him almost nude in an empty room. Napster creator Shawn Fanning responded later in the ceremony by presenting an award wearing a Metallica shirt, saying, "I borrowed this shirt from a friend. Maybe, if I like it, I'll buy one of my own."[50]

[Guy Incognito]

^ is from wikipedia, i couldnt be arsed researching it further.

[Gareth]

i dont have a problem with letting your song be on a commercial.
or a tv theme.
rjd2, whom i havent followed in years, did a song with aceyalone.
the instrumental is the mad men theme.

[cj hood]

what about KISS.......

Kiss condom, Kiss coffin, Kiss bowling ball...nuff said.

although i do like the new album...

[RobMoney$]

Kiss is in my top 5, maybe even top 2.
But Kiss also never billed themselves as anything else.
Gene Simmons makes no attempt to hide that he's a whore.


Metallica, Ozzy, Kiss, Axl, and Rod Stewart are my Mt.Rushmore of rock sellouts.

[Lex Diamonds]

50 Cent
Lil Wayne
Eminem circa 2003-2008

have all foregone artistic integrity in pursuit of money in a BIG way

[saz]

Wrong. Their last album is practically unlistenable, with only one pop song in about 70 minutes of dirge, not the act of a sell out.

ah no. after establishing themselves as an excellent psychedelic/progressive band, with the verve ep, a storm in heaven, no come down and a northern soul, they would sell out completely with urban hymns, full of ashcroft's corny ballads (just like his cheesy solo material), which is adult contemporary soft rock, he kind of stuff you'd expect to hear in a waiting room at a doctor's or dentist's office, ie sonnet, lucky man et al.

and richard ashcroft is the biggest hypocrite. in '93 he was slagging off other bands for being radio friendly, that received more air play, such as the wonder stuff. then four years later comes urban hymns, a ballad heavy album for the masses, with his ego taking over and pushing mccabe, jones and salisbury out of composing and arranging the music and songs (when mccabe was the true musical force behind the band, as proven on their previous albums). during urban hymns it turned quite nasty between mccabe and ashcroft over the direction of the band.

even in '95, ashcroft couldn't give credit to williambBlake for the lyrics on history. he's a mick jagger wannabe and just like jagger, he is only interested in media standing and adulation. despite this, he tries so hard to give the impression of a purist i can't take him seriously. and fourth was their weakest album yet. they've become coldplay wannabes.

[TurdBerglar]

oh definitely rod stewert.


i was completely fucking shocked after discovering the shit he did with jeff beck and the faces. i had no clue he did actual music at one point.

[Tzar]

that newsted comment would have been totally tongue-in-cheek.

*sighs and gathers strength*

i bet half the people here and waiting for my response to this. i can happily say i'm finished obsessing about metallica now. they're just one of my favourite past time bands. i'd still kill to see them live just to complete that part of my music life but anyway...

there's so many 'what if"s surrounding the band. more than any metal band in history, let's face it. what if cliff didn't die, what if they didn't make a video for 'one' (personally glad they did... the vid is greatness), what if bob rock never existed, what if they never sued napster, what if they never did therapy etc etc... i bet if you ask hetfield now if he could go back and change things, he would. if you listen to the commentary of SKOM, he says he dreams that Cliff is still alive and just shows up one day and joins the band again. if you ask me, that's one poor bloke. he obviously misses the old school badly but now he's sober, 40 odd w/ 3 or so kids, he just can't do that. none of them can't.

i would have argued more but i do now understand why people see metallica as a sell-out. but i really couldn't give a shit about it anymore. they have made awesome music, hit their prime and now just making music they wanna make. let 'em be. don't like it... don't listen to it. just watch this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8czyR0SXMW4) and enjoy it.


edit: hahaha the comment in that vid "Don't forget to support Metallica (most important - buy their CDs, do not download them)!"

[Ghouls_Night]

HENRY ROLLINS OPINION ON WHAT IS AND ISN'T "SELLING OUT"

I am sure you have had the experience of watching television and snapping to attention when you hear a familiar song by one of your favorite small of fame bands as the backdrop for an automobile commercial. Perhaps you have thought to yourself, "That's so fucking weak, what a bunch of sellouts. I hate their guts!" I get letters from people expressing their outrage that they heard the music of The Stooges, The Ramones, The Buzzcocks, or The Fall in an ad and I understand their anger and sense of loss as they figure yet another of their well-kept secrets has just become part of the corporate structure and the band is nothing more than the lap dogs of the man, the very man they were supposed to be sticking it to in every waking moment. These bands are not being co-opted or selling out at all. Selling out is when you make the record you are told make instead of the one you want to make. I wonder if it ever occurred to these people that the reason the music of these interesting and alternative bands is being recruited is because their fans are now the ones calling the shots. We have arrived! Of course the ad is trying to sell you something and by using a band you like, attempting to gain your confidence by exploiting the band's integrity for a commercial end. So what? You're not a fuckin' moron are ya? You see through that, don't ya? What would you rather hear, Iggy and The Teddybears doing I'm A Punk Rocker in a car ad or enduring some generic background music? I thought so. Do you have any idea what some of these bands went through to make that music? The fact that there might be some money for them all these years later is great. You think that paycheck is in any way a slight to their integrity? Are you fucking kidding me? Pay them. Pay them double. Pay them now. It's about fuckin' time.


I agree...

[Guy Incognito]

^ (y). the line is crossed when you do the advert and appear in the advert when you already make pots of money.imo.

[Guy Incognito]

Do people like Ozzy,Rev Run and Flava flav count for their cringy descents into reality tv?

just sitting here and runs house is on.

ozzy = no, i think it happened outof something else and they took an opportunity and took the piss a bit. and got out before it got totally stale.

run and flav = yes, they use the programs to sell and runs house is virtually an advert. Russell simmons is all over it, the whole family has a clothes line!

[RobMoney$]

HENRY ROLLINS OPINION ON WHAT IS AND ISN'T "SELLING OUT"

I am sure you have had the experience of watching television and snapping to attention when you hear a familiar song by one of your favorite small of fame bands as the backdrop for an automobile commercial. Perhaps you have thought to yourself, "That's so fucking weak, what a bunch of sellouts. I hate their guts!" I get letters from people expressing their outrage that they heard the music of The Stooges, The Ramones, The Buzzcocks, or The Fall in an ad and I understand their anger and sense of loss as they figure yet another of their well-kept secrets has just become part of the corporate structure and the band is nothing more than the lap dogs of the man, the very man they were supposed to be sticking it to in every waking moment. These bands are not being co-opted or selling out at all. Selling out is when you make the record you are told make instead of the one you want to make. I wonder if it ever occurred to these people that the reason the music of these interesting and alternative bands is being recruited is because their fans are now the ones calling the shots. We have arrived! Of course the ad is trying to sell you something and by using a band you like, attempting to gain your confidence by exploiting the band's integrity for a commercial end. So what? You're not a fuckin' moron are ya? You see through that, don't ya? What would you rather hear, Iggy and The Teddybears doing I'm A Punk Rocker in a car ad or enduring some generic background music? I thought so. Do you have any idea what some of these bands went through to make that music? The fact that there might be some money for them all these years later is great. You think that paycheck is in any way a slight to their integrity? Are you fucking kidding me? Pay them. Pay them double. Pay them now. It's about fuckin' time.


I agree...

Yeah, I think Henry Rollins is a tool, but we seem to hold the same opinion on this.

[BangBangBunny]

Does MTV qualify as a "modern musical act"?

Peace,
BBB