Metallica backs file sharing

[BillMason]

Interesting article on the Inq - discuss:

http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...s-file-sharing

[daofktr]

metallica has followed the money, and that is all. they are now officially doubletalking whores.
...not that there's anything wrong with that...

of course, this 'whorse' we're beating has died long ago. best we just bury it instead of getting new sticks.

[artistanbul]

[sarcastro83]

well good for Metallica... now if they'd only put out a record that was worth paying any attention to, I might be more excited for their newfound veiws on the file sharing phenomenon.

In short, all I can say is HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...

[BillMason]

Also entertaining are some of the comments left by readers at the bottom of the article.

[i_got_a_mohawk]

What a joke, I remember when they started off the whole thing against Napster. Bunch of tossers.

Here's a bit of history!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIuR5TNyL8Y

[Bad Brains]

Metallica is still around?

Today file sharing is even easier than it was back in the Napster days. It's much better bit torrenting entire albums, instead of taking the time to look up every song.

[Traver]

What a stupid and biased article. Metallica was against their music being downloaded illegally and without their consent. If they put their own albums up for download on their own website on their own terms, people downloading it would be doing so legally and on Metallica's terms.

I fail to see how Metallica are taking a U turn.

[Depth_Charge]

Metallica started out in the early 80's supporting fans bootlegging their shows and spreading their music and the word about them to build their product and market share.

Metallica then they got involved in the anti-sharing movement vs Napster not so long ago, to protect their product and market share.

And now Metallica are encouraging legal file sharing.

I think at each of these stages of the bands life, their motives and the environment they worked in was different, and they tried adapting best they could.

IMO, Metallica did more damage to their reputation releasing their documentaries allowing fans to see them acting like douche's towards each other than they did by trying to protect their product, both the good and the bad ones.

Just wanted to add I also remember a video where, through the Make A Wish Foundation, they visited a cancer patient in hospital and they jammed The Four Horsemen with him and hung out and that always sticks in my mind whenever I go to diss them to my friends or on forums

[mothmonsterman]

eh, they still suck.

[Spector_Ray]

They can still kiss my @$$.

[Depth_Charge]

Yeah I'm sure they'll be lining up too

[Spector_Ray]

Originally Posted by Depth_Charge

Yeah I'm sure they'll be lining up too

I think you need a drink.

[CHILDISHGAMBINO]

So they're jumping on the we don't need a label band wagon eh? Well at least it's not 2 or 3 years too late like when they jumped on the alternative band wagon(at the same time jumping the shark)and dressed up like Soundgarden wannabes. To me it doesn't matter how or where they sell their new album. I hope it doesn't but it's going to suck just like the last 4. I have a theory that every album from the Black Album on increases in suck factor exponentially ie: Load is at least twice as terrible as the Black Album, Reload is four times as bad, followed by St. Anger which approaches a level of sheer awfulness that it is rivaled only by the film Star Wars Episode II or possibly the band Complete. In fact I think I'd rather listen to Complete at least I know not to get my hopes up and I can have a good laugh. Still love the old Metallica stuff though.

[Spector_Ray]

Originally Posted by CHILDISHGAMBINO

So they're jumping on the we don't need a label band wagon eh? Well at least it's not 2 or 3 years too late like when they jumped on the alternative band wagon(at the same time jumping the shark)and dressed up like Soundgarden wannabes. To me it doesn't matter how or where they sell their new album. I hope it doesn't but it's going to suck just like the last 4. I have a theory that every album from the Black Album on increases in suck factor exponentially ie: Load is at least twice as terrible as the Black Album, Reload is four times as bad, followed by St. Anger which approaches a level of sheer awfulness that it is rivaled only by the film Star Wars Episode II or possibly the band Complete. In fact I think I'd rather listen to Complete at least I know not to get my hopes up and I can have a good laugh. Still love the old Metallica stuff though.

+1
I think it's suckiness is topped off by James trying to sing like Steve Perry nowadays.

[CHILDISHGAMBINO]

Originally Posted by Spector_Ray

+1
I think it's suckiness is topped off by James trying to sing like Steve Perry nowadays.

Haven't heard the Steve Perry vocals but I do think that if James ever quit they could easily replace him with The Macho Man Randy Savage. If you couldn't see him I bet no one would notice the difference. On the other side of the coin I'd really like to hear James say "Go for a Slim Jim!"