by Mike Masnick
Tue, Jun 10th 2008 7:56am
While Metallica has been trying to appear more internet friendly these days, it sounds like the band still has a lot to learn. Representatives of the band invited a bunch of music journalists and bloggers to a "listening party" last week to hear tracks off its upcoming album. Attendees weren't asked to sign any kind of embargo or non-disclosure form. So, as you might expect, some of them went home and wrote up quick reviews based on what they heard. And that was the point at which Metallica representatives went around demanding that these early reviewers take down the reviews, claiming that the songs they heard were an early mix of the album, rather than the final cut. If that's the case, then they shouldn't have played it for journalists -- or they should have at least required a non-disclosure agreement. To go around forcing journalists to remove their reviews of music played for them by a Metallica representative is simply ridiculous. Not only that, but it wasn't even as if the reviews were bad. Last time we wrote about Metallica, we noted that the band was still suffering from the hit its reputation took in 2000 when it sued Napster and various colleges. Pulling stunts like this only makes sure that its reputation will continue to slide.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- If Google Shouldn't Apply EU's 'Right To Be Forgotten' Everywhere, Why Should It Apply US DMCA Takedowns Globally?
- Of All The Ways The DMCA Takedown Process Can Be Responsibly Used, These Are None Of Them
- One Direction Offers Remix Competition, Then Sony/Soundcloud Punish The Entrants As Copyright Infringers
- Italian Court Realizes Ridiculousness Of Fining TripAdvisor Over User Reviews
- Cord Cutting Is About To Punch ESPN Squarely In The Face