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...
- Documents: The Domestic Email Collection Program The NSA 'Killed' In 2011 Was Actually Just Offshored
- France Responds To Paris Attacks By Rushing Through Internet Censorship Law
- YouTube Puts Some Monetary Weight Behind Fighting For Fair Use: Others Should Too
- Germany Wants To Define A Snippet As Seven Words Or Less; Doing So Is Likely To Breach Berne Convention
- MPAA Whacs A Few More Moles, Declares Premature Victory While Making Movie Fans Worse Off