Actually if you read the whole thing, it explains why he didn't include it on the album but why he was willing to release the song. I agree with him. They had him record it knowing what it would be and still snubbed it.MiracleOfSound said:
Lady Gaga blocks Weird Al parody...after considerable expense is spent recording it. (UPDATE)
- Thread starter tomtom94
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Maybe I'm not reading the sarcasm here, but Fair Use is how she got away with it with Madonna, and how Al would get away with it with her. He has a personal ethic not to sell it without permission, but it is perfectly within the law.MiracleOfSound said:
He's not making money off of it this way, but he did put effort into it, so why not share it?MiracleOfSound said:
Also keep in mind that he planned to have all the sales (had he published it commercially) donated to the Human Rights Campaign. He even promotes donations at the end of the YouTube video.
I'm sorry, do the italics mean you are a bona-fide music video creator around here? ... that's just disappointing.
Wtf if Weird Al decides to make a parody of one of your songs it is a sign that you have made it as a musician
That tmz post makes it sound pretty weird. Apparently she didn't block it at all, it was her manager being a dick. The article said she hasn't even heard it. I suggest checking it out, I have a feeling the whole story isn't out yet.
Why do you find that disappointing?Nuke_em_05 said:
I take it by your tone you are not an artist or musician, and have never experienced how it feels to have someone take something you poured your heart and time into creating and just use it any way they want whether you like it or not.
I'm not saying Gaga was right... I think she should grow a sense of humour. But he should still respect her wish not to have it used like that.
He was more or less asking permission to include it on his album, out of respect. This is because he stands to make a lot of money off of his album and the original artist would see none of that because of Fair Use laws. But since he recorded the song at his own expense of money and time at her demand only to have it shot down, he's still entitled to release it to his fans since he did put the effort in.MiracleOfSound said:
His moral code refers to how he makes his income by parodying other musicians.
But from the sounds of that update, I'd be tempted to say that this might fall on Lady GaGa's manager. Of course, I take the quotes about her being a fan of Weird Al's with a grain of salt, but if she's just trying to save face then it's a bit late.
That's what I was thinking! You'd think it'd be an honor to have Weird Al parody one of your songs. I mean, really. He's been at it for how friggin' long?Donbett1974 said:
But geez. Reading his post kinda bummed me out. Going to all that bloody work, jumping through hoops, just to have her say no. Dang.
Wow. It's like she was always going to say no, but hated Weird Al so much she made him waste time and money before shooting him down, because she's just that much of a *****.
I'd like to announce here and now, in this post that most likely no-one and certainly not Al will ever read, that in the unlikely event of my getting a career in music, he has standing permission to parody whatever songs of mine he wants to.
Because seriously, Weird Al's freaking awesome.
I'd like to announce here and now, in this post that most likely no-one and certainly not Al will ever read, that in the unlikely event of my getting a career in music, he has standing permission to parody whatever songs of mine he wants to.
Because seriously, Weird Al's freaking awesome.
[sarcasm]You can read tone? I didn't even tag it or anything.[/sarcasm].MiracleOfSound said:
[matter-of-fact]What I found disappointing was what seemed to be an ignorance on fair use by a "professional" music video creator.[/matter-of-fact]
[factually]I am not an artist or musician, this is true.[/factually]
[personal conjecture]I can, however, presuppose that, should Al's side of the story be believed (and it looks like more is unfolding as I type); he went through the cost and effort to produce a song on good faith that she would approve it (having already read the lyrics and hopefully having familiarity with her own [used loosely here] tune). She then denied it. So he respected that and did not publish it commercially. However, he had already gone through the effort of making it, so he published it for free. As any artist who had put effort into creating something would want to share it.[/personal conjecture]
That TMZ article was pretty enlightening....(I cannot believe I just typed that). I kinda had a feeling Gaga wouldn't have a problem with this, she does have a sense of humor...I think, but that is quite the dick move on her producer's part. Did the producer think she wouldn't even hear about this? Come on now.
Captcha: oupula announces.....well alright, but what is it announcing?
Captcha: oupula announces.....well alright, but what is it announcing?
Well, my understanding is he's releasing it this way so he dosen't get paid, but he's still letting it be heard because he put a lot of work into it.MiracleOfSound said:
Seeing as her song is almost the same as Express Yourself by Madonna...she shouldn't even be able to say anything, since she's basically a baby Madonna.
