No need to be rude you know, though I don't mind being called a tool. being a tool implies I am fantastic at taking the piss and bring pleasure to myself and others. You have brought sarcasm, I believe of the two I would choose pleasure so that works out well.
Now, I believe the problem here is that she said she wanted to hear it if she was going to judge it. She didn't make him record it, she made him record it if he wanted her approval. Massive difference, he was perfectly able to back out whenever he wanted to, no one made him do all this except himself. At any point he could have stopped and the whole reason he recorded it was to allow her to say yes or no.
Well she said no. well within her rights, all perfectly above board. He put it out in to the world anyway, perfectly within his rights, all perfectly above board too. The bit I don't like is that he makes it a personal policy not to release songs without approval, I don't think he'd have released this except to take a cheap shot at her and to remind her that asking her was a formality.
Well my problem is that he was playing by optional rules. You either ask people and respect that, or you tell them where to stick it and just do it. Saying they've got a say in it and then disregarding their say when you don't like it is just dishonourable. It's kind of like if I said you could tell me whether you wanted me to give you money but I will only accept 'no' as an answer. It's fair, legal and within rights but it's not nice. I wouldn't mind so much if he did it for a good reason because we all bend our morals for good causes now and again but he released it anyway because fuck her basically. He released it because he resented her saying he couldn't use her music when she'd made it clear she may say that and what's more he's give her the choice in the first place.
Just doesn't sit right is all, that's not a personality I'd trust. Probably heat of the moment but still.
