Deleted
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2011 17:56:14 GMT -5
Brought to my attention by twitter-folks.
Billboard's "Year in Arrests."http://www.billboard.com/#/photogalleries/the-year-in-arrests-2011-1005706202.story
Somewhere someone who doesn't follow Adam closely is saying, "That's the most gorgeous mugshot I've ever seen."
|
|
|
|
Post by gelly14 on Dec 29, 2011 18:00:18 GMT -5
Yes but this is not a mugshot like the other pics. |
|
|
|
Post by gelly14 on Dec 29, 2011 18:03:24 GMT -5
It's very late and I just noticed it. Going to bed. Good night guys.  |
|
|
|
Post by chunkeymonkey81 on Dec 29, 2011 18:04:39 GMT -5
Ok this helps a bit me thinks with the issue regarding who he needed permission from to use the bass line:
THE BASICS
Before we drill into the six copyrights, it’s important to have the basics. There are two copyrights to every recorded song – a © and a ℗.
This is Dolly Parton. She wrote the song "I Will Always Love You".
This is Columbia Records. Columbia Records hires Whitney Houston to sing Dolly’s song "I Will Always Love You"
This is the recording of Dolly’s song "I Will Always Love You" that Columbia Records hired Whitney to sing. The actual recording of Whitney singing Dolly’s song is controlled by Columbia Records – this is the ℗ - it stands for "Phonogram"
The song itself is owned by Dolly, this is the © - it stands for "Copyright" Many of the copyright laws benefit the songwriter (Dolly) more than the performer (Whitney).
If you are both the songwriter and the performer, it’s important to imagine yourself split in two.
For example, Dolly wrote the song. Columbia Records then makes a deal with Dolly Parton (the Performer) to sing Dolly Parton’s (the Songwriter’s) song. Dolly Parton (Performer) could make no money while Dolly Parton (Songwriter) could make a bundle due to copyright laws.
The basic concept behind the right to reproduce is this: under federal law, if you write a song, no one else can reproduce it without paying the songwriter(s) a "Mechanical Royalty." The Mechanical Royalty rate is set by the government, and defines the maximum amount that must be paid to the songwriter for each reproduction.
More here:http://www.tunecore.com/guides/sixrights
So if I am getting this right, I am thinking Adam would need both permission from the record company--EMI right?--and the song writer. No? Soooo if that's right, and I am not lawyer here lol, that would mean that Deacon, who was the writer, would have granted him permission? Right? And if he really is as critical and protective of his/Queen's material then this is a pretty big compliment to let him sample the song...right?
|
|
zeldon
Member
Posts: 409
Location:
|
Post by zeldon on Dec 29, 2011 18:05:49 GMT -5
RE: Year in Arrests. Frankly the majority of them look like hoodlums and yes, the shot they included of AFL was one of my favs.
I still think it's an amazing miracle no one shot vid or took photos outside the club that night in Helsinki. Just amazing. There would have been all kinds of vid if it had happened in WeHo.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Location:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2011 18:06:16 GMT -5
oh, i know it's not - it's sorta funny to me, though, the thought of someone clicking through that, seeing so many mug shots, and then ADAM - looking Grammy nite gorgeous.
|
|
|
|
Post by LindaG23 on Dec 29, 2011 18:10:27 GMT -5
Ok this helps a bit me thinks with the issue regarding who he needed permission from to use the bass line: THE BASICS Before we drill into the six copyrights, it’s important to have the basics. There are two copyrights to every recorded song – a © and a ℗.This is Dolly Parton. She wrote the song "I Will Always Love You". This is Columbia Records. Columbia Records hires Whitney Houston to sing Dolly’s song "I Will Always Love You" This is the recording of Dolly’s song "I Will Always Love You" that Columbia Records hired Whitney to sing. The actual recording of Whitney singing Dolly’s song is controlled by Columbia Records – this is the ℗ - it stands for "Phonogram" The song itself is owned by Dolly, this is the © - it stands for "Copyright" Many of the copyright laws benefit the songwriter (Dolly) more than the performer (Whitney).
If you are both the songwriter and the performer, it’s important to imagine yourself split in two. For example, Dolly wrote the song. Columbia Records then makes a deal with Dolly Parton (the Performer) to sing Dolly Parton’s (the Songwriter’s) song. Dolly Parton (Performer) could make no money while Dolly Parton (Songwriter) could make a bundle due to copyright laws. The basic concept behind the right to reproduce is this: under federal law, if you write a song, no one else can reproduce it without paying the songwriter(s) a "Mechanical Royalty." The Mechanical Royalty rate is set by the government, and defines the maximum amount that must be paid to the songwriter for each reproduction.
More here:http://www.tunecore.com/guides/sixrights So if I am getting this right, I am thinking Adam would need both permission from the record company--EMI right?--and the song writer. No? Soooo if that's right, and I am not lawyer here lol, that would mean that Deacon, who was the writer, would have granted him permission? Right? And if he really is as critical and protective of his/Queen's material then this is a pretty big compliment to let him sample the song...right? Since you want to believe this and it pleases me to believe this, I am going to go with ... RIGHT !!!! |
|
|
|
Post by chunkeymonkey81 on Dec 29, 2011 18:15:39 GMT -5
Ok this helps a bit me thinks with the issue regarding who he needed permission from to use the bass line: THE BASICS Before we drill into the six copyrights, it’s important to have the basics. There are two copyrights to every recorded song – a © and a ℗.This is Dolly Parton. She wrote the song "I Will Always Love You". This is Columbia Records. Columbia Records hires Whitney Houston to sing Dolly’s song "I Will Always Love You" This is the recording of Dolly’s song "I Will Always Love You" that Columbia Records hired Whitney to sing. The actual recording of Whitney singing Dolly’s song is controlled by Columbia Records – this is the ℗ - it stands for "Phonogram" The song itself is owned by Dolly, this is the © - it stands for "Copyright" Many of the copyright laws benefit the songwriter (Dolly) more than the performer (Whitney).
If you are both the songwriter and the performer, it’s important to imagine yourself split in two. For example, Dolly wrote the song. Columbia Records then makes a deal with Dolly Parton (the Performer) to sing Dolly Parton’s (the Songwriter’s) song. Dolly Parton (Performer) could make no money while Dolly Parton (Songwriter) could make a bundle due to copyright laws. The basic concept behind the right to reproduce is this: under federal law, if you write a song, no one else can reproduce it without paying the songwriter(s) a "Mechanical Royalty." The Mechanical Royalty rate is set by the government, and defines the maximum amount that must be paid to the songwriter for each reproduction.
More here:http://www.tunecore.com/guides/sixrights So if I am getting this right, I am thinking Adam would need both permission from the record company--EMI right?--and the song writer. No? Soooo if that's right, and I am not lawyer here lol, that would mean that Deacon, who was the writer, would have granted him permission? Right? And if he really is as critical and protective of his/Queen's material then this is a pretty big compliment to let him sample the song...right? Since you want to believe this and it pleases me to believe this, I am going to go with ... RIGHT !!!! LOL I don't WANT to believe this I am trying to figure out how it works. Deacon could have no say in this at all or still think Adam sux...lol...it's no skin off my teeth either way but I am trying to understand *shrugs* But no1currs lol so maybe I'll bring up bull semen =b |
|
FanOfTheMan
Member
Love Our Guy!
Posts: 4,205
Location:
|
Post by FanOfTheMan on Dec 29, 2011 18:23:27 GMT -5
I HATE THIS POLL!!!! >:( This, to me, is infuriating. "21 of the Queerest Songs..." What the hell! It belittles and marginalizes so-called "queer" artists. Why don't they have a like poll for "straight" artists. Adam didn't sing "queer" songs. He sang beautiful songs. He is not "sexy queer." He is sexy. period. Adam.Is.An.Artist. period. He.Is.Gay.period. Damn! Artists are artists. *smokecomingfromears*  Doesn't this bother anyone else? :-/ |
|
|
|
Post by reihmer on Dec 29, 2011 18:28:40 GMT -5
|
|
