There's been drama!
Related item:
Related item:
Last edited:
There's a huge power imbalance at play though. Negotiating power, and knowledge as well since labels will have big teams of lawyers seeing that the terms are as favourable to themselves as possible.This stuff happens a lot. But whilst I have some sympathy for the artists, at the end of the day they decided to sign whatever contract was put in front of them and willingly gave up their freedom.
I don't think he knows Donnie blocked Alain and Gus from Instagram, since according to Alain himself they are on good terms.And of course Morrissey knows none of this?
Hold on a second, we don't know that Morrissey breached any part of his contract by doing that.No. You did, insinuating that the whole drama is caused by Central posts that MIGHT HAVE BEEN poster by the tour manager - when clearly, openly, publicly Morrissey himself breached the contract by announcing MC on stage. It’s on video ffs.
There surely are dangers of collusion as you describe here. But on the other hand, were dealing with Morrissey here, no stranger to the way that the industry works and no stranger to fallouts with other labels – in very recent history – for nebulous or undisclosed reasons. That doesn't completely negate the gravity of the potential power imbalance that you're talking about here, but someone with Morse's experience should have a little bit more deftness and skill in navigating the challenges of institutions whose perceived prestige and monetary and logistical support he clearly still values and wants.There's a huge power imbalance at play though. Negotiating power, and knowledge as well since labels will have big teams of lawyers seeing that the terms are as favourable to themselves as possible.
Yeah I don't think we disagree here.There surely are dangers of collusion as you describe here. But on the other hand, were dealing with Morrissey here, no stranger to the way that the industry works and no stranger to fallouts with other labels – in very recent history – for nebulous or undisclosed reasons. That doesn't completely negate the gravity of the potential power imbalance that you're talking about here, but someone with Morse's experience should have a little bit more deftness and skill in navigating the challenges of institutions whose perceived prestige and monetary and logistical support he clearly still values and wants.
The only thing I remember him saying about it seemed to indicate the label just got annoyed/upset at him for some reason. Not sure he "chose" to walk away from it. I could be misremembering though.Put everything about capitol and Bonfire of Teenagers aside and there are still at least two albums available for him to enter into contracts with any other interested party about. In the case of World Peace Is None of Your Business, there's been no real explanation as to why things soured on his and with that relationship. As far as contemporary releases go, there was a lot of marketing push for that one, preorder bonuses tailored to the kinds of things that the hard-core Morrissey fans would like – signed or duplicated lyric sheets, that oddball but somehow fitting spoken word music videos, single b-sides and a deluxe album that all of us seem to think as some real quality songwriting to it, some of his best arguably.
There was the orange exclusive hot topic vinyl. There was a lot is my point and it's not clear to me why he chose to walk away from the contract and have that comeback album stripped from shelves mere weeks after its release
In the spirit of fairness and accuracy, it seems (according to Morrissey) that Steve Barrett was the one that terminated the contract – as per a statement True-to-You. https://www.billboard.com/pro/morrissey-harvest-timeline/#!The only thing I remember him saying about it seemed to indicate the label just got annoyed/upset at him for some reason. Not sure he "chose" to walk away from it. I could be misremembering though.
A lot of good points - hasn't Morrissey complained about promotion (or lack thereof) going back to The Smiths?I wonder if Morrissey was ever satisfied with any promotional efforts across his many labels going back to the 2000'S four fee all feel that they were fundamentally flawed and somewhat intentionally ruinou. Because they didn't stay true to his letter perfect priorities and promotional vision/
I don't remember that. Sometimes, as in the case of The Smiths/Rough Trade - he's right. I have a harder time believing Harvest/BMG/Capitol were all negligent and nefarious. I think harvest's promotional campaign for world peace was pretty good if not at least understandable. Low In High School got some singles at Deluxe Edition, some TV appearances radio promotion and at Deluxe Edition.A lot of good points - hasn't Morrissey complained about promotion (or lack thereof) going back to The Smiths?
I can't recall the specifics but didn't someone suggest that Morrissey was also upset with Harvest for not being able to get him the musical guest spot on Saturday Night Live?
This is true, however these artists sign away their rights as they are trying to harness that big label power. Sometimes it works for them, sometimes it doesn't. But it's ultimately their choice to sign when they could have just released material themselves and kept all their creative control.There's a huge power imbalance at play though. Negotiating power, and knowledge as well since labels will have big teams of lawyers seeing that the terms are as favourable to themselves as possible.
We do know. See the first tweet. Morrissey announcing publicly - both via his website and during a gig - MC’s involvement when he was asked not to do.I don't think he knows Donnie blocked Alain and Gus from Instagram, since according to Alain himself they are on good terms.
Hold on a second, we don't know that Morrissey breached any part of his contract by doing that.
No. You did, insinuating that the whole drama is caused by Central posts that MIGHT HAVE BEEN poster by the tour manager - when clearly, openly, publicly Morrissey himself breached the contract by announcing MC on stage. It’s on video ffs.
Hold on a second, we don't know that Morrissey breached any part of his contract by doing that.
We do know. See the first tweet. Morrissey announcing publicly - both via his website and during a gig - MC’s involvement when he was asked not to do.
I think Crissit is right – we don't have direct evidence of a formal contract breach – and how could we, it's not as if anyone released the contracts or memorandums of understanding – and I highly doubt we will.However, ticked off Scott by his perceptions of Moz's behavior would probably be a bridge too far, releasing the contract would be a bridge too far, even for himDo we know? Crisstti is asking you about a contract breach. Because you said he breached his contract because his announcement.
I didn’t see anything about that in the first tweet ….
View attachment 97583
I think Crissit is right – we don't have direct evidence of a formal contract breach – and how could we, it's not as if anyone released the contracts or memorandums of understanding – and I highly doubt we will.However, ticked off Scott by his perceptions of Moz's behavior would probably be a bridge too far, releasing the contract would be a bridge too far, even for him
However, based on my reading of the tweet in question you went ahead and did what you were asked not to do means at the very least Morrissey was aware of either a label or management request. Even if it were simply a management request that Moz didn't put any particular importance it seems that he was at least aware of it before announcing/posting
It does seem a bit stupid – if that's the sticking point – that having her uncredited (maybe" but still obviously present makes some is any tangibly different than M announcing it on stage, but as the others pointed out previously that's the kind of wink-wink nod -nod ridiculousness that has been standard operating procedure in the record industry for more than Moz's lifetime/career, and surely during it
Theoretically once Miley's current record contract ends, she could be credited on Veronica?I'm not at all convinced anyone would have heard those distorted background vocals and known it was Miley. Granted the fact that he posted a picture of her during the recording of BOT might have made us suspect it.
Reading the tweet it sounds like Miley's label and management would have been OK with her appearing uncredited on BOT. Of course that was not good enough for Morrissey as he wanted the perceived 700% benefit of having her as a featured artist on BOT.
It seems a bit pedantic to argue whether Morrissey committed "formal contract breach." In the end, does it matter? He can't use Veronica with Miley on it. Capitol will not release BOT. Even if Morrissey buys it back he still can't use the version of Veronica he wanted.
You've got to wonder... had he played things a bit better he might have got almost everything he wanted.
She did indeed do the vocals when she was unsigned but I assume as Veronica would've been a new release while she's signed to Columbia, when it was recorded was irrelevant.One would think so.
But I was surprised that Columbia had a say, considering ( and I could be wrong about this) didn’t she do those Veronica vocals before she signed a contract with Columbia?
She did indeed do the vocals when she was unsigned but I assume as Veronica would've been a new release while she's signed to Columbia, when it was recorded was irrelevant.
She did indeed do the vocals when she was unsigned but I assume as Veronica would've been a new release while she's signed to Columbia, when it was recorded was irrelevant.
I'm not at all convinced anyone would have heard those distorted background vocals and known it was Miley. Granted the fact that he posted a picture of her during the recording of BOT might have made us suspect it.
Reading the tweet it sounds like Miley's label and management would have been OK with her appearing uncredited on BOT. Of course that was not good enough for Morrissey as he wanted the perceived 700% benefit of having her as a featured artist on BOT.
It seems a bit pedantic to argue whether Morrissey committed "formal contract breach." In the end, does it matter? He can't use Veronica with Miley on it. Capitol will not release BOT. Even if Morrissey buys it back he still can't use the version of Veronica he wanted.
You've got to wonder... had he played things a bit better he might have got almost everything he wanted.
I honestly don't care HOW it's released as long as we hear it by next year. I need to hear Ha Ha Harlem and My Funeral... hell, the entire album, someway somehow soon or I'm gonna lose my few remaining marbles.In that case. I wonder if Capitol is actually going to wait out her contract so they could release BoT. That’s if Morrissey doesn’t sooner buy it back, and release it himself. Which he fuucking should.