Right? She took Feraggamo (spelling?) Shoes and didnt want to wear hiking shoes.... what is the difference between that and these girls??

Add to that the ruling to Marvin Gaye’s family against Robin Thicke and Pharrell for ‘Blurred Lines’ for having too much of the sample ‘feel.’ There goes the right to homage.

Actually, having done some time in the ad/promo biz, that’s just the CYA talk. The promoter knew they didn’t have the rights and ran with it anyway, probably after checking off the record with higher ups. It’s not like they used some obscure 90s never-was in their promo.

R.E.M. always refused to let their stuff be used in ads, and they got asked a lot.

I never took the original version of Girls very seriously, as it was so obviously over the top.

He’s the short one. He’s married to Kathleen Hanna.

I think this is one of the benefits of the Beastie Boys being older and wiser - they worked really fucking hard and for a really long time and they are entitled to payment of their work. As is EVERY artist. Why is it so hard for people to see artists and musicians as people that are doing a job?

Sampling made completely new music out of its sources, and usually changed the emotional slant of the sounds used as well. Suing over samples never sat right with me because there was never a solid argument that a hip hop/r&b track using, say, the drums from Lou Donaldson’s “Ode to Billy Joe”, was in any way a…

Actually, Adam Yaunch requested on his deathbed that the surviving members wouldn’t allow their music to be used in ads. They make plenty of money, they just don't allow huge ass corporations to profit off their music.

Worst yet, there’s a growing movement of people that believe you shouldn’t earn anything from what you create and that magically and communistically if you create it should be instantly shared and reaappropriated to how any idiot thinks it should be.

It wasn’t a commercial. It was a promotional video used at Monster-sponsored events, and the guy who produced the video for them misled the promoter into believing the rights were secured.

Pretentious hipster bullpucky. There is no shame in getting paid for you work. If artists want to make some cash leasing their music out to advertisements, then more power to them.

There seems to be an amazing proportion of people out there in the world who think that if something is on the internet, it is free for anyone to use however they like. The concept of copyright, ownership, or (heaven forbid) paying for content of any kind, is almost non-existent in certain quarters.

Also...because Lilly said what I did first and better. Isn’t it also a little refreshing to see a bunch of musicians who don’t see themselves first and foremost as purveyors of a brand? Who turn down what’s probably a ton of cash so as not to commodify what they did?

That’s weird. Because I always thought the Beastie Boys were known to let suits

Where I am from, the guy who gets the garter doesn’t only get to dance with the woman who catched the bouquet. Oh, no! He gets to put the goddamn garter ON HER while everyone in the crowd shouts, “Higher! HIGHER!!”

When I was really little, I was the flowergirl in one of my aunts’ weddings, and I caught the bouquet. I ended up dancing with a friend of my uncle’s who was probably in his mid-20s, but he was a good sport about it. I stood on his shoes and he spun me around, and I had a blast.

The garter shit is tacky and a weird tradition “Here, have an intimate piece of my new wife’s lingerie! Who wants it?? Whoooo wants it?” Because in my country men fight to catch the garter. And then the guy that gets the garter dances with the girl who gets the bouquet. Gross and embarrassing.

The garter thing, or the groom getting wasted at his own wedding??

Why are we still doing this shit?