Drake v Lamar.....?

[Beedster]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cje08q8qnzqo

 

I have my own theory as to the why and the what here but it potentially sets an interesting precedent?

[hiram.k.hackenbacker]

Well that was a thoroughly depressing read, the final nail in the coffin being we have to suffer Lamar during the Super Bowl half time show.

[Cato]

When I saw the headline yesterday I assumed the lawsuit would be over the contents of Lemar's 'diss track' in particular calling Drake a paedophile.

 

I was quite suprised to find out it that it's alleged chart rigging that's offended the Drake camp.

[Jean-Luc Pickguard]

I'd bang their heads together and tell them to stop bickering.

[Cato]

15 minutes ago, Jean-Luc Pickguard said:

I'd bang their heads together and tell them to stop bickering.

 

I suspect most of these things start out as calculated publicity stunts, though these two gentlemen seem to have got more than a little carried away.

[Beedster]

37 minutes ago, Cato said:

When I saw the headline yesterday I assumed the lawsuit would be over the contents of Lemar's 'diss track' in particular calling Drake a paedophile.

 

I was quite suprised to find out it that it's alleged chart rigging that's offended the Drake camp.

 

Exactly.....

 

In the old days they used to write (often quite clever) diss tracks that made them both shitloads of cash. Fast forwards and Drake's suing his own record company - essentially because his diss tracks sold less well than Lamar's diss tracks - so he (Drake), and possibly both, are about to lose shitloads of cash? 

 

But interesting that the allaged slander/libel (never sure which is which), isn;t the subject of the case......?

[BigRedX]

59 minutes ago, Beedster said:

But interesting that the allaged slander/libel (never sure which is which), isn;t the subject of the case......?

 

It is now in a separate action.

[Doctor J]

This sounds good. I might sue everyone else on Spotify for my economic harm.

 

“Streaming is a zero-sum game,” they argue. “Every time a song breaks through, it means another artist does not.” As a result, they claim, Drake suffered “economic harm” at Lamar’s expense.

 

 

[cetera]

Who?

[Beedster]

48 minutes ago, Doctor J said:

This sounds good. I might sue everyone else on Spotify for my economic harm.

 

“Streaming is a zero-sum game,” they argue. “Every time a song breaks through, it means another artist does not.” As a result, they claim, Drake suffered “economic harm” at Lamar’s expense.

 

 

 

It's why I didn't get famous, zero sum game between me and bloody Pastorius  

[tauzero]

As Nick Drake has been dead for years, why would he be bothered by Mark Lamar?

[russ.c]

How can this be? Neither are classed as actual music IMO, it's just noise.

 

Or maybe I'm getting old.

[Beedster]

1 hour ago, russ.c said:

How can this be? Neither are classed as actual music IMO, it's just noise.

 

Or maybe I'm getting old.

 

I'm more interested in the fact that a performer is suing his own record company for the fact that he doesn't sell as much as one of his rivals. Whether we like the music in question or not, it strikes me as another nail in the coffin of the music industry. Each new nail results in an increasingly risk-averse music industry, and an increase in the promotion of safe, generic, offend nobody & please everybody, dull music (more Ed Sheeran essentially)  

[russ.c]

I think as long as that risk only pertains to rappers who diss each other, that should leave enough room for plenty other enjoyable genres of music to be promoted. I don't think the music industry is ever going to be averse to promoting rock, funk, edm, folk, blues, reggae, etc. and perhaps even jazz and classical, but I can take or leave the latter two...

 

But it's an interesting debate for sure.

[russ.c]

Ed who?

[mike257]

5 hours ago, russ.c said:

How can this be? Neither are classed as actual music IMO, it's just noise.

 

Or maybe I'm getting old.

 

Yes, yes you are. 

[silverfoxnik]

20 hours ago, Beedster said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cje08q8qnzqo

 

I have my own theory as to the why and the what here but it potentially sets an interesting precedent?

Hi Chris, 

 

I don't know about the legal ramifications of this and it's potential long-term impact on the music business, but the very fact that there's such a thing as 'diss tracks' in this world makes me despair at the state we're in. 

 

Compare and contrast The Beatles and Brian Wilson spurring each other on to make even greater music back in the 60s, to this pair of overrated, under-talented (if there is such a word) ego-fuelled twats! 

 

Instead of arguing about how big their reproductive organs are, they should be working together to take on monolithic record companies and Spotify to get fairer deals for all music creators. 

 

This sums up just about everything that's wrong with today's music industry and some of the artists that exist in it.... 

[Leonard Smalls]

2 minutes ago, silverfoxnik said:

the very fact that there's such a thing as 'diss tracks' in this world makes me despair at the state we're in. 

 There are some good 'uns!

When RATM released "Killing in the name of" with it's iconic "F you I won't do what you tell me" refrain those wags at Suicidal HQ came up with this (though they were, as ever, just a bit tongue in cheek which sort of runs against the self-obsessed norm of some "talents"):

 

 

[Beedster]

9 hours ago, silverfoxnik said:

Hi Chris, 

 

I don't know about the legal ramifications of this and it's potential long-term impact on the music business, but the very fact that there's such a thing as 'diss tracks' in this world makes me despair at the state we're in. 

 

Compare and contrast The Beatles and Brian Wilson spurring each other on to make even greater music back in the 60s, to this pair of overrated, under-talented (if there is such a word) ego-fuelled twats! 

 

Instead of arguing about how big their reproductive organs are, they should be working together to take on monolithic record companies and Spotify to get fairer deals for all music creators. 

 

This sums up just about everything that's wrong with today's music industry and some of the artists that exist in it.... 

 

Mmm, I like the sentiment but disagree with it being 'wrong' Nik. Creativity is sparked by emotion, and emotion is sparked by both positive and negative events. I think back through the history of music and I see diss tracks everywhere, at least tracks in which an artist has a transparent pop at another person quite openly. Possibly the most famous is 'You're So Vain' by Carly Simon (poor old Warren Beatty), but Neil Young v Lynyrd Skynyrd in the Alabama/Sweet Home Alabama debate, there's Silly Love Songs by Macca that was a direct response to a line in a Lennon track (and apparently Lennon & McCartney were at it a lot in relation to each other in their post-Beatles repertoire). Morrissey and Pet Shop Boys weren't averse to the occasional dig either.

 

I've just read this book and it makes it very clear that the verbal/lyrical competition between sound systems in Jamaica and UK was a key player in the development of reggae.

 

 

In short, it's use in rap/hip-hop is not new, in fact it's just normal human expression via music, and if it helped Lennon & McCartney, Neil Young, and reggae, I'm fine with it 👍

[mike257]

11 hours ago, silverfoxnik said:

Hi Chris, 

 

I don't know about the legal ramifications of this and it's potential long-term impact on the music business, but the very fact that there's such a thing as 'diss tracks' in this world makes me despair at the state we're in. 

 

Compare and contrast The Beatles and Brian Wilson spurring each other on to make even greater music back in the 60s, to this pair of overrated, under-talented (if there is such a word) ego-fuelled twats! 

 

Instead of arguing about how big their reproductive organs are, they should be working together to take on monolithic record companies and Spotify to get fairer deals for all music creators. 

 

This sums up just about everything that's wrong with today's music industry and some of the artists that exist in it.... 

 

I'm pretty sure Lennon's "How Do You Sleep" is the original diss track, aimed squarely at his ex-bandmate!

[Beedster]

5 minutes ago, mike257 said:

 

I'm pretty sure Lennon's "How Do You Sleep" is the original diss track, aimed squarely at his ex-bandmate!

I suspect if we look at the lyrics of a lot of songs, undercurrents re bandmates or rival bands will appear 👍

[silverfoxnik]

4 hours ago, Beedster said:

 

Mmm, I like the sentiment but disagree with it being 'wrong' Nik. Creativity is sparked by emotion, and emotion is sparked by both positive and negative events. I think back through the history of music and I see diss tracks everywhere, at least tracks in which an artist has a transparent pop at another person quite openly. Possibly the most famous is 'You're So Vain' by Carly Simon (poor old Warren Beatty), but Neil Young v Lynyrd Skynyrd in the Alabama/Sweet Home Alabama debate, there's Silly Love Songs by Macca that was a direct response to a line in a Lennon track (and apparently Lennon & McCartney were at it a lot in relation to each other in their post-Beatles repertoire). Morrissey and Pet Shop Boys weren't averse to the occasional dig either.

 

I've just read this book and it makes it very clear that the verbal/lyrical competition between sound systems in Jamaica and UK was a key player in the development of reggae.

 

 

In short, it's use in rap/hip-hop is not new, in fact it's just normal human expression via music, and if it helped Lennon & McCartney, Neil Young, and reggae, I'm fine with it 👍

I get that Chris and its not that diss tracks, or their earlier equivalents, are wrong per se, I'm just saying that I personally don't like all that stuff... 

 

My use of the word 'wrong' was in a different context, i.e., I think it's wrong that artists are more interested in spending their time squabbling with each other so publicly, instead of doing something more productive with the leverage / public platform they both have...for example, taking on Spotify who are ripping off so many musicians and content creators.

 

Just my idealistic 2p worth... 

[Beedster]

7 hours ago, silverfoxnik said:

I get that Chris and its not that diss tracks, or their earlier equivalents, are wrong per se, I'm just saying that I personally don't like all that stuff... 

 

My use of the word 'wrong' was in a different context, i.e., I think it's wrong that artists are more interested in spending their time squabbling with each other so publicly, instead of doing something more productive with the leverage / public platform they both have...for example, taking on Spotify who are ripping off so many musicians and content creators.

 

Just my idealistic 2p worth... 

 

Can’t disagree with any of that Nik 👍

[Skybone]

I think that the two gentlemen in question should grow up, and realise that they are no longer inhabitants of the school playground.

[Beedster]

34 minutes ago, Skybone said:

I think that the two gentlemen in question should grow up, and realise that they are no longer inhabitants of the school playground.

 

Interesting and not wrong, but competition/diss tracks are part and parcel of hop-hop culture, and at times are really creative and entertaining (probably not in the most recent example of this case). I guess the reason I posted this is that I wonder what sort of precedent a legal decision might set for retrospective legal action by artists regarding previous examples recorded at a time at which artists generally saw 'dissing' as part and parcel of the recording game and simply shrugged it off or recorded a repost (Young and Skynyrd being great examples)?