• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Metallica is "at it" again!

I don't see why you guys hold that against them. It's their name. And it's not like it's a common name, either. When someone says "Metallica" I think of the band, not some too-expensive-for-not-enough, snobby vanilla spread. I would rather keep it this way. They'll most likely win this one too. *yay!*
 
I'd call that a pretty blatant rip-off.

Think of the trouble they'd get in if it was N'SYNC perfume or some such nonsense. They (the department stores) are just trying to cash in on the name Metallica.

PH
😀
 
Uh they are capitalists just like everyone else. Your a capitalist. I am too. Anyone who says they are not, is just afraid to admit it.

They make music, and people listen to it. I wont stop listening to a bands music because they make money off of it. Thats retarded. People sell art, music is an art, it is sold.

Grow up.
 
I don't agree, purplehayes. "Metallica" is not that creative of a name, I can easily imagine several parties coming up with it, and besides, the other products that used that name were unrelated to the rock music scene. I'm just sick of hearing about these garage-rockin' yuckos.
 
Bastard, Bastard give what I'm after...money money.... hear my laughter laughter I laugh all the way to the bank.....[then guitar riff]
 
It IS their name, yes. The company could have recognized that naming their smelling-salt that might have brought this upon them, just like Victoria'sSecret did. Also, with Metallica's retraction letter, the company refused to rename the skank-nasty product. So with that, Metallica kicked it up a notch. *kudos* to em.
 
I'm going to make a video game, and call it "Goin' Metallica"

The object will be go into large businesses and begin shooting people for ripping you off, kinda like goin' postal? hehe

I wonder if I'll get sued?

😉 Really, I think it's coincidental and unfortunate. I think the band hurt their rep badly with the napster deal, but this is too much. I hope they kill those retailers in court. A total rip-off of their name they worked many years to get.
 
The Napster thing was good for them, too. They were, perhaps, losing money on those potential customers who would get MP3's from people instead of purchasing the original album.

They haven't done anything wrong or stupid yet, just defended themselves as a whole.
 
Agreed killbat. I thought the only way that you could sue is if it was in the same category, such as you can have something called windows but it cant be dealing with computers. They will lose more than likely because it is a non competitive market.
 
metallica isn't that an original name as far as I'm concerned, so I can see it as being reasonable that the perfume company didn't even really think about the band when naming their product. Let's see you have the word "metallic" meaning having the properties of metal, then you add an "a" Not a whole lot of originality for all the fuss over the name.
 
It doesnt matter how "creative" the name is. It is copyrighted. I could make a band called Horse, copyright it (assuming horse is not already copyrighted) and if someone used it on their product without my permission or license, i could sue the hell out of them.
 
Why are they seeking punitive damages? They haven't made enough money already? I guess if it was for lawyer fees then maybe that's understandable, but if they're seeking damages just cause they used their name, these guys are lamer than I thought. I used to love metallica(until the stupid black album came out), but now they're just a pawn of the record industry(who is the real evil behind all of this). These stupid @ssholes maybe saving themselves a few dollars every year by trying to stop people from downloading their music, but they're helping the record industry keeps it's deathgrip and hurting all the small bands who haven't made it yet. They just have to accept that we're not going to pay $18 for a cd that takes $3 to produce. I'm sure that you have all read Courtney Love's speech being the well informed anandtecher's that you are, but if you haven't, I highly recommend reading it. I wasn't a fan of hers until I read this. Screw Metallica, the stupid greedy bastards. I wish Fugazi could meet them(and beat them) in a back ally and teach them what a band who cares about music is really like.
 
seph your mixing copyright and trademark. You copyright a song, you trademark a name. So if this perfume company did a cover of a metallica song and sold it, it'd be copyright infringement.
 
This is actually a safe bet for Metallica. They aren't going to piss off fans of their music as they did due to the Napster case. They're just going to piss off rich bitches who like that perfume.
 
I don't know, hearing the words "Metallica" and "lawsuit" still has the ability to piss me off. They should just change the name to Mettalica instead and put a disclaimer on it saying "This product has no relation to the money grubbing, @ss puppets who pretend to make music but now have no more ideas, so feel the need to bleed every last cent off of the good music they put out many years ago".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top