Krock Show

Discussion regarding Jane's Addiction news and associated projects
Message
Author
Hokahey
Site Admin
Posts: 5518
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:51 pm

Re: Krock Show

#51 Post by Hokahey » Thu Dec 15, 2011 2:32 pm

Pete being so likable would make it easier to root for them to do well too. Make it easier to digest purchasing tickets etc.

Enron
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2011 2:01 am

Re: Krock Show

#52 Post by Enron » Thu Dec 15, 2011 3:50 pm

Perry simply cannot perform Janes songs anymore.

What he needs are songs that accent his current voice. Like GGU. PF hasn't pulled off Ain't No Right in years.....

User avatar
Deconstruction
Posts: 379
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:57 pm

Re: Krock Show

#53 Post by Deconstruction » Thu Dec 15, 2011 8:11 pm

Enron wrote:Perry simply cannot perform Janes songs anymore.

What he needs are songs that accent his current voice. Like GGU. PF hasn't pulled off Ain't No Right in years.....
Maybe if they renamed it "Ain't No Site" he'd put more passion into it.

CaseyContrarian
Posts: 1035
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 4:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Krock Show

#54 Post by CaseyContrarian » Fri Dec 16, 2011 5:16 am

intertwoven wrote:
Tyler Durden wrote:I would be more than happy if they never played this song ever again.
Somebody start a petition. Or maybe we could pool our money.. I'm sure for the right price they could be persuaded to retire the song.

Perhaps we could get a corporation to sponsor the song's retirement. I'd sign up for a MasterCard if there was a promotion somehow linked to that song not being performed. I'd sign a long Verizon contract if it meant "Jane Says" wouldn't be played anymore. The band is sitting on a goldmine here!!
Sofa King funny. And true.

User avatar
Diabolik
Posts: 511
Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2011 11:00 pm

Re: Krock Show

#55 Post by Diabolik » Fri Dec 16, 2011 6:49 am

I get the feeling Perry just dosent like Janes Addiction. He uses it to make money, and I'm sure he's proud of it on some level. But I'm sure he resents that this is the only thing that most anyone cares about. It shows in the performances and the general lack of any direction. It's there to make money when need be.

TGEA looks more and more like an excuse to keep the name alive. Half an album with an outsider, and half an album with a journey man bass player that didn't stick around... Anything to just simply have a product . Having a CD I'm sure helps book big festivals and tours...without it the offers are probably much less and few and far between.

The more I think about it, Perry's apathy in the performances and such just make me realize he resents having to drag out the corpse of the band over and over and over again.

I bet if he did P4P it would be a 180 degree difference. That at least is HIS own thing. Think he values it more.

ragdoll
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 1:59 pm

Re: Krock Show

#56 Post by ragdoll » Fri Dec 16, 2011 6:56 am

Six7Six7 wrote:1. Pete deserves to play big shows with big paydays
yeah just not with Jane's
Six7Six7 wrote: 2. Lance Herbstrong isn't exactly tearing up the charts...
they are a live party band...they actually do very well and always play to a packed room or festival
Six7Six7 wrote: 3. ...Either are his solo albums
Pete does not charge for his honesty. Pete does not write music to sell to the masses. Pete's songs are not your typical radio written composition.Pete writes and records in one sitting.
Pete's solo music is filled with love and wisdom. Words to heal and literally change the world!! Maybe just by one soul at a time but it is solid art. It is deep if you are looking to dig deep into life. Pete's solo music makes an impact that last.

I echo everything kv has said!

leave Pete out of Jane's. It shouldn't even be a option. Pete loves Perry and the guys but Pete is his own animal.
Porno For Pyros is very sacred to Pete, it should never be exploited. It is a treasure for few to see and appreciate.
As much as I love both bands with every drop of blood in my body and as much as I love all the members I would NEVER want the two to combined. They both deserve to be special in their own way :heart:

User avatar
Matz
Posts: 3958
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 2:58 am
Location: Denmark

Re: Krock Show

#57 Post by Matz » Fri Dec 16, 2011 7:52 am

ragdoll wrote:
Six7Six7 wrote:
As much as I love both bands with every drop of blood in my body and as much as I love all the members I would NEVER want the two to combined. They both deserve to be special in their own way :heart:
I agree, and I hope they don't do a reunion, leave it alone, untarnished as someone said regarding this a while ago.

User avatar
SR
Posts: 7913
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 12:56 pm

Re: Krock Show

#58 Post by SR » Fri Dec 16, 2011 8:06 am

ragdoll wrote:leave Pete out of Jane's. It shouldn't even be a option. Pete loves Perry and the guys but Pete is his own animal.
Porno For Pyros is very sacred to Pete, it should never be exploited:
Are you saying Jane's is being or has been exploited?

ragdoll
Posts: 132
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2011 1:59 pm

Re: Krock Show

#59 Post by ragdoll » Fri Dec 16, 2011 8:30 am

SR wrote:
ragdoll wrote:leave Pete out of Jane's. It shouldn't even be a option. Pete loves Perry and the guys but Pete is his own animal.
Porno For Pyros is very sacred to Pete, it should never be exploited:
Are you saying Jane's is being or has been exploited?
yeah, Id say I think there have been times where Jane's has been exploited and I really think it falls on the management not the band.

User avatar
JOEinPHX
Posts: 6708
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:55 pm
Location: The Sea

Re: Krock Show

#60 Post by JOEinPHX » Fri Dec 16, 2011 8:36 am

i can't wait to see what we're all saying in 10 years. :lol:

Tyler Durden

Re: Krock Show

#61 Post by Tyler Durden » Fri Dec 16, 2011 8:48 am

Six7Six7 wrote:i can't wait to see what we're all saying in 10 years. :lol:
Nuno and Stephen were on fire last night! I miss the days of when Perry only relied on a backing track; he can't even lip sync well.

P.S. I bought the Rhino remasters of Nothing's Shocking and Ritual on iTunes today. Perry having Chaney re-record all of Eric's bass lines is an all time low for this band. :essence:

User avatar
SR
Posts: 7913
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 12:56 pm

Re: Krock Show

#62 Post by SR » Fri Dec 16, 2011 8:57 am

Tyler Durden wrote: Perry having Chaney re-record all of Eric's bass lines is an all time low for this band. :essence:
Are you serious? Did he really have this done? He is such a small, small man. :bored:

User avatar
Matz
Posts: 3958
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 2:58 am
Location: Denmark

Re: Krock Show

#63 Post by Matz » Fri Dec 16, 2011 9:02 am

:lol: I believe that was a joke

User avatar
Matz
Posts: 3958
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 2:58 am
Location: Denmark

Re: Krock Show

#64 Post by Matz » Fri Dec 16, 2011 9:03 am

Tyler Durden wrote:
Six7Six7 wrote:i can't wait to see what we're all saying in 10 years. :lol:
Nuno and Stephen were on fire last night! I miss the days of when Perry only relied on a backing track; he can't even lip sync well.

P.S. I bought the Rhino remasters of Nothing's Shocking and Ritual on iTunes today. Perry having Chaney re-record all of Eric's bass lines is an all time low for this band. :essence:
:lol: nice

User avatar
SR
Posts: 7913
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 12:56 pm

Re: Krock Show

#65 Post by SR » Fri Dec 16, 2011 9:06 am

Matz wrote::lol: I believe that was a joke
:dunce: Good, jokes on me too then.

I'm no intellectual property or copyright expert, but I can see fathom him doing this to lift the financial obligation to EA...even partially....which of course speaks volumes of what I think of the man. :nod:

User avatar
JOEinPHX
Posts: 6708
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:55 pm
Location: The Sea

Re: Krock Show

#66 Post by JOEinPHX » Fri Dec 16, 2011 9:27 am

i don't know if they could actually do it.

It's not like Ozzy's band that were just hired guns for the album and Ozzy was the one with the record deal.

Eric signed on the dotted line with the rest of the band for that album.

CaseyContrarian
Posts: 1035
Joined: Sat Aug 06, 2011 4:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Krock Show

#67 Post by CaseyContrarian » Sat Dec 17, 2011 9:47 am

Six7Six7 wrote:i don't know if they could actually do it.

It's not like Ozzy's band that were just hired guns for the album and Ozzy was the one with the record deal.

Eric signed on the dotted line with the rest of the band for that album.
It's not the record deal that matters -- it's the publishing. Perry could never do a re-record as long as EA controls some part of the composition copyrights.

User avatar
JOEinPHX
Posts: 6708
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:55 pm
Location: The Sea

Re: Krock Show

#68 Post by JOEinPHX » Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:03 am

Boom. Solved.

Good to know.

But wait... how did Perry get away with using Jane's songs for PFP? And for Kettle Whistle?

User avatar
Pandemonium
Posts: 5725
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:18 pm

Re: Krock Show

#69 Post by Pandemonium » Sat Dec 17, 2011 10:09 am

CaseyContrarian wrote:
Six7Six7 wrote:i don't know if they could actually do it.

It's not like Ozzy's band that were just hired guns for the album and Ozzy was the one with the record deal.

Eric signed on the dotted line with the rest of the band for that album.
It's not the record deal that matters -- it's the publishing. Perry could never do a re-record as long as EA controls some part of the composition copyrights.
Well, he could, but Eric would still collect publishing royalties. He would lose performance royalties. The current situation with Janes vs Ozzy's (original) solo band is actually a bit more similar than you think. Although everyone in Ozzy's original "Blizzard of Ozz" band was a "hired gun," they also all participated in writing and performing those tunes and had joint publishing. Ozzy owns the brand name and copyright, but the original band members who wrote the music together still share publishing royalties even if they likely don't have a vote how the classic songs are used (or abused) in say, car commercials.

I don't know the details of how Perry owns a majority stake in the "Janes" brand these days but he theoretically pull the same stunt which would have the same effect on Eric or anyone else in the band he decided to replace. Eric would still get publishing *and* performance royalties from airplay/use of the original songs but he would not get performance (he'd still get publishing) royalties from newly re-recorded versions. Anyone in the band (or not, such as a cover band) who moves on to their next band can play the songs live but they (legally) have to pay whatever the small royalty to ASCAP who distributes the fee to the proper artists responsible for creating the song.

On this topic, Axl Rose re-recorded the entire Appetite For Destruction album around 2001 to cut off performance royalties from his former bandmates but for whatever reasons, the album was never released.

Hokahey
Site Admin
Posts: 5518
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 3:51 pm

Re: Krock Show

#70 Post by Hokahey » Sat Dec 17, 2011 3:53 pm

Six7Six7 wrote:Boom. Solved.

Good to know.

But wait... how did Perry get away with using Jane's songs for PFP? And for Kettle Whistle?

I believe in the Xiola interview he mentioned things like that and how legally he could put up a fight but chose not to. He still gets paid for it (songs he recorded being published) but the fight would just be about the use of the songs.

Post Reply