Jump to content

NFL asks teams not to play R&R Part 2


Recommended Posts

Here's the original thread when he got busted

 

Today's article - Glitter Still Guilty

 

As news of Glitter's failed appeal spread, in the United States, the National Football League moved to have teams stop playing the singer's greatest hit, the stadium-friendly anthem "Rock and Roll Part 2," in the upcoming season.

 

"Most of the teams understand the reasons, and ultimately, it's their decision, but we encourage them not to play it," NFL spokesperson Brian McCarthy told E! Online. "In terms of the music that's played, pre-game or halftime, that's controlled by the teams, not the NFL."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that OJ Simpson is still in the Hall of Fame and on our Wall of Fame I seriously doubt that anyone will really consider Gary Glitter's off-stage activities when they pick music.  Does the NFL want anything with Pete Townsend banned as well?

709369[/snapback]

Besides....half the world won't even relate Gary Glitter to the song if they heard it. I don't see many (if any) teams pulling the song.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Besides....half the world won't even relate Gary Glitter to the song if they heard it. I don't see many (if any) teams pulling the song.

709377[/snapback]

 

It's not that anyone thinks of Gary Glitter when they hear the song, but rather that the man gets royalties every time that song is used. It's a rough PR move for a team to have to send money to an imprisioned child molester.

 

His situation is different than O.J. in that he was criminally convicted of a serious charge (lewd acts with 10 and 11 year old girls). No matter what you think of O.J. (I think he's guilty), in the eyes of the law he did not commit a criminal act (if he had been convicted I bet it would have had repercussions on his Hall/Wall status).

 

I'll also add that one of the only things people hate more than a murderer is a child molester, and that's what Glitter is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not that anyone thinks of Gary Glitter when they hear the song, but rather that the man gets royalties every time that song is used. It's a rough PR move for a team to have to send money to an imprisioned child molester.

 

His situation is different than O.J. in that he was criminally convicted of a serious charge (lewd acts with 10 and 11 year old girls). No matter what you think of O.J. (I think he's guilty), in the eyes of the law he did not commit a criminal act (if he had been convicted I bet it would have had repercussions on his Hall/Wall status).

 

I'll also add that one of the only things people hate more than a murderer is a child molester, and that's what Glitter is.

709419[/snapback]

If you are correct and he does own the rights to the song then I can understand the NFLs position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter what you think of O.J. (I think he's guilty), in the eyes of the law he did not commit a criminal act (if he had been convicted I bet it would have had repercussions on his Hall/Wall status).

709419[/snapback]

 

This makes me want to puke every time I hear it. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know OJ was guilty despite the verdict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NFL is a little late when it comes to this particular song. Gary Glitter's wrap sheet for child porn and even worse has been going on for at least 3 or 4 years now. This is just the latest disgusting act.

 

That all being said, the NFL becoming the moral watchdog of sports all of the sudden is just plain laughable. Stop worrying less about songs that are played and instead try to better deal with all of the turds playing in your own league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll also add that one of the only things people hate more than a murderer is a child molester, and that's what Glitter is.

709419[/snapback]

 

Rapists get the firing squad in Vietnam.

 

"Prosecutors did not have enough evidence to charge the 61-year-old Glitter with the more serious count of child rape, which carries a maximum penalty of death by firing squad"

 

http://www.eonline.com/News/Items/0,1,18093,00.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NFL is a little late when it comes to this particular song. Gary Glitter's wrap sheet for child porn and even worse has been going on for at least 3 or 4 years now. This is just the latest disgusting act.

 

That all being said, the NFL becoming the moral watchdog of sports all of the sudden is just plain laughable. Stop worrying less about songs that are played and instead try to better deal with all of the turds playing in your own league.

709453[/snapback]

 

It's all about the PR and teams having to pay money to a guy who is a convicted child molester - I'm not sure they're getting up on a moral high horse as much as they are trying to head off possible outrage and troubles.

 

Glitter's had a history of this stuff (they found kiddie porn on his computer when he took it to be reraired in the UK), but I'm not sure he was ever convicted of anything serious - he has been now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happens if someone played the song and refused to pay royalties (on the account the royalties were going to a fugitive)?

 

It's not like Glitter can come back to Los Angeles and sue.  And if he does, he gets busted and then a greater good is served.  Win-win, seems like.  :doh:

709461[/snapback]

 

Then it's a bigger issue with using unlicensed music for commercial purposes (which I believe is a violation of federal law) and you get ASCAP and the whole music/publishing industry after you. That's a huge s***tstorm to get into - far bigger than one cause by people pissed that a team cut a check to a child molester.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then it's a bigger issue with using unlicensed music for commercial purposes (which I believe is a violation of federal law) and you get ASCAP and the whole music/publishing industry after you. That's a huge s***tstorm to get into - far bigger than one cause by people pissed that a team cut a check to a child molester.

709469[/snapback]

 

Yeah. I didn't really think it would work. :doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then it's a bigger issue with using unlicensed music for commercial purposes (which I believe is a violation of federal law) and you get ASCAP and the whole music/publishing industry after you. That's a huge s***tstorm to get into - far bigger than one cause by people pissed that a team cut a check to a child molester.

709469[/snapback]

 

How does all this work? Does the NFL have to provide a list to ASCAP or RIAA of the songs played at the stadium, then the league or team is presented with a bill? Does anyone here have first-hand knowledge of this?

 

In MLB, most guys have a personal song played when they come up to bat. Seems like if there was some sort of payment to the artist, the system could be ripe for corruption (if the money was big enough, which it probably isn't).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...