Don't Download This Song

Weirdalover · Post by **Weirdalover** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 5:53 am

Look, the point is that Al has and will soon be recording music and he could nay will dish out the album. So I think we should be just happy for that. (note Al has had big gaps between his albums)

Post by **weirdojace** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 5:57 am

CatraDhtem @ Feb 1 2006, 10:20 PM wrote: It's possible that permission for the other parodies is still pending, so indicating just three songs could have been a sort of legal courtesy to those who have been approached, as if to say "We're not going to record the other parodies until we get the okay." Granted that seems a bit unlikely, but I'm just speculating.

...why didn't I think of that?

That's most likely it.

Post by **Kevbo1987** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:38 am

Those were all really excellent points, Greg. I agree with you that it wouldn't make much sense for Al to just sit on three parodies and a music video for an extended period of time. I like the theory that permission might not yet be secured for all of the parodies. Or maybe permission was rejected for one parody and Al is going with another idea instead. That's not very likely, but I'm just trying to point out a possibility.

Yankovic Farley · Post by **Yankovic Farley** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 8:00 am

We've been slowly tantalized by revealed album covers, so couldn't album information slowly be revealed by odd and somewhat confusing statements about recording dates? If we're being "nicely played with" as usual, then it's not hard to imagine that maybe saying only 3 songs will be recorded in the end of Feb. means 3 are already done and we're going to get treated to an album sooner than though or 3 will be recorded swiftly in the beginning of March as previously mentioned.

Hmmm, I guess the conspiracy theorist in me is just emerging to be hopeful of getting an Al album sooner.

Whatever the case, we know that we're being watched, as I just saw Bermuda on, and I'm sure he's loving our conspiracies.

CatraDhtem · Post by **CatraDhtem** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 9:18 am

Yankovic Farley @ Feb 2 2006, 01:00 AM wrote: If we're being "nicely played with" as usual, then it's not hard to imagine that maybe saying only 3 songs will be recorded in the end of Feb. means 3 are already done and we're going to get treated to an album sooner than though or 3 will be recorded swiftly in the beginning of March as previously mentioned.

That's certainly the best-case scenario, and it's indeed possible, but then I guess it would still leave open the question of singling out just three songs. One would kinda think that if it was a bit of playful misinformation just to tease us, then why not just keep it as a vague "the guys will be back in the studio soon" right up until the inevitable album cover pull-back tease?

I dunno...maybe the blurb was updated because of all the talk on here about a January studio date? I personally don't think the discussion on it ever got to the point where the record needed to be set straight as accurately as possible, but if it was merely for our benefit, then that was pretty cool. Now we just have slightly updated information to discuss to no end.

Post by **KnottyEmily** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 10:08 am

Weirdalover @ Feb 2 2006, 02:53 PM wrote: (note Al has had big gaps between his albums)

really? i hadn't noticed

Post by **Kevbo1987** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 5:36 pm

CatraDhtem @ Feb 2 2006, 02:18 AM wrote: That's certainly the best-case scenario, and it's indeed possible, but then I guess it would still leave open the question of singling out just three songs. One would kinda think that if it was a bit of playful misinformation just to tease us, then why not just keep it as a vague "the guys will be back in the studio soon" right up until the inevitable album cover pull-back tease?

I dunno...maybe the blurb was updated because of all the talk on here about a January studio date? I personally don't think the discussion on it ever got to the point where the record needed to be set straight as accurately as possible, but if it was merely for our benefit, then that was pretty cool. Now we just have slightly updated information to discuss to no end.

I agree, Greg. I think if Bermuda was just trying to mess with us, he wouldn't have said something so specific. You could be right that Bermuda just wanted to let us know not to get excited about a January recording date.

Post by **mewrio** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 4:31 am

Slightly OT, but is We Are the World out-of-print nowadays? Was it ever even released on CD? I've been looking everywhere and I've only found second hand copies of it.

There are a few reasons why I'm asking - firstly, I wouldn't mind being able to buy it if it's confirmed that Al's parodying it. But secondly, if it is OOP, why would Al even bother? There'd be few legal ways to listen to the original for those who haven't heard it before.

BTW, does anyone think that Al would ask permission from every single performer on the single first? How likely is it that they'd all say yes?

Post by **weird_el** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 4:42 am

Al doesn't have to ask permission from everyone involved. Lionel Richie and Michael Jackson wrote it, but I don't know who owns the rights to it now.

weirdalfan95 · Post by **weirdalfan95** » Sat Feb 18, 2006 4:42 am

Al doesn't ask from the performers... He asks the writers. So if they all wrote it, then he would need to ask them all.