Guns N' Roses were forced to cancel a show in Brazil on Sunday after freak wind damaged the venue.
The rock veterans were due to appear at the Apoteose Stadium in Rio De Janeiro, as part of their ongoing tour of South America.
The decision followed heavy rains and winds, which caused serious structural problems to the stage.
Axl Rose posted a message online confirming the drama and revealing plans to reschedule the concert.
"Fortunately (there) are no fatalities but there are injuries from both our camp and Rio crews the extent of which is not known at present," he said on Twitter.
The news follows the band's decision to pull another gig in the early hours of Friday in Sao Paulo, prompting furious scenes amongst fans.
"The audience got angry and started to mount the stage, and fight and destroy everything. It was wild," explained a source.
"There were fights everywhere, on the dance floor, in the bathrooms, outside the club. Crazy. I guess the free drinks didn't help," they said of the private show.
GUNS N' ROSES - WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE (LIVE IN BRAZIL 1991)
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Pink Floyd Win EMI Court Battle
Pink Floyd have won their court case against EMI, who are now likely to be forced to pay a big fine relating to back-dated royalties.
In a ruling today a judge at the High Court in London ruled that EMI were wrong to sell individual tracks from the band’s back catalogue on online stores such as iTunes. The band had signed a contract in 1998 that meant that EMI could not release songs independent of their album.
EMI contested that the contract only related to physical releases but the High Court today agreed with the band who said that the contract signed prior to the download boom covered online sales.
EMI have been told to pay £40,000 to the band with a further fine to be decided by the judge at a later date. The label is also now no longer allowed to sell individual Floyd tracks without the band’s permission.
BBC
In a ruling today a judge at the High Court in London ruled that EMI were wrong to sell individual tracks from the band’s back catalogue on online stores such as iTunes. The band had signed a contract in 1998 that meant that EMI could not release songs independent of their album.
EMI contested that the contract only related to physical releases but the High Court today agreed with the band who said that the contract signed prior to the download boom covered online sales.
EMI have been told to pay £40,000 to the band with a further fine to be decided by the judge at a later date. The label is also now no longer allowed to sell individual Floyd tracks without the band’s permission.
BBC
Pink Floyd await EMI dispute ruling
AP
A High Court judge is due to rule in a dispute between rock band Pink Floyd and record label EMI.
The band, whose Dark Side Of The Moon is one of the best-selling albums in music history, is challenging the legality of EMI's decision to make individual tracks from their albums available online.
The case also concerns how online royalties are to be calculated.
Robert Howe QC, appearing for the group, said earlier this week an agreement negotiated in the 1990s contained a clause that prohibited single track downloads without express consent.
It banned what was referred to as "unbundling" - the selling of record tracks, either physically or online - "other than in their original configuration".
EMI argued that the prohibition "applies only to the physical product and doesn't apply online".
Mr Howe told Sir Andrew Morritt, Chancellor of the High Court, the band was well known for producing "seamless" pieces of music on albums and "wanted to retain artistic control".
The legal dispute is focused on an agreement reached several years before the download market was launched in the UK by Apple through the iTunes Music Store in 2004.
Mr Howe said both parties had been faced at the time the agreement was drawn up with a whole new world of potential exploitation of music "and quite simply they didn't know how that would work out".
He said it would have been "a very odd result" if members of Pink Floyd were able to control exactly how their music was sold as a physical product but there was "a free-for-all with no limitation on online distribution".
A High Court judge is due to rule in a dispute between rock band Pink Floyd and record label EMI.
The band, whose Dark Side Of The Moon is one of the best-selling albums in music history, is challenging the legality of EMI's decision to make individual tracks from their albums available online.
The case also concerns how online royalties are to be calculated.
Robert Howe QC, appearing for the group, said earlier this week an agreement negotiated in the 1990s contained a clause that prohibited single track downloads without express consent.
It banned what was referred to as "unbundling" - the selling of record tracks, either physically or online - "other than in their original configuration".
EMI argued that the prohibition "applies only to the physical product and doesn't apply online".
Mr Howe told Sir Andrew Morritt, Chancellor of the High Court, the band was well known for producing "seamless" pieces of music on albums and "wanted to retain artistic control".
The legal dispute is focused on an agreement reached several years before the download market was launched in the UK by Apple through the iTunes Music Store in 2004.
Mr Howe said both parties had been faced at the time the agreement was drawn up with a whole new world of potential exploitation of music "and quite simply they didn't know how that would work out".
He said it would have been "a very odd result" if members of Pink Floyd were able to control exactly how their music was sold as a physical product but there was "a free-for-all with no limitation on online distribution".
Monday, March 08, 2010
Keith Talks New Material / Tour Possibility
Speaking to Rolling Stone Magazine Richards revealed that the band were yet to formalise any plans but he thinks that they still have a future in the studio.
“There’s no definite plans, but I can’t see any of them [the rest of the band] stopping,” he says. “I wouldn’t be surprised if we did some recording later this year.”
But the guitarist admits he’s uncertain whether any sort of tour would follow. “I don’t know how the rest of them feel about roadwork at the moment,” he tells Rolling Stone. “Maybe we’ll search for a different way for the Stones to go back on the road. Maybe not the football stadiums anymore. Maybe something different. You can’t go around there in lemon-yellow tights forever.”
He also revealed that recent reports that he had sobered up were wide of the mark.
“Listen, the rumours of my sobriety are greatly exaggerated,” he says. “And we’ll leave it at that.”
The Rolling Stones re-issue their classic Exile On Main Street on 17 May.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
