Lookout! in trouble after Green Day pull back catalogue

Capitalist bastards.

I'm with the man above me... I can't imagine them doing this without a good reason. Would be nice to know what that was...

If they aren't paying Royalties to Greenday they are very within their rights to challenge them and take their recordings elsewhere i think.

They weren't paying royalties to Avail or Screeching Weasel either who also pulled their records.

So clearly they just can't manage a business very well.

Pity because they've released some really good records!

Sellouts!

Capitalists!

Green Day are the least punk band ever to make "punk" music.

Here's what Larry said about the whole thing:

"The problem has been going on for a long time, and Green Day has been more than patient. It's about money, and also about bad faith. Lookout! has been failing to pay Green Day (and other bands) for years now, and apparently using the money instead to put out a series of terrible records that very few people wanted to buy. Gambling on new bands is part of what a record label does, but you don't do it with other people's money."

And before you can scream "greedy major label bastards," Livermore also defended the multi-platinum artists, saying: "Green Day could have taken their records away several years ago when Lookout! first breached their contract, but they were generous enough to allow Lookout! to keep licensing the records in hopes that the label would get back on its feet. No matter how rich a band is, they shouldn't be expected to subsidize a failing label forever, especially when that label isn't doing anything particularly worthwhile."

Hey, go here for a full article based on the above Lookout statements: http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/news/05-08/03.shtml#greenday

that is a pretty dumb thing to say!!!

Yes, Green Day have plenty of money already, but it's wrong to imply that they 'should' stay with Lookout! despite the fact that they aren't keeping up their side of the deal just because it's a label that's released some good records over the years. If they did, well that would be very nice of them and all, but I don't think it's something that should be expected of them.

its not like they need the money - does bono need to sue that woman because she robbed his hat? No, but he does, because he's a prick.

It's the principle of the thing - if someone robs your hat, you should have them surely? Otherwise it will send a message that you can get away with stealing the hats of the rich, and then chaos will follow. Seriously though?