Ed Kowalczyk = Douche bag and you can't deny it..... Options

[Bremang]

Chad Taylor said it as well.

...That's why I wrote "They both said they would get the band back together"

This post has been edited by Bremang: Sep 11 2013, 5:37 pm

[Bremang]

I am not sure how people can see otherwise that is currently Eds decision not to be involved with Live. Chad said so much in an interview very recently. CCP wanted Ed to come back and he refused.

Ed said he wanted to get Live together. So did Chad. It didn't happen. Ed was fired. It seems Ed doesn't want to be with Live but I do not believe CCP wanted Ed back throughout the lawsuits.

[Bremang]

to further diminish the Live brand because they moved forward when he decided that he didn't want to be in the band is irrational.

both sides are cashing in on the feud now that they're separated. He's trying to bolster his own act by bring Live down, authenticating himself by saying he wrote 90% of Live's music. Perfect timing with the controversial comments, his new album just dropped.

[Bremang]

I'm not hinging on Chad's words either. Both sides (and even the album liners) indicate that post TDTH Ed had the brunt of the creative control. It's not really up for interpretation or debate that there was more collaboration early on and less collaboration later on. I do believe Chad when he said he blames himself for letting that happen, I think he regrets it, but by the same token Ed either let it happen or wanted it to happen as well.

Taking the whole scenario in, it seems quite obvious that there were creative differences and as a result of that Ed felt that he could do what he was doing in Live, as a solo artist. As a solo artist you don't have to debate or collude with anyone against your will. If you want to make a Christian Pop song, you can.

It's at this point, a very obvious point, that Ed wanted to just do his thing (I don't fault him for this), but to do his thing it required leaving the band and getting into a position where you have autonomous creative authority (solo artist).

CCP, having lost their lead singer (the facts leading up to such are irrelevant regarding this point), decided to move forward instead of just retiring the band. It seems that the Pro-Ed camp, and Ed himself, would have preferred they just retired or waited in the shadows for some time in the future, if ever, that Ed would want to be in Live again. I ask you, or anyone, is that fair to them? Should Ed have the authority or capability to force all of Live into retirement?

First Lakini's Juice said that the outbursts about Ed being a thief were immature, and that they shouldn't have been made public. And then you said that its common sense that the allegations against Ed being a thief were true. And I said that we don't have enough evidence for us to have any proof of of whether the allegations are legally legitimate, so it definitely requires more than common sense. So I think you weren't following the convo, since you're back to just saying that CCCP should continue Live, which neither Lakini or I expressly disagreed with.

This post has been edited by Bremang: Sep 11 2013, 6:05 pm

[Bremang]

Actually....Lakini and I were not saying CCCP shouldn't continue with Live, we're just saying if any hypocrisy exists, it would be that CCCP are honoring Ed's' songs even though they think he's a disgrace.

And I'm saying that we don't have enough evidence for us to have any proof of of whether the allegations of Ed being a thief are legally legitimate (which was the outbursts Lakini was referring to). It definitely requires more than common sense to know the truth to that claim.

[Bremang]

No one even cares who they are without him. Truth. sorry.

Not true. See Summerland tour and FB page.

This post has been edited by Bremang: Sep 11 2013, 6:14 pm

[PurdueSteve]

okay , so you don't feel they are using the name wrongfully?

No, per agreements made by all 4, each member holds 25%. As I indicated, legally they own and control the band. To suggest otherwise would be to undermine what little property rights people have in this world.

You don't think they are failing fans by letting them think ed is still the singer?

I'm mixed on this, I mean it's not something you make a highway banner for. How do you exactly let the fans know? I'd say effectively all of the serious fans know, it's only the casuals that don't, and honestly I could give two shits about casuals. They can't recall lyrics beyond Lightning Crashes and I alone, so what does it matter? The guys are still introducing him as Chris, if a fan doesn't know the original singer's name was Ed and not Chris, does it really matter?

So if they can all use thier 25 percent why couldn't he?

I'm not completely sure how this works with regards to Ed's 25%. It's control, think democracy or majority rule. 75% voted to continue Live and bring Chris on board kind of thing. I don't think CCP could have just dissolved Ed's 25% stake without at least buying him out. It's irrelevant so long as CCP stay in tune with each other, as they collectively represent 75%.

If you really think hard about it. As i said, he doesn't even have to put "formerly of live" anymore at all.

According to who? You? He doesn't control the brand, and those that do control the brand have said he cannot use the brand in the manner it which it was being used?

People know who he is. no one knows who shinn is and they are kind of cheating him as well. It was all just a waste of time in the end.

This contradicts the rest of your post. If everyone knows who Ed is, and no one knows who Shinn is, then everyone would know that it wasn't Ed up on stage at a Live concert. So which was it? Both sides of the coin can't be true simultaneously.

The truth, the casuals, which make up the majority of the population, don't have the slightest clue who Ed or Chris is. In fact, they probably don't ever even think of the band Live or the 90s songs that made them popular until they hear a local advertisement on the radio that plays the songs and says the show is coming to town.

[PurdueSteve]

First Lakini's Juice said that the outbursts about Ed being a thief were immature, and that they shouldn't have been made public. And then you said that its common sense that the allegations against Ed being a thief were true. And I said that we don't have enough evidence for us to have any proof of of whether the allegations are legally legitimate, so it definitely requires more than common sense. So I think you weren't following the convo, since you're back to just saying that CCCP should continue Live, which neither Lakini or I expressly disagreed with.

I wasn't talking about the allegations. I was talking about the demise of Live. Set all of the allegations and acts of bad friendship aside and look at the business/brand specifics. In that scope, there are enough facts and obvious deductions that plot enough of the story.

If you want to talk about specific allegations, according to Ed's own filed response, he admitted to (as CCP indicated) to having had paid them a portion of what was owed regarding their cut. Part of CCP's claim was getting the rest of that portion. That's about as cut and dry as you can get without being the teller that deposits the check.

[SJN1279]

If you want to talk about specific allegations, according to Ed's own filed response, he admitted to (as CCP indicated) to having had paid them a portion of what was owed regarding their cut. Part of CCP's claim was getting the rest of that portion. That's about as cut and dry as you can get without being the teller that deposits the check.

If it was cut and dry, why did the court process not end the way they wanted it to?

[PurdueSteve]

Actually....Lakini and I were not saying CCCP shouldn't continue with Live, we're just saying if any hypocrisy exists, it would be that CCCP are honoring Ed's' songs even though they think he's a disgrace.

Ed's songs? I wasn't aware that they were exclusively Ed's songs. It's not totally possible that any of the guys are proud of their contributions. Last time I checked they weren't playing Heaven. They were playing songs from early in the career wherein they had creative input.

[PurdueSteve]

If it was cut and dry, why did the court process not end the way they wanted it to?

How do you know it didn't? There was more involved in the case than just this one specific item. I'd say, as we've gone over in the past, that odds are high Ed did end up paying them for the balance of which he already began payments on.

The rest of the things they sued on, like his acoustic bootlegs, who knows. Maybe they did or didn't get paid for that kind of stuff.

Unless you have specifics and know that CCP didn't win on a single of the multiple points, you're, as usual, talking out your ass.

[Bremang]

I wasn't talking about the allegations. I was talking about the demise of Live. Set all of the allegations and acts of bad friendship aside and look at the business/brand specifics. In that scope, there are enough facts and obvious deductions that plot enough of the story.

If you want to talk about specific allegations, according to Ed's own filed response, he admitted to (as CCP indicated) to having had paid them a portion of what was owed regarding their cut. Part of CCP's claim was getting the rest of that portion. That's about as cut and dry as you can get without being the teller that deposits the check.

Well Lakini was referring to the outbursts, which were the allegations, which we should specify if we want to be on the same page...and you were responding directly to Lakini's comment but not talking about the allegations, so therein lies the confusion. I know you were saying Ed should let CCP keep Live, but Lakini wasn't against that, though he did make respond to your comment about hypocrisy, which you still haven't explained. Still the subject matter in the allegations definitely are a part of the demise of live, cause it ultimately brought about the legal breakup. The business and brand specifics are also related to the allegations, so I don't know what you're discerning there. Also, just cause Ed paid money doesn't mean that the rest was immediately payable or that Ed even owed money. That sort of thing is unavailable to us.

[Bremang]

If it was cut and dry, why did the court process not end the way they wanted it to?

How do you know it didn't end the way they wanted?

[Bremang]

Ed's songs? I wasn't aware that they were exclusively Ed's songs. It's not totally possible that any of the guys are proud of their contributions. Last time I checked they weren't playing Heaven. They were playing songs from early in the career wherein they had creative input.

If a songwriter thinks that another artists playing of the songs he wrote is less authentic, I don't see the hypocrisy. That's his opinion of whats most important about the songs. Without CCP the style of Live wouldn't be as great, but without Ed the songs don't even exist.

[mattyeagles]

If a songwriter thinks that another artists playing of the songs he wrote is less authentic, I don't see the hypocrisy. That's his opinion of whats most important about the songs. Without CCP the style of Live wouldn't be as great, but without Ed the songs don't even exist.

Nailed it!