John Key’s DVD: Take 2

20 comments on “John Key’s DVD: Take 2 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. IrishBill 1

   4 April 2008 at 10:35 am

   I was interested to see Colin saying talks are still going between National and EMI to determine a remedy for the last copyright theft.
2. Steve Pierson 2

   4 April 2008 at 10:44 am

   Yeah, me too. I was trying to working out what kind of sum would be typical – but you’re the one with the media industry contacts, Irish, any idea?

   Also, such a breach of copyright is illegal under criminal law. Didn’t hear about any Police investigation though. I suppose the compliant would have to be made by the copyright holder to get anywhere.

   Graeme Edgeler are you out there? Do you know about criminal law around copyright/piracy?
3. mike 3

   4 April 2008 at 11:02 am

   Your obsession with JK was getting boring now it’s scary
   How about playing the ball and not the man for a change?
   Surely there must be some real stories out there
   Let’s see, EFA breaches and hypocrisy for starters..
4. IrishBill 4

   4 April 2008 at 11:06 am

   Good point Mike, I assume you’ll be popping over to all the Kiwiblog right sites to give them similar advice regarding their obsession with Helen? In fact you should probably start by telling Steady Eddy his recent fascination with Jordan is particularly creepy. Run along.
5. Steve Pierson 5

   4 April 2008 at 11:11 am

   We’re not playing the man – we’re mocking

   a) Key’s illegal use of Coldplay’s ‘Clocks’ in his DVD, a DVD that was universial condemned as a poor piece of political puffery. That was a political action and it is open to critique

   b) Key’s lack of political principle and depth – that’s what hollow man is a reference to – that is a topic of political importance just as any policy he produces is. As a politician Key’s politics, principles, knowledge, trustworthiness, and competency are all subjects open to critique.

   We’re not going to shy away from that just because you want Key to get a cakewalk to victory, and when we do mock politicans we’re doing it in a way that is not cruel and does not make fun of him for his physical flaws, sexuality, or anything else. We only attack Key as a politician; because we have standards unlike scum like Whaleoil.
6. James Kearney 6

   4 April 2008 at 11:17 am

   Don’t waste your time on the whinging right Steve- they just don’t like people mocking their man for his obvious lack of substance.
7. Matthew Pilott 7

   4 April 2008 at 11:19 am

   Mike – JK has no ‘balls’ to play with.

   Or are you referring to his little $50 scheme?
8. Sam Dixon 8

   4 April 2008 at 11:23 am

   Mike – identify the personal attack.
9. andy 9

   4 April 2008 at 11:24 am

   Mike

   If there was policy to critique, I am sure the standard would focus on that.

   The policy vacuum only serves to highlight Keys weaknesses, If he has strengths in policy all power to him.

   Captcha: prominence audrey
10. mike 10

    4 April 2008 at 11:49 am

    Yep he’s sure got you guys rattled for a “slippery”, “hollow”, “vacuous”, “rich prick” with “no balls”
    says a lot
11. Sam Dixon 11

    4 April 2008 at 12:05 pm

    Matthew’s ‘no balls’ comment relates to you begging the Standard to ‘play the ball, not the man’

    you still haven’t said how this post plays the man.
12. Matthew Pilott 12

    4 April 2008 at 12:19 pm

    Sorry Mike, the ‘balls’ in my comment were a reference to his policies. Y’see, if playing the man and not the ball means criticising him as a person, then ‘the ball’ would presumably relate to his policies. As you might guess, it was a wee joke there, a play on words, if you will. I’d like to declare, therefore, that to the best of my knowledge, John Key has Balls. Probably two of them, as God gave Man.

    Or have I got you wrong, and you’re admitting with your comment that he has no policy, where you asy “no balls”? 😉
13. insider 13

    4 April 2008 at 1:35 pm

    I thought he didn’t use clocks but a soundalike that was not different enough

    PS does anyone else remember those great records from the 70s and 80s with soundalike hits? Far enough away to avoid the law but close enough to be annoying for not being quite right.
14. Steve Pierson 14

    4 April 2008 at 1:38 pm

    well, if National withdrew the DVD because of the tune and National and Coldplay are in talks over compensation, it seems the tune, whether or not it *is* Clocks, was certainly close enough to breach copyright.

    I’m no expert but I reckon if there aren’t soundalike hits anymore it’s probably due to changes in copyright law.
15. IrishBill 15

    4 April 2008 at 1:49 pm

    Or it could be that someone finally twigged that soundalikes really, really sucked.
16. Matthew Pilott 16

    4 April 2008 at 1:58 pm

    Those bastards advertising some ‘Spooks’ TV show ripped off Massive Attack’s Angel.

    They really, really suck indeed.
17. Jameson 17

    4 April 2008 at 3:42 pm

    [Tane: Jameson, give it a rest. You can keep bashing your head against a brick wall, or you can grow up and engage in constructive debate like the rest of us.]
18. Jameson 18

    4 April 2008 at 3:55 pm

    [Tane: Jameson, your obsession is odd. This is your last warning. Engage in constructive debate or you will be banned for life.]
19. Jameson 19

    4 April 2008 at 5:12 pm

    [Tane: And that’s Jameson banned for life.]
20. roger nome 20

    6 April 2008 at 3:23 pm

    Key can remind me off this song at times. Though, it’s really way to cool to be associated with him.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS