Here we go again...Iron Maiden sued over the rights of 6 songs

Naty said:
This was posted yesterday...

"Early pub years Iron Maiden before they found the real-deal singer Paul Di'Anno and landed their first album deal. The rest is rock history. The source of this recording is unknown and no royalties are being collected. This audio is for educational purposes only."
Click to expand...

THIS is what Maiden77 are pushing as the one and only true and best Maiden lineup ever???
 
Naty said:
This was posted yesterday...

"Early pub years Iron Maiden before they found the real-deal singer Paul Di'Anno and landed their first album deal. The rest is rock history. The source of this recording is unknown and no royalties are being collected. This audio is for educational purposes only."
Click to expand...
Never thought I'd hear something that early, thanks!
 
In an interesting turn of events, Maiden 77 have disassociated themselves from Willcock and even sacked him from a planned event.
 
Funnily, I thought Maiden 77 was Dennis Wilcock's stuff. They made a quite harch comment : "Does this make us the first people to sack Dennis Willcock
1f914.png
maybe...." Love it (although Steve did not sack him).
 
harrisdevot said:
Funnily, I thought Maiden 77 was Dennis Wilcock's stuff. They made a quite harch comment : "Does this make us the first people to sack Dennis Willcock
1f914.png
maybe...." Love it (although Steve did not sack him).
Click to expand...
I shouldn't think they were too happy about facing 120 hardline Maiden fans straight out of a Maiden show while being fronted by the person who is (rightly or wrongly) suing them.

Seriously though, Dennis Willcock's idea of how to bow out of the band professionally was to simply fail to turn up for a gig - that wasn't going to make him top of their list of people to keep in touch with. And if he simply disappeared off the radar shortly afterwards ...
 
Forostar said:
I noticed that too. People are getting scared now.
Click to expand...
Yeah, of being unpopular.
(What else? Nobody could hold you legally responsible for having an opinion on Maiden's history.)
After years and years of trying to set the record straight, and promoting "anyone from the band who has a raw deal" (on this very forum), trying to play both sides of the fence last week didn't really work. Don't know if you've seen the last posts before it went, but first they got a backlash from people understandably unhappy with Dennis' decision, then turned 180 degrees, and, predictably, got another backlash from people thinking Dennis' contribution was obviously, and perhaps deliberately, played down in the official history. I would have certainly related to a stance along the lines of, say, "we believe Dennis' claims but this was not the right way to do it, and being Maiden fans first and foremost,we distance ourselves from him" - said openly, not just hinted - but I didn't see this at all.
A post by Baz Crowcroft while the page was still available summed it up well: embarrassing for both sides, and both sides telling lies (or that's how I understood it).
Pathetic.
 
Maybe they have just decided it would be wise to keep a low profile until the dust settles ... you know, discretion is the better part of valour and all that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top