Gilmour and PinkFloyd.co.uk

Post by **Keith Jordan** » Fri Oct 25, 2002 7:20 pm

http://www.pinkfloyd.co.uk/dg/index2.html

It would seem Gilmour is using the good Pink Floyd name to promote his solo career. Has he scraped the life out of the Floyd only to leave a carcase in which to place his own solo career or has he got every right as he is a member of the band??

quicksilver · Post by **quicksilver** » Fri Oct 25, 2002 8:06 pm

It would seem that he is using the Floyd name to advance his career. But what is wrong with that? He was very instrumental in their success and I feel has every right to do so just as Roger does. I understand that Roger does not promote his solo career using the Pink Floyd name; but I would not begrudge him at all for doing so. Any solo success they have had or will have in the future is a result in part because of the success of Pink Floyd. If Roger or Dave do a solo concert without any Floyd songs, I won't go, simple as that. The fans want to them sing Floyd songs and they both realize that; they're not idiots. The bottom line is....... the Pink Floyd name is an intregal part of both of them and their careers.

After Syd left they also could have changed their name I suppose, but they probably figured the name would help them sell records.

Real Pink in the Inside · Sat Oct 26, 2002 4:12 am

Last time I checked, pinkfloyd.co.uk was PINK FLOYD's OFFICIAL HOMEPAGE. Gee, all of a sudden it's apparently DAVID GILMOUR'S OFFICIAL HOMEPAGE too.

Why am I not surprised?

Go ahead and whore the name till you're tickled pink. It's already a meaningless farce anyway.

Who wants to join me in burning all the MLOR and TDB albums we can gather?

True colors always show eventually.

FloydNZ · Post by **FloydNZ** » Sat Oct 26, 2002 4:56 am

Now I totally agree with you Real Pink......when he was just using the server to host his quicktime player I had no problem with that......But this is really abusing his right to the Pink Floyd brand name......

One question is begging to be asked......Why the hell did he take that guy to court a couple of years ago to get his domain name (http://www.davidgilmour.com). His argument was that his name and the domain were his trademark......why doesn't he use HIS trademark domain to promote HIS work?

Real Pink in the Inside · Sat Oct 26, 2002 4:58 am

FloydNZ wrote:why doesn't he use HIS trademark domain to promote HIS work?

The same reason he decided to release MLOR as a "Pink Floyd" product.

pfco · Post by **pfco** » Sun Oct 27, 2002 3:52 pm

kjnpf wrote:It would seem Gilmour is using the good Pink Floyd name to promote his solo career.

It seems some things need clearing up here. pinkfloyd.co.uk is an EMI site. EMI owns it and EMI controls the content. Nowhere in Dave's promotions of his new DVD or in his live shows has he said "David Gilmour of Pink Floyd", etc. (Unlike Waters who *did* use the Pink Floyd name to sell tickets for his solo shows). EMI naturally would promote a DVD they are selling on a site that they own.

FloydNZ wrote:One question is begging to be asked......Why the hell did he take that guy to court a couple of years ago to get his domain name (http://www.davidgilmour.com). His argument was that his name and the domain were his trademark......why doesn't he use HIS trademark domain to promote HIS work?

Mr. Gilmour sued for the domain name because the person was intending to SELL UNLICENSED Pink Floyd products. That being the case Mr. Gilmour had every right to protect his name. As mentioned earlier, EMI promotes all things Pink Floyd on their site which is pinkfloyd.co.uk

There is no need for David to start up another website to promote his album with EMI doing it for him.

Sandy

Post by **Keith Jordan** » Sun Oct 27, 2002 5:43 pm

pfco wrote:It seems some things need clearing up here. pinkfloyd.co.uk is an EMI site. EMI owns it and EMI controls the content. Nowhere in Dave's promotions of his new DVD or in his live shows has he said "David Gilmour of Pink Floyd", etc. (Unlike Waters who *did* use the Pink Floyd name to sell tickets for his solo shows). EMI naturally would promote a DVD they are selling on a site that they own.

I though Pink Floyd 1987 Ltd. may have owned it. Perhaps they are just a publishing company owned by Floyd for the music rights??

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Sun Oct 27, 2002 6:03 pm

kjnpf wrote:I though Pink Floyd 1987 Ltd. may have owned it. Perhaps they are just a publishing company owned by Floyd for the music rights??

Domain Name: pinkfloyd.co.uk

Registrant: EMI Records Limited

Trading As: EMI Records Limited

Registrant's Agent: EMI RECORDS LTD t/a EMI Records Ltd

Sandy

Post by **Keith Jordan** » Sun Oct 27, 2002 6:25 pm

Thanks, Sandy. I suppose I should have done a WHOIS lookup!!

Real Pink in the Inside · Mon Oct 28, 2002 2:57 am

Hey, people, let's complain about some promoters using the line "The Creative Genius Behind Pink Floyd" to promote Roger Waters' live shows, but say nothing when David Gilmour's DVD is promoted on what is supposedly PINK FLOYD'S OFFICIAL HOMEPAGE. And let's just forget that David Gilmour sued a fan for running the site http://www.davidgilmour.com (We cannot forget David Gilmour is the ONLY person on the entire planet with the name David Gilmour!). If the selling of unlicensed Pink Floyd products was the reason, why not just ask for him to simply stop doing so?

Ultimately, I wonder what these same people would be saying if Roger Waters' management had bought the domain PinkFloyd.com in September of 2001, and used it to promote Roger's DVD and his 2002 World Tour.

mostHigh · Post by **mostHigh** » Mon Oct 28, 2002 3:15 am

He IS the creative genius behind Pink Floyd. David Gilmour was just a hired gun, a guitar player who eventually became part of the band. But Roger was the creative force. Go listen to Obscured By Clouds or The Wall and then go listen to Divison Bell.... no comparison.

David Gilmour whores the Pink Floyd name and he will always do that because without it he can never sell a ticket. AS far as DVD's go... Dave will sell maybe 1,000 copies world wide. How many casual Floyd fans do you really think are awaiting the day the dvd comes out...and on that day will jump out and say, "'OH MY I MUST GOTO THE STORE AND PURCHASE THE NEW DAVE GILMOUR DVD WHERE BOB GELDOF SINGS!! OH MY"

Nobody.

Real Pink in the Inside · Mon Oct 28, 2002 3:23 am

pfco wrote:Nowhere in Dave's promotions of his new DVD or in his live shows has he said "David Gilmour of Pink Floyd", etc. (Unlike Waters who *did* use the Pink Floyd name to sell tickets for his solo shows).

While it is true that Gilmour never promoted his shows or DVD with the line "David Gilmour of Pink Floyd," David Gilmour's live shows were promoted at PinkFloyd.com initially after Emka Productions Ltd., which is owned by Steve O'Rourke, bought the domain name in late 2001. All that was on the domain for quite some time was a huge picture promoting Gilmour's live shows.

I don't know about you, but in my eyes some PROMOTERS using the line "The Creative Force Behind Pink Floyd" to promote Roger's shows is NOTHING compared to David Gilmour's live shows being promoted by his MANAGEMENT at PINKFLOYD.COM.

dgsyd1 · Post by **dgsyd1** » Mon Oct 28, 2002 4:24 am

Let's see a Pink Floyd website owned by Pink Floyd's management, promoting a DVD by a member of the band who is still under that management. And not promoting material by an ex member of the band, who left nearly 20 years ago, and who has nothing to do with the bands management. Yep, that's quite unbelievably offensive that one!

FloydNZ · Post by **FloydNZ** » Mon Oct 28, 2002 4:30 am

pfco wrote:It seems some things need clearing up here. pinkfloyd.co.uk is an EMI site. EMI owns it and EMI controls the content.

Thats true enough......but it's a well known fact that David Gilmour has never bowed down to EMI and let them do anything with his product that he didn't approve of.....as Pink Floyd or solo..... They wouldn't be promoting his solo product on their Pink Floyd site without his say so.

Real Pink in the Inside · Mon Oct 28, 2002 4:37 am

dgsyd1 wrote:Let's see a Pink Floyd website owned by Pink Floyd's management, promoting a DVD by a member of the band who is still under that management.

Not just a Pink Floyd website, but supposedly Pink Floyd's official homepage. You won't find the promotion of Paul McCartney's shows and releases at The Beatles' official homepage. Why should David Gilmour's DVD be promoted at PinkFloyd.co.uk and PinkFloyd.com? Why not promote those at DAVID GILMOUR'S OFFICIAL HOMEPAGE instead of PINK FLOYD's OFFICIAL HOMEPAGE? As someone asked earlier, why doesn't he use HIS trademark domain to promote HIS work? David Gilmour's DVD is NOT a Pink Floyd work, it is a DAVID GILMOUR WORK. So what the heck is it doing on PINK FLOYD'S TRADEMARK DOMAIN?

dgsyd1 wrote: Yep, that's quite unbelievably offensive that one!

It's far more offensive, in my eyes, for David Gilmour's work to be promoted at PinkFloyd.com by his MANAGEMENT than Roger Waters' shows to be promoted by SOME PROMOTERS with the line "The Creative Genius Behind Pink Floyd."

I can only imagine the screams that would be heard if Roger Waters' work was promoted by his management on a site that includes the words Pink & Floyd in its domain name. I know I'd be one of them. Perhaps it's time to treat each member equally and stop making excuses for this whoring of the name?

Gilmour and PinkFloyd.co.uk

It Gilmour being a little cheeky?

Gilmour and PinkFloyd.co.uk

Re: Gilmour and PinkFloyd.co.uk

Re: Gilmour and PinkFloyd.co.uk

Re: Gilmour and PinkFloyd.co.uk

Re: Gilmour and PinkFloyd.co.uk

Re: Gilmour and PinkFloyd.co.uk