Ellmeister Posted October 20, 2010 Share Posted October 20, 2010 *whistles innocently and coincidentally* Seriously confused the fack out of me. Kind of wished it was my housemate for as ReZ would say "Teh Lolzors" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted October 20, 2010 Share Posted October 20, 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted October 20, 2010 Author Share Posted October 20, 2010 Those are not maths songs, they only have a few numbers in it. Maths songs must contain maths terminology and maths metaphors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted October 20, 2010 Share Posted October 20, 2010 So how come you said nothing about Spice Girls? They only say two numbers! :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted October 20, 2010 Author Share Posted October 20, 2010 I was too busy thinking of the poor babies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chairdriver Posted October 20, 2010 Share Posted October 20, 2010 So how come you said nothing about Spice Girls? They only say two numbers! :p Well they're obviously describing a mathematical structure where 2 is the multiplicative identity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted October 20, 2010 Share Posted October 20, 2010 Well, with his main audience being girls, it's somewhat understandable. The "hit songs" are just the names for each colour, and it's not like he's going to wear them. He just has his name on it, which will make girls lap it up. Well, That's the problem. From what I can tell it's for money, and it's a bit obvious that it's for nothing else. It's not like there's a lack of nail polish and Bieber is acting all chivilrious by supplying them with much needed nail polish. For me, he just loses so much respect from me, not that I had much to begin with :p Im fairly impartial to him as I've never heard of his music but this is just a cop-out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted October 20, 2010 Share Posted October 20, 2010 Well they're obviously describing a mathematical structure where 2 is the multiplicative identity. The Proclaimers is saying if you travelled 500 miles and you walked 500 more, you'd be the guy who walked 1000 miles, hehehe :p ...and Feist teaches you how to count, haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted October 20, 2010 Author Share Posted October 20, 2010 Well, That's the problem. From what I can tell it's for money, and it's a bit obvious that it's for nothing else. It's not like there's a lack of nail polish and Bieber is acting all chivilrious by supplying them with much needed nail polish. For me, he just loses so much respect from me, not that I had much to begin with :p Im fairly impartial to him as I've never heard of his music but this is just a cop-out. There's not like there's a lack of perfume or clothes, but artists make their own brands of that too. It's normal in celebrities. Your beautiful Gaga does it too. Like her or hate her, Lady GaGa boasts a very strong, distinct personal brand. So last October, the artist's management moved to protect her brand by trade marking everything GaGa. However, a look at recent updates to the trademark show that GaGa, or her management, may be on the verge of ruining everything.The documents show that the Lady GaGa trademark covers, among other things, "caps, visors, boxer shorts, headbands, sneakers, swim wear, bras, scarves, hosiery, pajamas, and robes." Oh, and Lady GaGa sweatpants. The update is more worrisome, however, as it includes vinyl covers for cell phones, MP3 players, laptops. It also claims rights to Lady GaGa "gift certificates which may then be redeemed for goods and services." No one should be surprised that the talented singer/songwriter is lending her image to an imaginative array of endorsements, but even the most ardent fan has limitations, and saturating the market with one's personal brand brings with it the risk of backlash. After all, part of what makes Lady Gaga so appealing is her ability to be different -- fans naturally want a piece of that, a piece of her brand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heroicjanitor Posted October 20, 2010 Share Posted October 20, 2010 Ninety-nine bottles of beer on the wall, Ninety-nine bottles of beer. Take one down, pass it around, Ninety-eight bottles of beer on the wall. If lipstick would sell and earn me money I'd put out a brand too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashley Posted October 20, 2010 Share Posted October 20, 2010 I suppose you could argue Team Gaga are just copyright protecting. Knock off merch is bound to happen but at least this way they can either a) sue or b) create their own anyway. But still, there's something so seemingly apt about rip-off Gaga merchandise... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted October 20, 2010 Share Posted October 20, 2010 oh, never heard about that. You sure it's actually advertised by Gaga and her company itself? Because from just that extract it kinda sounds like the merchandise that any famous person would have. Whereas the lip-gloss is actually a Justin Bieber product. The only company I know that gaga is a part of is the Haus of Gaga, which does indeed sell stuff like T-Shirt's and clothing. They're aloud, in my opinion, though because they create stunning things like the "Living Dress" :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paj! Posted October 21, 2010 Share Posted October 21, 2010 They're aloud allowed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashley Posted October 21, 2010 Share Posted October 21, 2010 Maybe he meant "loud" and the 'a' slipped in there by mistake :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted October 21, 2010 Share Posted October 21, 2010 No, unfortuantly I didn't :p Feel free to punish me. I think I can still use the excuse that it was quarter to one in the morning and I was using me iPod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diageo Posted October 22, 2010 Author Share Posted October 22, 2010 If they are allowed because they make stuff you like, we're just getting back into the subjectivity argument. And it's nail polish, not lip gloss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts