this would be the strangest double bill ever.

Talk about taking it to the man.

I love smoking.

Is the lawsuit and all the bitching actually necessary? I'm not exactly sure but wasn't it just some pull out map with band names on it with a tobacco ad on the other side? If I'm wrong then I've just misunderstood but it's not like they are superimposing the bands faces on porno pictures or something.

i'm getting so sick and tired of all this anti-smoking bitching. its really getting old.
and this is coming from someone who has never smoked a cigarette in his entire life.

If this lawsuit in anyway helps to destroy Rollingstone then I am all for it. Take those bastards to the cleaners!

This doesn't seem to be about the smoking, really, but about ANY major corporation that tries to capitalize on independent music and sell shit to idiots.

So dumb.

Can anyone tell (or show) me what the original ad looked like?
AND

if the lawsuit amasses to $195.4 billion at $750 for every issue per band that better mean there were,260,400,000 bands listed because I can't imagine anyone reads that swill anymore.
-Dante

That's mest up.

I can't believe there are so many people on this site stupid enough to think this is about smoking.

This doesn't seem to be about the smoking, really, but about ANY major corporation that tries to capitalize on independent music and sell shit to idiots.

Ditto

well if that money gets split up amongst the bands, i'm all for it.

I already got their point. The bitching is getting rediculous. Do they really need billions of dollars to turn this wrong into a right. I understand why they are pissed but in the words of a nearly crippled stand up comedian, "Come on guys."

which rag is more worthless? AP or rolling stone?

discuss.

you people are fuckin stupid. rolling stone fucked up and now their getting shit from all the bands they fucked. whats wrong with that?

It's politics. Say that Exxon decides to air ads that support Democratic candidates in the upcoming election. Democrats that see this are likely to jump to the conclusion that "oh, now the democrats are working with Big Oil, let's boycott this person/party because it goes against their and our ideals." Much like the party losing support, here bands will lose support, which is in reality very unlikely. But for the principle of it, this is a necessary action by Fucked Up. Had someone not done this now, take a look at who's on the list that would've taken action eventually. Are you saying that Fugazi would be "dumb and bitchy" to let this one slide?

The whole point is that camel tried to cash in on the popluarity of independant music with this "article". The whole ridiculous thing was a pull out section that had a large advertisement saying "commited to supporting and promoting independant record labels" with the camel logo on the back, and by listing a large number of independant bands with rising popularity impilied that they supported said artists and vice versa. Most saw it for what it is(bullshit) and now Rolling stone and camel are playing stupid.

here's hoping the bands win

who the fuck smokes camels?

they'll never win that much money, but i support what they're doing

Has anyone else heard a rumor about RJ Reynolds buying up a bunch of land in Northern California to start growing Marijuana? This hippy girl I know told me about it a couple of days ago, weed may become legal. Hooray!

Shit id sue for money if i could, they have the right. Im all for smoking but id rather have the cash

it would be awesome if, on top of all this, the bands actually smoked camels.

I once heard Fugazi on DC101 (a major music/pop station in DC) and wrote Dischord about it being as Fugazi's pretty much anti anything "major" or "mainstream." Dischord told me radio stations can play whatever they want and don't need their permission. It's probably the same thing here. If a radio station can play whatever they want why can't a magazine print the band's name whenever they want?