Good to hear Gareth. Hope to see you hit the States, particularly the Southern ones.

From our website…

FALSE TWITTERING
by thedrummer » Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:10 am

So it seems someone has decided to pretend to be our very own Mr. Roddy Woomble on Twitter. Those of you that know Roddy and his writing have probably noticed that its not really his style to be publicly threatening legal action against our fans….
There have been a few nuggets of truth in amongst the false tweets - there will be a tour but it will probably start mid October and the first single is more than likely to be "Readers and Writers " - but thats about it.

Anyway please feel free to spam these tweeters(if thats possible) until we get the page taken down.

Morris,

I never claimed Idlewild were smart! In that light, your "probably more likely" theory doesn't seem any less bizarre. As for the tarnishing of reputations, I believe that that is more than sufficiently achieved by means of recurrent regurgitation of sub-par indie slop.

Re: Re: 2. I draw your attention to key phrase "...*more* of an effort…" I do commend them for doing what any self-respecting band does in offering their hardcore fans cosy exclusive shows, but by any measure that isn't living on the road in the name of art, in hopes of a bite to eat, and at the mercy of the trauma potentially caused by multiple break-ups and make-ups.

I'll politely decline your invitation to make it anywhere near their shows; I'd much sooner, as is said in street parlance, drop a barf.

Bushra, while it's a pity that any band feel they have to use lawyers it's probably more likely in this case that the watermark was intended as a deterrent that didn't ultimately work. Your lawsuit theory is bizarre. Who *wants* to go to court? Why risk having your reputation tarnished on comment fields across the web?

Re: 2. If you read the offer, it includes exclusive shows… See you at the front!

Wow! Fans being policed by the bands they listen to… how touching :P

Here's another take on it: the reason the watermark was put in place to begin with was because the band knew full well of the inevitability of albums being leaked in this day and age. I believe it was an underhanded tactic to make a quick buck out of the lawsuit to come, rather than concede:

1) Not that many people buy their records in the first place, leak or no leak.

2) In the tradition of real bands, they should make more of an effort to make money out of touring.

3) Accept the fact that the 20th century was a gross anomaly in terms of the economic valuation of entertainment: if Edgar Allan Poe and Mozart died in hunger and poverty, what makes Idlewild so special?

Carl,
Well it wasn't me! :)
It does sound like it's a fan (with the watermarked CD) rather than an engineer.
It would be so ironic if after buying in to the band's CRM system for the fan-funding project, it's that same system (plus per-CD watermarking) that undoes him/her.

Woomble says "remains to be seen how it will affect future sales…". Surely this will NEVER be known? Because you can't go back and do an identical experiment with a non-leaked album to test against?

It does seem odd that a proper fan who'd contributed money to the cause AND seen the warning against leaking would do this.

Assuming it was one of the fans listed in the sleevenotes - and not a studio engineer etc. - is it possible for a fan to leak an album by accident? Out of practice y'see… :-)