Supreme responds to TTY statement by Morrissey

Regarding Supreme/Morrissey - Supreme / Facebook

In July of 2015 Supreme approached Morrissey to participate in one of it's poster and T-Shirt campaigns. The scope of the project was explained in full detail to Morrissey, including the intended look, the setting, the photographer, as well as the items that would be produced: a T-Shirt and a poster. An agreement was entered which named the photographer as Terry Richardson, who has shot many of Supreme's campaigns, and whom Morrissey has worked with before. Images of past campaigns were sent to Morrissey for reference so that the intended result was clear. Morrissey required a substantial fee for his participation in this project which Supreme paid up front and in full. The photo shoot lasted two hours and Morrissey was free to do, and pose as he wished. The agreement prohibits Morrissey from "unreasonably" withholding approval of the use of photographs taken at the photo shoot.

After offering Morrissey several options of images from the shoot, Morrissey rejected them all with no explanation. Instead, Morrissey insisted on using a photo that he had taken of himself wearing a Supreme T-shirt for the campaign. This image was later made public on Instagram by his nephew.

Unable to use this image Supreme repeatedly offered Morrissey three very reasonable options as a remedy to the impasse: 1) To do an entire re-shoot at Supreme's sole expense, 2) To select one of the many options from the shoot with Terry Richardson that were offered to Morrissey, 3) To return the money that was paid to Morrissey by Supreme.

Morrissey repeatedly ignored all three options with no reason given as to why. He then proceeded to assert a sudden and ridiculous claim that because Supreme had used the White Castle logo on a group of products in the past, and because he is a known vegetarian, that the agreement was supposedly terminated.

In light of this ploy, Supreme once again requested the return of the money it had paid to Morrissey so that both parties could walk away from the project. However, he refused.

After many attempts to solve this problem, and left with no other viable options, Supreme proceeded to publish these images as per it's agreement with Morrissey.


Media:



Related item:


 
Last edited by a moderator:
i am with ketamine sun, it's a great rock 'n' roll swindle!!! Now what happened to those topless russian models young sam invited round to gyrate with him and moz in their music video???????????????

you are sleeping you do not want to believe
 
IMPERFECT LIST II

Adolf Hitler, the dentist, terry @ June, f***ing bastard thatcher, Dubliner cheese, any cheese, duck dynasty bottlers, dog eaters, Steven f***ing Patrick f***ing tosserrey,cat eaters, fame craving pathetic useless nephew, Jimmy f***ing Savile, liars, tax avoidance, the word humasexual, stupid statements, dairy products, cancellations, Martin, rolf harris, fake cancer, high court judgement dodgers, list of the lost, glossy five star hotel magazine popstar performer interviews, David's passing, lawnmowers, closet gays, contract breakers, sexist videos, mikes treatment, Andy's treatment, Paris for profit, cult ultras, people who fail to take responsibility, snot nosed junior high ribbing, VIOLA BEACH RIP
Where were you ?

Benny-the-British-Butcher

One of your best posts. Thank you.
 
'Supreme were issued with a legal caution not to use the photograph and their fee would be returned. Evidently Supreme have ignored my lawyer.'

Ignored his lawyer..they used a photo of him, a photo that he told them not to use. And if they don't use it,then the fee will be returned. They $crewed themselves.

The photograph had not been used since October 2015. The fee was not returned by Morrissey. Could you tell me why Morrissey in all those months had not returned the money and how long exactly should Supreme have waited for their money to be returned? Was the money being sent via camel perhaps or turtle? How long would you suggest they wait? Six months? A Year? Sounds diabolically devious, truculent and unreliable to me.
 
The American, especially Mexican a
American fan base, really are thick. I've noticed on certain forums and pages they are the only people defending Morrissey.

The British and Irish know what hes about. The Americans fall for the BS

It seems perfectly clear what went down. Morrissey decided to rip off Supreme. He's now has a bad name in music, publishing and fashion world.
Morrissey did the ad and then tried to get spammy a job - look at the pic Sam mocked up, same sort if white walls, tshirt etc.
Supreme unwilling to put their name talentless spammys work. Refused.
Morrissey then relied on his old tricks

The animal rights claim is BS, he's playing countries where they eat dogs and cats. His beloved (beloved when he need a cash top up) have a terrible record with animals, not to mention women.
The guy is a scanner
 
I consider it quite strange of Morrissey to keep the money he got paid for doing the photo shoot.

I mean if he has this strong belief that the cruelty towards animal are among the worst things
and that the reason for him to "plead" against Supreme was because of the fact that Supreme had
"sponsored in part by the beef sandwich pharaoh known as White Castle" – isn't that blood money?

My conclusion is that Morrissey does not care where the money comes from aslong as it pays
his ways - a person true to his interest would not accept money from someone [Supreme] dealing
with "beef pharaohs"? Just a thought. Sorry for my grammar bad englisho.
 
The photo taken by his nephew is way better! But none of the photos are worth causing a fuss over. Morrissey should honour his agreements: either let the photos be released or return the money. Sounds like Supreme did everything they could to resolve the situation before being left with no choice other than releasing the photo. That photo is indeed pure crap and I don't blame Moz for being miffed but he should have done the second photo shoot. Obviously Moz hates anything to do with the meat industry but if he applied that logic to his concerts he would have to ban at least 50% of the attendees. Probably a lot more than 50%.

p.s. All this aggravation is yet another reason for potential record companies to stay away. Why would they take a risk?
 
The photo taken by his nephew is way better! But none of the photos are worth causing a fuss over. Morrissey should honour his agreements: either let the photos be released or return the money. Sounds like Supreme did everything they could to resolve the situation before being left with no choice other than releasing the photo. That photo is indeed pure crap and I don't blame Moz for being miffed but he should have done the second photo shoot. Obviously Moz hates anything to do with the meat industry but if he applied that logic to his concerts he would have to ban at least 50% of the attendees. Probably a lot more than 50%.

p.s. All this aggravation is yet another reason for potential record companies to stay away. Why would they take a risk?

im sure he knows this and and may be why he goes to other extremes in other areas. a way to vent that unavoidable grumpy discomforting aspect of touring
 
'Supreme were issued with a legal caution not to use the photograph and their fee would be returned. Evidently Supreme have ignored my lawyer.'

Ignored his lawyer..they used a photo of him, a photo that he told them not to use. And if they don't use it,then the fee will be returned. They $crewed themselves.

Except, according to their version of events, Moz refused to return the money. And, from experience, we both know that if someone must be lying, it is probably Morrissey.
 
The photo taken by his nephew is way better! But none of the photos are worth causing a fuss over. Morrissey should honour his agreements: either let the photos be released or return the money. Sounds like Supreme did everything they could to resolve the situation before being left with no choice other than releasing the photo. That photo is indeed pure crap and I don't blame Moz for being miffed but he should have done the second photo shoot. Obviously Moz hates anything to do with the meat industry but if he applied that logic to his concerts he would have to ban at least 50% of the attendees. Probably a lot more than 50%.

p.s. All this aggravation is yet another reason for potential record companies to stay away. Why would they take a risk?

In his statement he is offering to return the money. An offer needs to be accepted.
 
In his statement he is offering to return the money. An offer needs to be accepted.

thank you from the lawyer but theyll just say he should make a point to donate it but i imagine he needs to wait until he sees how this works out
 
What's all the fuss ?
We all know Steven is a toxic contaminated veggie/vegan, we only need look back in time to make sense of it all.
Let me explain ! Are you sitting comfortably ? Then I'll begin.

Caught with Dubliner Kerrygold cheese on the rider (his favourite apparently)
So called meat free performances yet cheese panini's on the menu
Staples centre performance again big deal made yet again that he'd closed down the meat fair.
Being photographed and associated with the 5* Hotel group Pestana who pride themselves in leather/fur luxurious trimmings and lashings of meat fit for Royalty.
Glastonbury statement not being animal friendly yet Steve performed at it more than once.
Madison Square Garden performance (yep another one) so called meat free yet luxurious meat and sushi served to the wealthy in corporate boxes.
Meat festival performances in the States last tour.
Dates being planned as we speak in Dog and cat eating countries.

Get over it people ! [rolleyes] it's just Steve ! Well !!!!!! er being Steve ! I don't care, I don't care, I don't care.

Benny-the-British-Butcher������
Don't forget the Wawa and it's association with the Firefly Festival. Not a peep out of Morrissey having his name next to the machine where you order meatball subs. https://www.wawa.com/Hoagies.aspx
 
The American, especially Mexican a
American fan base, really are thick. I've noticed on certain forums and pages they are the only people defending Morrissey.

The British and Irish know what hes about. The Americans fall for the BS

It seems perfectly clear what went down. Morrissey decided to rip off Supreme. He's now has a bad name in music, publishing and fashion world.
Morrissey did the ad and then tried to get spammy a job - look at the pic Sam mocked up, same sort if white walls, tshirt etc.
Supreme unwilling to put their name talentless spammys work. Refused.
Morrissey then relied on his old tricks

The animal rights claim is BS, he's playing countries where they eat dogs and cats. His beloved (beloved when he need a cash top up) have a terrible record with animals, not to mention women.
The guy is a scanner

As he said, if they didn't use the photo, he would return the money. He obviously knew when the campaign started, waited, and then they used his photo, why run the risk of them using the photo and then be without the fee too?. You are all so stupid, Morrissey is brilliant.
 
The photograph had not been used since October 2015. The fee was not returned by Morrissey. Could you tell me why Morrissey in all those months had not returned the money and how long exactly should Supreme have waited for their money to be returned? Was the money being sent via camel perhaps or turtle? How long would you suggest they wait? Six months? A Year? Sounds diabolically devious, truculent and unreliable to me.

I would be very interested in what a contract attorney makes of this. He is an adult of (presumably) sound mind. He signed the contract as written and agreed to by both parties and was duly compensated. As far as I can tell, Supreme never misrepresented themselves in any way. Whether days, weeks, months, or years later Moz decides to rethink his decision that is squarely on him. How many music artists signed crappy record deals and were held to the terms of the contract? Seems as though Morrissey and contracts are like Superman and kryptonite.
 
LOL
someone actually believes that moz intended to return the fee? LOOOLLL
 
I would be very interested in what a contract attorney makes of this. He is an adult of (presumably) sound mind. He signed the contract as written and agreed to by both parties and was duly compensated. As far as I can tell, Supreme never misrepresented themselves in any way. Whether days, weeks, months, or years later Moz decides to rethink his decision that is squarely on him. How many music artists signed crappy record deals and were held to the terms of the contract? Seems as though Morrissey and contracts are like Superman and kryptonite.

He seems likes hes said it was his mistake already and while he tried probably can't do much
 
Don't forget the Wawa and it's association with the Firefly Festival. Not a peep out of Morrissey having his name next to the machine where you order meatball subs. https://www.wawa.com/Hoagies.aspx

Sadly Steven has used The Smiths song meat is murder as a solo career gimmick. Apart from performing it on a perpetual loop has anyone actually witnessed him do anything useful on the frontline or at the coal face for animals ? Bumping into animal demos to sign petitions and pose for photos whilst out shopping at Harvey Nichols, posting statements here and there, wearing stickers/badges, selling t-shirts n graffiti stencils, posting utube clips etc doesn't really amount to much does it.
No doubt the bullfighter song was written in the hope that it would be his next career gimmick to see him into retirement.
Steven has had a very comfortable lifestyle off the back of animals.
As you have pointed out above meat is murder when it suites Steve.

Benny-the-British-Butcher
 
Loving Supreme's new range of his/hers pants
supreme.jpg
 
Last edited:
As he said, if they didn't use the photo, he would return the money. He obviously knew when the campaign started, waited, and then they used his photo, why run the risk of them using the photo and then be without the fee too?. You are all so stupid, Morrissey is brilliant.

Brilliant, you say.
Yes if you blow every chance you have. This is no more than a low rent scam.
How did it come to this?
 

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom