Radiohead let their fans pay as much or little as they wanted for the download release of the album, with many fans choosing to download it free.
Gordon has refuted the idea that the Oxford band put out the album off their own backs, criticising the plan.
"They did a marketing ploy by themselves and then got someone else to put it out," she told The Guardian.
She added: "It seemed really community-oriented, but it wasn't catered towards their musician brothers and sisters, who don't sell as many records as them.
"It was a good marketing ploy and I wish I'd thought of it! But we're not in that position either. We might not have been able to put out a record for another couple of years if we'd done it ourselves. And
In the same interview, frontman Lee Ranaldo spoke about Hits Are For Squares', the compilation record Sonic Youth put out on the Starbucks label last year.
"We thought we'd try it and see what happens," he said. "There's a certain side to this group that likes perversity, and that's a pretty perverse concept.
"At that time, Starbucks were selling records when no one else was. The majors were throwing up their hands. The irony is, for all the spewing it caused on the blogs, it is our most rare record. I have never seen a copy in a store, and I've never met anyone who's seen a copy in a store."
Kim, you're kind of late.
Radiohead were already questioned about their "musician brothers and sisters" a long time ago. Here's what their manager said:
SPEC: The industry is looking at this release under a microscope. A number of artists said that giving music away for free is easy when you have the touring base Radiohead has, but that it hurts new bands who don’t have that revenue source. How do you respond to that statement? Do you think Radiohead, because of their stature, has an obligation to the next generation of bands or only to their fans?
BRYCE EDGE: “Don’t try this at home” should be tagged to this way of doing things.