A Letter from Bryan Loren

[SmoothCriminal1995]

For anyone who has heard Deep In The Night, could you tell us anything about what it is like, or what it reminds you of?

 

[OnirMJ]

Is Deep In The Night vocally complete?

 

[lounisp]

Im confused about his message because isn't he the one who shared those tracks on his myspace account back in the days? and to be honest i never ever listen his MJ songs, they are way too cheesy for my own taste. MJ brought Teddy Riley for a reason...

 

[madmijack]

In case he's releasing "Deep In The Night" and "Man In Black" - I am ready to pay.
Remembering the crowdfunding for "Dangerous Tour Oslo", it has been done pretty fast, clear and fair for all.
So, there's no problem for me personally Bryan Loren could open crowdfunding for these and other full unleaded MJ tracks - I'll definitely support it.

 

[AlwaysThere]

I haven't heard it, but apparently "Deep in the Night" only has chorus vocals -- no verses.

 

[SmoothGangsta]

I haven't heard it, but apparently "Deep in the Night" only has chorus vocals -- no verses.

I pretty much assume this with MJ songs at this point.

 

[OnirMJ]

In case he's releasing "Deep In The Night" and "Man In Black" - I am ready to pay.
Remembering the crowdfunding for "Dangerous Tour Oslo", it has been done pretty fast, clear and fair for all.
So, there's no problem for me personally Bryan Loren could open crowdfunding for these and other full unleaded MJ tracks - I'll definitely support it.

He can't release anything. He's bullshitting. And those are not HIS songs as he's saying. Those are Michael's songs that he co-wrote and helped record and produce. And he was PAID for his services fairly, I'm sure, because Michael was always fair and very very very generous (sometimes even too generous) to his collaborators. It's too bad that some of those songs leaked to the internet (but it also happened with Akon, Darkchild, Paul Anka, Dr. Freeze, Bill Bottrell and others).

All he can do is illegally leak it to the internet or sell it to traders on black market who will keep re-selling it to fans until they leak, which is also illegal.

In any case, I hope he changes his mind, don't leak or sell anything and re-negotiate a fair deal with the Estate for Dangerous 30 or some other release. It's not just those 4 leaked songs.. there are around 25 songs they did together worth A LOT of money and the Estate are not stupid to waste that money.

All those songs deserve a respectful release on official MJ album and not to be leaked and sold around on the black market.

 

[madmijack]

He can't release anything. He's bullshitting. And those are not HIS songs as he's saying. Those are Michael's songs that he co-wrote and helped record and produce. And he was PAID for his services fairly, I'm sure, because Michael was always fair and very very very generous (sometimes even too generous) to his collaborators.

Of course I've said that I am ready to pay meaning ONLY if this Bryan Loren got rights to share those songs. Nobody's going to appreciate black market.

 

[Dilan]

deep is chorus only

 

[Mikky Dee]

Im confused about his message because isn't he the one who shared those tracks on his myspace account back in the days? and to be honest i never ever listen his MJ songs, they are way too cheesy for my own taste. MJ brought Teddy Riley for a reason...

Thank you! This is an excellent point. I wasn't aware that he was the one to leak the songs, in the first instance. This is a game changer, for sure. As I said in an earlier post, I don't really like these songs much at all and I never bother with them, either.

I pretty much assume this with MJ songs at this point.

Yes, so do I.

 

[Mikky Dee]

He can't release anything. He's bullshitting. And those are not HIS songs as he's saying. Those are Michael's songs that he co-wrote and helped record and produce. And he was PAID for his services fairly, I'm sure, because Michael was always fair and very very very generous (sometimes even too generous) to his collaborators. It's too bad that some of those songs leaked to the internet (but it also happened with Akon, Darkchild, Paul Anka, Dr. Freeze, Bill Bottrell and others).

All he can do is illegally leak it to the internet or sell it to traders on black market who will keep re-selling it to fans until they leak, which is also illegal.

In any case, I hope he changes his mind, don't leak or sell anything and re-negotiate a fair deal with the Estate for Dangerous 30 or some other release. It's not just those 4 leaked songs.. there are around 25 songs they did together worth A LOT of money and the Estate are not stupid to waste that money.

All those songs deserve a respectful release on official MJ album and not to be leaked and sold around on the black market.

Excellent points and I agree with your perspective, especially with the paragraph in bold.

 

[Korgnex]

In 2009 Bryan Loren illegally put the then already leaked songs with MJ on his mySpace account - not caring about the endeavors of any other creative people who worked on them.
These songs having been previously leaked did not make his actions any better.

And he also did leak the Janet collaboration "Work" - without any approval from Janet.

Here, in his most recent adventure into cyber crimes, the fact that he promotes his request for so-called "donations" with holding out the prospect of leaking more MJ stuff - that he cannot legally share (he has ZERO copyright on MJ's part) - shows you Loren's true persona.

 

[Mikky Dee]

Here, in his most recent adventure into cyber crimes, the fact that he promotes his request for so-called "donations" with holding out the prospect of leaking more MJ stuff - that he cannot legally share (he has ZERO copyright on MJ's part) - shows you Loren's true persona.

Very interesting indeed. This certainly shines a spotlight on his "suspect" actions, both present and past.

Notwithstanding that he may have leaked these songs illegally himself, fans still do not have the right to copy them, alter them, share and/or distribute them throughout the fandom, in my opinion. They have no more right to do it than he does, really. As I said, I truly doubt that fans will be lining up to pay him their pennies, considering their general sense of entitlement, to use and abuse anything that anyone drops, online.

 

[MJTruth]

Very interesting indeed. This certainly shines a spotlight on his "suspect" actions, both present and past.

Notwithstanding that he may have leaked these songs illegally himself, fans still do not have the right to copy them, alter them, share and/or distribute them throughout the fandom, in my opinion. They have no more right to do it than he does, really. As I said, I truly doubt that fans will be lining up to pay him their pennies, considering their general sense of entitlement to use and abuse anything that anyone drops, online.

I agree with you, but sadly MJ fans sure do act as though they have the right to do whatever they want and they'll try to justify their actions in any way they can. The recent crowdfunding campaign for the Oslo(?) concert was a very clear example of that.

 

[AlwaysThere]

The likelihood of the Estate ever putting incomplete songs on the market is slim to none.

Branca is currently sitting on a minimum 25 vocally-complete songs on the grounds that he doesn't think they're "good enough" to be released. If he holds that release-worthy material to such an absurdly low standard, it stands to reason he thinks even less of the half-finished demos, which he had several opportunities to use (e.g., any singles, in place of the remixes on Bad25, The Ultimate Fan Extras Collection). Even after the Estate's self-imposed hiatus on unreleased music ends, I'd wager they'll drip-feed us the finished songs over the course of several decades.

Finished songs should be withheld and protected at all costs, because those are vital to the vault. But there was no gloom or doom when "Days in Gloucestershire" made its way online, because we all recognize that it'll likely never be used. I'd imagine the same would apply if "Man in Black" or "Deep in the Night" suddenly popped up.

Side note: I wish fans would stop speaking of Dangerous 30 as if it was even a possibility. Loren shouldn't hold back his material on the off-chance that such a project becomes reality. Several people had the same stance for Dangerous 25 and Off the Wall 30, neither of which happened (at least not in the way we wanted). It's fine to reference it with a hopeful connotation, but to discuss it with an air of expectancy is just ridiculous.

And he was PAID for his services fairly, I'm sure, because Michael was always fair and very very very generous (sometimes even too generous) to his collaborators.

Who knows whether or not he was paid fairly? Several people have suggested that they would've worked for free just to be in Michael's presence. Plus, Michael has screwed over his collaborators before (e.g., Brad Buxer, Greg Phillinganes, the writers of "Whatever Happens"), so there's really no way for any of us to know.

 

[OnirMJ]

Thank you! This is an excellent point. I wasn't aware that he was the one to leak the songs, in the first instance.

He was not the one who leaked them initially. All songs leaked cca. 2006 from 2001 Special Edition unreleased second disc.

He just posted them on his My Space account (the ones that already leaked).

 

[OnirMJ]

In 2009 Bryan Loren illegally put the then already leaked songs with MJ on his mySpace account - not caring about the endeavors of any other creative people who worked on them.
These songs having been previously leaked did not make his actions any better.

And he also did leak the Janet collaboration "Work" - without any approval from Janet.

Here, in his most recent adventure into cyber crimes, the fact that he promotes his request for so-called "donations" with holding out the prospect of leaking more MJ stuff - that he cannot legally share (he has ZERO copyright on MJ's part) - shows you Loren's true persona.

Agreed!

 

[OnirMJ]

The likelihood of the Estate ever putting incomplete songs on the market is slim to none.

Branca is currently sitting on a minimum 25 vocally-complete songs on the grounds that he doesn't think they're "good enough" to be released. If he holds that release-worthy material to such an absurdly low standard, it stands to reason he thinks even less of the half-finished demos, which he had several opportunities to use (e.g., any singles, in place of the remixes on Bad25, The Ultimate Fan Extras Collection). Even after the Estate's self-imposed hiatus on unreleased music ends, I'd wager they'll drip-feed us the finished songs over the course of several decades.

Finished songs should be withheld and protected at all costs, because those are vital to the vault. But there was no gloom or doom when "Days in Gloucestershire" made its way online, because we all recognize that it'll likely never be used. I'd imagine the same would apply if "Man in Black" or "Deep in the Night" suddenly popped up.

Side note: I wish fans would stop speaking of Dangerous 30 as if it was even a possibility. Loren shouldn't hold back his material on the off-chance that such a project becomes reality. Several people had the same stance for Dangerous 25 and Off the Wall 30, neither of which happened (at least not in the way we wanted). It's fine to reference it with a hopeful connotation, but to discuss it with an air of expectancy is just ridiculous.



Who knows whether or not he was paid fairly? Several people have suggested that they would've worked for free just to be in Michael's presence. Plus, Michael has screwed over his collaborators before (e.g., Brad Buxer, Greg Phillinganes, the writers of "Whatever Happens"), so there's really no way for any of us to know.

He was paid more than fairly. That was late '80 and early '90. Michael was full of cash and spending a lot on studios and engineers and producers.

Brad Buxer and Michael Prince may have worked for free sometimes in late 2000s but for sure not for official album release - studio album sessions.

Brad Buxer, Greg Phillinganes and others were always paid fairly for what they did - arranging and playing instruments for what they were credited for. They were not paid for the things they didn't do, of course (e.g. Greg for "co-writing" DSTYGE - that was pure arranging).

I'm sure guys who wrote Whatever Happens got some cash when they sold the song. They didn't have to do it. It was optional for them. They decided to sell it to MJ and Teddy because they wanted their name on MJ album.

 

[dam2040]

The Estate is honestly completely clueless on the musical side of things. I think this is undebatable. However, I don't support someone trying to make a quick buck just because he worked for MJ 30 odd years ago.

Who's to say he didn't see the Oslo campaign and saw dollar signs!?

 

[OnirMJ]

We need collectors label ASAP! All these songs have to have official release on MJ album. I would buy such an album immediately and all these co-writers would get their deserved royalties (if they didn't renounce them back in the days).

 

[AlwaysThere]

He was paid more than fairly. That was late '80 and early '90. Michael was full of cash and spending a lot on studios and engineers and producers.

Brad Buxer and Michael Prince may have worked for free sometimes in late 2000s but for sure not for official album release - studio album sessions.

Brad Buxer, Greg Phillinganes and others were always paid fairly for what they did - arranging and playing instruments for what they were credited for. They were not paid for the things they didn't do, of course (e.g. Greg for "co-writing" DSTYGE - that was pure arranging).

I'm sure guys who wrote Whatever Happens got some cash when they sold the song. They didn't have to do it. It was optional for them. They decided to sell it to MJ and Teddy because they wanted their name on MJ album.

Your knowledge about who was paid how much money is about as extensive as mine (i.e., non-existent). Perhaps Loren was underpaid for his work with Michael. Perhaps he was overpaid. Perhaps he was paid fairly. We don't know.

Fair compensation isn't an excuse for poor judgments. I don't care if a producer was paid $1 million for a single song and let Michael take full songwriting and production credits; for Michael to accept credits for something he didn't do is morally reprehensible, and he deserves to be criticized for it. (Also, due to the unlikelihood that any producers/musicians ever legally surrendered writing credits to Michael via a contract, they could legally sue his Estate to obtain such credits if they so desired.)

For example:

• Brad Buxer wrote the verse melody (taken from a cue he was working on for Sonic the Hedgehog 3), collaborated with Michael on the chord progression and chorus melody, solely produced/arranged an early instrumental version of "Stranger in Moscow" (including the trademark drum/percussion loop), and further went on to say that the song was "more than anything I've ever written with him a true collaboration."
• Greg Phillinganes wrote the melody and chord progression for the bridge of "Don't Stop 'til You Get Enough" (which did not exist before he became involved) and was originally given co-writers credit in the Off the Wall liner notes before Michael had his name revoked.
• The writers of "Whatever Happens" were essentially told that the song would only be included on Invincible if Michael and Teddy received co-writing credit.
• Jerry Hey apparently composed musical elements of "Speed Demon" with/for Michael, yet was not credited, in spite of Quincy Jones' insistence.
• Teddy Riley indicated that Michael was given undue production credits on the seven tracks Riley produced for Dangerous, but never complained because "you can't exactly tell the King of Pop he can't, can you?"
• Bryan Loren co-produced "Superfly Sister" with Michael in mid-April 1990, though he was not credited.
• Michael apparently changed a single word in "You Are My Life" and was granted co-writers credit for doing so.

Moreover, the line between "composing" and "arranging" is easily blurred and can only be approached on a case-by-case basis, but more often than not the definition of "arranging" coincides with putting the overall structure of a song in order, as well as reharmonization and orchestration of previously arranged music, whereas "composing" is the literal act of writing music, lyrics, or a melody.

In the case of Brad Buxer, he composed and arranged elements of a song without being credited. In the case of Greg Phillinganes, he composed elements of a song without being credited. In the case of "Whatever Happens," Michael was given co-writers credit despite having no involvement in the songwriting process. And once again, just because the involved parties may not have a problem with it doesn't mean it's still isn't indicative of Michael abusing his power.

 

[dam2040]

• Michael apparently changed a single word in "You Are My Life" and was granted co-writers credit for doing so.

Don't see your issue with this. Albeit minor, he's still co-writing the song. Kanye West credits people on songs if they bring him something like a water while he's working on it, which is a lot more bizarre of a credit for example.

 

[Zeus7]

[*]Teddy Riley indicated that Michael was given undue production credits on the seven tracks Riley produced for Dangerous, but never complained because "you can't exactly tell the King of Pop he can't, can you?"
[*]Bryan Loren co-produced "Superfly Sister" with Michael in mid-April 1990, though he was not credited.
[*]Michael apparently changed a single word in "You Are My Life" and was granted co-writers credit for doing so.
wer.

Michael gave Teddy writing credits on Dangerous despite him not writing any lyrics according to MJ in the mexican depositions, maybe works both ways

 

[AlwaysThere]

Don't see your issue with this. Albeit minor, he's still co-writing the song. Kanye West credits people on songs if they bring him something like a water while he's working on it, which is a lot more bizarre of a credit for example.

Just comes off oddly to me. It's like if you were building a house, and I came in and did nothing but hammer one piece of wood to another piece of wood. I wouldn't expect you to say, "He helped me build that house." But that's just me. Of the seven things I noted, it definitely is the least consequential.

Michael gave Teddy writing credits on Dangerous despite him not writing any lyrics according to MJ in the mexican depositions, maybe works both ways

Nonetheless, it just rubs me the wrong way for someone to take credit for work they didn't do. Perhaps it's a lesser deal to others, but at the very least it can be acknowledged that there were times where Michael took undue credit.

But I digress. Back on topic, I encourage and would love to see Bryan Loren leak his half-finished music. I've heard great things about "Seven Digits," "Deep in the Night," and "Don't Believe It," and I'd love to hear them.

 

[OnirMJ]

Your knowledge about who was paid how much money is about as extensive as mine (i.e., non-existent). Perhaps Loren was underpaid for his work with Michael. Perhaps he was overpaid. Perhaps he was paid fairly. We don't know.

I agree, we don't know. I'm sure he was paid more than fair and he was fine with it until now.

Fair compensation isn't an excuse for poor judgments. I don't care if a producer was paid $1 million for a single song and let Michael take full songwriting and production credits; for Michael to accept credits for something he didn't do is morally reprehensible, and he deserves to be criticized for it. (Also, due to the unlikelihood that any producers/musicians ever legally surrendered writing credits to Michael via a contract, they could legally sue his Estate to obtain such credits if they so desired.)

If they accepted the deal, who are we to judge? It's not like he didn't credit them as co-writers. They probably signed a contract to give all the royalties to MJ and Teddy. Bill Bottrell did the same for his collaborations. He said in an interview, when asked about Streetwalker, Come Together, Monkey Business and What About Us credits, that he was paid a fixed sum for his services and work on the songs and that he, even though he's credited, don't receive any royalties from the songs, because he signed such contract with Michael. He thought that was fair and I also think that is fair if he agreed with the terms of the contract.

For example:

• Brad Buxer wrote the verse melody (taken from a cue he was working on for Sonic the Hedgehog 3), collaborated with Michael on the chord progression and chorus melody, solely produced/arranged an early instrumental version of "Stranger in Moscow" (including the trademark drum/percussion loop), and further went on to say that the song was "more than anything I've ever written with him a true collaboration."
• Greg Phillinganes wrote the melody and chord progression for the bridge of "Don't Stop 'til You Get Enough" (which did not exist before he became involved) and was originally given co-writers credit in the Off the Wall liner notes before Michael had his name revoked.
• The writers of "Whatever Happens" were essentially told that the song would only be included on Invincible if Michael and Teddy received co-writing credit.
• Jerry Hey apparently composed musical elements of "Speed Demon" with/for Michael, yet was not credited, in spite of Quincy Jones' insistence.
• Teddy Riley indicated that Michael was given undue production credits on the seven tracks Riley produced for Dangerous, but never complained because "you can't exactly tell the King of Pop he can't, can you?"
• Bryan Loren co-produced "Superfly Sister" with Michael in mid-April 1990, though he was not credited.
• Michael apparently changed a single word in "You Are My Life" and was granted co-writers credit for doing so.

I know all of that or most of it. I disagree about production credits on Dangerous with Teddy. Michael produced vocals and the song (vocal melody). Also Teddy received co-writing credits for Dangerous, Jam, Someone Put Your Hand Out, which he didn't deserve. He deserved just arrangement/co-producer credits. But that was the deal they had. They were both fine with it, apparently.

For Superfly Sister Loren received co-writing and arrangement credits. Producing and arranging can be very similar. Maybe it was a mistake in the album credits. I don't know.

Moreover, the line between "composing" and "arranging" is easily blurred and can only be approached on a case-by-case basis, but more often than not the definition of "arranging" coincides with putting the overall structure of a song in order, as well as reharmonization and orchestration of previously arranged music, whereas "composing" is the literal act of writing music, lyrics, or a melody.

In the case of Brad Buxer, he composed and arranged elements of a song without being credited. In the case of Greg Phillinganes, he composed elements of a song without being credited. In the case of "Whatever Happens," Michael was given co-writers credit despite having no involvement in the songwriting process. And once again, just because the involved parties may not have a problem with it doesn't mean it's still isn't indicative of Michael abusing his power.

I agree about You Are My Life, Whatever Happens and similar. He didn't deserve co-writing credits. But what about Dangerous, Jam, Someone Put Your Hand Out... and many others.

My view on this is.. I watched a great documentary about Queen where they discussed about this. And Freddie said. Who comes up with the original song idea he will get the writing credits, even though others may have helped with the songs' creation. But the one who came with the demo will be credited solely. Others will receive arrangement and producing credits. The band functioned like this almost close to the end. Only in the last few albums they changed this policy and they started crediting all the songs with Queen.

And I agree with their original policy and agreement. Also with Michael's and Quincy's way on the first 3 albums. All the songs had 1 or 2 writers. Only after Quincy, this started to happen. And in my opinion that was stupid decision. Michael shouldn't be credited on some songs (especially on some of Invincible stuff), but also others shouldn't be credited on songs he created himself (e.g. Greg, Teddy).

 

[AlwaysThere]

If they accepted the deal, who are we to judge? It's not like he didn't credit them as co-writers. They probably signed a contract to give all the royalties to MJ and Teddy. Bill Bottrell did the same for his collaborations. He said in an interview, when asked about Streetwalker, Come Together, Monkey Business and What About Us credits, that he was paid a fixed sum for his services and work on the songs and that he, even though he's credited, don't receive any royalties from the songs, because he signed such contract with Michael. He thought that was fair and I also think that is fair if he agreed with the terms of the contract.

Even if the respective writers/producers did sign contracts to take a lump sum and receive no credit, it's an example of a Hollywood powerhouse (this being Michael) using his influence and power to take advantage of lesser men/women, which I find abhorrent. When all's said and done, this is just my opinion on the situation, which is as inconsequential as anyone's. A debate can be had about whether or not it's a big deal if all parties consented to the agreement, but there's no question that Michael took undue credit on several situations. That cannot be disputed.

I know all of that or most of it. I disagree about production credits on Dangerous with Teddy. Michael produced vocals and the song (vocal melody). Also Teddy received co-writing credits for Dangerous, Jam, Someone Put Your Hand Out, which he didn't deserve. He deserved just arrangement/co-producer credits. But that was the deal they had. They were both fine with it, apparently.

For Superfly Sister Loren received co-writing and arrangement credits. Producing and arranging can be very similar. Maybe it was a mistake in the album credits. I don't know.

Vocal production =/= song production. Countless albums, past and present, divide "vocal producer" and "producer" into two separate categories; check the liner notes for the standard version of Xscape for an example. Even if you were to conflate the two, Teddy independently wrote and produced the instrumental beats that later became album tracks, not to mention being asked to reproduce "Jam" and "Dangerous" by Michael, so his co-writer/co-production credit is more than justified.

I've never heard any pre-Teddy Riley versions of "Jam" so I can't comment on exactly what he brought to the table, but the bridge in his version of "Dangerous" is completely different to the one in Bill Bottrell's version. If he contributed to that in any substantial way, his co-writing credit is again justified, though we don't know. (That would qualify as "composing," by the way, as it involves the creation and application of a new melody and chord progression.) "Someone Put Your Hand Out" is in a similar boat: people who have heard the original '86 demo indicate that they are structurally, musically, and productionally two different songs, particularly in the verse... which Michael acknowledged Teddy helped re-write.

Producing and arranging are similar, but not nearly enough to be confused. Helping put all the creative content into one cohesive song is the role of the producer, which Bryan Loren did alongside Michael for "Superfly Sister."

My view on this is.. I watched a great documentary about Queen where they discussed about this. And Freddie said. Who comes up with the original song idea he will get the writing credits, even though others may have helped with the songs' creation. But the one who came with the demo will be credited solely. Others will receive arrangement and producing credits. The band functioned like this almost close to the end. Only in the last few albums they changed this policy and they started crediting all the songs with Queen.

So if I wrote "Bohemian Rhapsody" with Freddie Mercury -- a fifty-fifty collaboration on the music and lyrics -- but he recorded the demo without my assistance, I would only get an arrangement or production credit???? Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're saying here, that logic makes no sense. If you contributed chords or a principal melody, you wrote the song. No question.

 

[Mikky Dee]

I wish fans would stop speaking of Dangerous 30 as if it was even a possibility. Loren shouldn't hold back his material on the off-chance that such a project becomes reality. Several people had the same stance for Dangerous 25 and Off the Wall 30, neither of which happened (at least not in the way we wanted). It's fine to reference it with a hopeful connotation, but to discuss it with an air of expectancy is just ridiculous.

I agree that the air of expectancy is ridiculous. Fans dream up these milestones and are then angry and disappointed when they're not observed by the Estate.

Even Michael, himself, when he was alive, only observed Thriller 25, nothing else and I'm not sure how enthusiastic he was about it. He always said that he wanted to look forwards, not backwards. The Estate cannot possibly observe 20, 25, 30, 35 year anniversaries for every single album. I don't see other artists and/or their Estates doing that, either. Sometimes less really is more.

Who knows whether or not he was paid fairly? Several people have suggested that they would've worked for free just to be in Michael's presence. Plus, Michael has screwed over his collaborators before (e.g., Brad Buxer, Greg Phillinganes, the writers of "Whatever Happens"), so there's really no way for any of us to know.

"Screwed over his collaborators" is an exaggeration and not exactly fair to Michael, in my view. As more time passes, people who worked with him have started to change their stories, regarding how much input they had, on songs. Brad Buxer, in particular, has (apparently) contributed more and more and more of SIM, every time he speaks about it. He tells a different story now, to what he originally said, when Michael was alive and I'm not down with that.

And once again, just because the involved parties may not have a problem with it doesn't mean it's still isn't indicative of Michael abusing his power.

Some of these people had an entire career because of Michael and still have their "name" in the business, today, because of him. Michael abused nothing. He was the genius that they all wanted to work with and most of them came away from their experience with him, greatly enriched because of it.

 

[Mikky Dee]

I agree with you, but sadly MJ fans sure do act as though they have the right to do whatever they want and they'll try to justify their actions in any way they can. The recent crowdfunding campaign for the Oslo(?) concert was a very clear example of that.

YEP and that won't be happening again. At least not publicly.

 

[michaelsson]

thats the business. get over it. if you received your money or sold certain rights then thats on you. if you agree to give a co writing credit just to get your track on an album thats on you. nobody forced you.nobody is guarenteed to be listed in the credits. as long as they were paid I'm sure they don't care.

 

[ChrisC]

A debate can be had about whether or not it's a big deal if all parties consented to the agreement, but there's no question that Michael took undue credit on several situations. That cannot be disputed.

Nah. To me there's clearly a grey area that's worth some investigation and questions being asked. But it is not beyond dispute. Because it fits that analogy of a more powerful person wielding power over a person of lesser strength, doesn't make it all true.

And yes, the SPYHO demo and the version that appeared on the Pepsi cassette are unrecognisably different. When I heard the demo I didn't even know it was an early form of the track.