Michael - The Great Album Debate

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

@Ivy

Law, court, legal system, proof, ... let's stop considering law as the ultimate Gospel of what can be proven right or wrong. The Court will never be perfect no matter the amount of arguments or counter-arguments we provide.

I really don't know why you are sticking all the time to what the Law and the Court would say. I don't think that anyone denies what the Court would say.

The thing is crystal clear. The Estate --the official body-- considers those tracks to be genuine. In other words, it is as if Michael Jackson came and said himself that those tracks are by him. So going to court and claiming those tracks not to be Michael Jackson against "Michael Jackson" (the Estate) would be absurd --legally.

The thing we are dealing with is beyond what the Court would rule i.e. outside Court and the legal system the Estate is NOT Michael Jackson and will never be. The problem we are dealing with is cemented:

-the Estate claims it is Michael Jackson
-SONY claims it is Michael Jackson
-some musicologists claim it is Michael Jackson (although no musicologist can claim it 100%)
-Cascios claim it is Michael Jackson
-Jason Malachi denies to be involved

This case in Court is closed even before opening it. So let's stop even bothering evoking the Court as if it was Gospel and the final truth.

I can give you some examples were cases were cemented and the very same legal system condemned innocent people to death:

Johnny Frank Garett - executed
Wayne Felker - executed
Cameron Willingham - executed
...
Common point? There is a serious doubt they had ever been guilty of their crimes. The evidence and forensic analysis that was conducted has been seriously questioned after they were executed. Today the above mentioned ones are believed to have been wrongfully executed. Oh yes, the Court did its job of course based on the evidence they had at the time of trial, yet they were wrong and the evidence was not the same as the truth. Oops? Too late.

So let's step aside from the evidence acceptable by the Holy Court and stop blindly believe and accept what the Court would rule and see why the fans are protesting here:

MJ's voice on those Cascio tracks is:

-questionable (fact, not a myth)
-shaky
-unfamiliar vibrato
-youngish
-different timbre
-words copy-pasted in the middle of the sentences, here is the proof listen to it: http://www.zshare.net/audio/825030868b4d0741/
-lack of "hee hees"
-lack of "aoows"
-lack of "dahs" (many of them are are pasted)
-lack of natural grit and husk
-exaggerated "yelps" and "gulps"
-many of the songs ressemble previously released melodies such as "Stranger in Moscow", "On the Line", "Heaven Can Wait", "They Don't Care About Us", "Let me let go",...
-more common points found with JM's voice type than with MJ's voice type
-fans being unable to tell if they hear Michael Jackson 100%, 90%, 80%, 70%, ...0%!

All these arguments are not sufficient in Court, yet all these things are present in those songs and no Court can deny it.

There are two types of evidence: the court one and what you see, hear, taste, feel and smell one. If you can't prove the second type of evidence, it means that the Court wins and is right, but it does not mean that the Court holds the truth, because one day the second one could be proven as it often happens. And all the Court could do is rule again. Oops too late, the damage has already been done.

 

[Grent]

If you really do like to know: Since I mastered Musicology from university and have been an musician for over 20 years I kind of am an expert. I would never call myself an expert though and I never did.

And it doesn't take an expert to know facts on Can't get you out of my mind.
Jeez, are you trying to impress anyone? That's the impression you make. Almost everytime. Presenting your 'facts'...

*Stopping feeding the troll once and for all*

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

If you really do like to know: Since I mastered Musicology from university and have been an musician for over 20 years I kind of am an expert. I would never call myself an expert though and I never did.

Are you willing to pass a test

What do you think of the choice of instruments, arrangements and complexity in melody about this (knowing that everything has been made by the same person including singing):


[youtube]4dp21DRTgH0[/youtube]

 

[Korgnex]

If Sony or the MJ Estate were fooled, there would be no reason for them not to take the Cascios into a court. They could only profit from suing them - financially and image-wise.

Yet it was actually the MJ Estate who had to approve the US Copyright Office registration concerning Michael's participation for it to become valid. Neither have they chosen not to approve what Eddie Cascio has sent in on 27th June 2009 nor have they ever contested it.

Jeez, are you trying to impress anyone? That's the impression you make. Almost everytime. Presenting your 'facts'...

*Stopping feeding the troll once and for all*

Calling me a troll now?
Hmm, WHO presented his own thoughts about things that have allegedly "burned to [people's] brains"? It was YOU, of course. Believers would only be idiots that have been fooled by Malachi and other fakes before (that's basically what you said). That's one of your so-called "facts"...

Neither do you care to get the song title correct nor do you have a history of informing people about fakes like I do. Yet you're accusing me and others to be "brainwashed" etc. because you fail to accept any other opinion than yours.
And yes, you have called yourself an expert. You have even focused on analysing the music - "as an expert" - between Cascio and Malachi tracks which is an impasse because you simply ignore the fact that the music was produced by people who have nothing to do with Malachi, yet you claim that would be another "evidence". As a musicologist you should know that a lot of basic melodies and similarities (and that's all you've addressed) can be found in a lot of today's mainstream music that is produced like an assembly line work. The producers can be totally different people who don't know about each other, yet their work can share some basic melodies and similarities.
And what shall this have to do with the vocals that are questioned? You're acting like you would have found anything telling.

 

[SheilaMJFan4Ever]

My main issue with the album is that it, obviously, didn't have Michael's creative input into it, so therefore it's not had the deep thought process into putting the tracks into it.

I can't believe Michael would have chosen half the tracks on this, but then again I've heard some fans say the borderline similarities to Invincible (Monster reminds me of Threatened) are proof he's alive and pulling the strings from somewhere. Breaking News' intro is a direct copy (almost) of Tabloid Junkie's (from History obviously) intro too, that really leapt out at me.

Can't win ...

That is the main reason I steer clear of posthumous albums from ANY artist, because the end result isn't their final vision/interpretation of the songs. Someone else is second guessing the artist, which is impossible. Leave it raw or leave it alone. My sister gave me "Michael" as a gift and I respectfully gave it back to her, un-opened. She understood my stance and I'm glad.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

If Sony or the MJ Estate were fooled, there would be no reason for them not to take the Cascios into a court. They could only profit from suing them - financially and image-wise.

Yet it was actually the MJ Estate who had to approve the US Copyright Office registration concerning Michael's participation for it to become valid. Neither have they chosen not to approve what Eddie Cascio has sent in on 27th June 2009 nor have they ever contested it.

Why SONY would sue anyone if the musicologists told them that they can sell them as MJ's tracks. There is more profit in selling them as MJ's tracks in the long term.

 

[Grent]

And yes, you have called yourself an expert. You have even focused on analysing the music - "as an expert" - between Cascio and Malachi tracks which is an impasse because you simply ignore the fact that the music was produced by people who have nothing to do with Malachi, yet you claim that would be another "evidence".

Ok, the very last time!

1) Korgnex, you are a liar.
2) Reread the post
3) Tell me where exactly I say 'expert', where I call anything or even imply 'evidence'
4) Tell me where I am ignoring facts as I was simply ASKED to analyse music

Can't be. Really.

That's one of your so-called "facts"...

"I believe, believers listened to those songs so many times already, that "this is real, this is MJ" is burned to their brains."

You think I presented this as a fact? Maybe it's just the language barrier, I don't know.


This is the end on that. Mods hopefully realize this is self defense. Since I am publically defamed a simple PM won't handle it properly.

 

[Korgnex]

1) Korgnex, you are a liar.
3) Tell me where exactly I say 'expert', where I call anything or even imply 'evidence'

Sometimes I feel my musically trained ears are worth nothing as I am not able to differentiate between the "Michael Jackson+James Porte"-supervoice on 6 Cascio songs and the nobody-lamo-voice on Burn 2 Night.

These differences must be extremely subtle.
As far as I know only one person is able to hear the difference.
And that person hears so much difference that the conclusion these are two different persons and not one person singing slightly differnt comes up first.

If you believe Michael Jackson's voice changed and combined with Porte became the Cacio voice - how come the Burn 2 Night voice is out of this Jackson+Porte range? Maybe more Porte this time? Maybe more ... oh, how I love this buzzword ... "processing" ? Maybe more shower, more tube, more buttons, more sickness, more pills, more basement ...

The other way round: I also find it extremely difficult to understand, that when you hear the differences between Malachi and the Cascio singer, the only conclusion is that these are 2 different people. I mean you come with showers, tubes, buttons to explain why MJ sounds so different, but you immediately can tell it's not Malachi due to small timing differences?

Those ears must be worth millions. :bugeyed

And remember: this "MJ+Porte"-supervoice is just a theory presented as fact by some userx irate:. Based on nothing. The theory says, words sounding too off MJs voice to explain them by [insert BS excuse], are Porte alone (just like, events we can't explain, are devine miracles) whereas everything that slightly resembles MJ are MJ+Porte mixed and matched so extremely well that it sounds like one voice - in 12 songs. Well ... Burn 2 Night must be mostly Porte then ...

This theory by the way contradicts most of Eddie's, Teddy's and Roger's informations about the songs. :wacko:

In this posting you have presented yourself to be the all-knowing guy who has the right to say what is nonsense (["insert BS excuse"], "Maybe more shower, more tube, more buttons, more sickness, more pills, more basement ...") and what must be right according to you. And you've - again - ridiculed any believer/neutral person, playing down their intelligence with remarks like "those ears must be worth millions" and by using derogative language and lots of smilies.

Not to mention that in almost every posting you're ridiculing me. ("that one person")

With every song that was leaked, there has always been a doubter who said "Oh my god, this time there's not even James Porte in it and Jason doesn't even try to imitate Michael".
It happened with "Stay", "All I Need", "Soldier Boy", "Burn 2Nite" etc
Doubters have always made contradicting statements, not only about what they hear - as they all hear different things - but as well about when and how these songs shall have been faked . They don't bother about it as they still have a common ground.

 

[Grent]

Are you implying I meant myself with that blue sentence?

Edit: Ok, regarding to your last edit you probably refer to "musically trained ears" ... well. That's just the way it is. I'm not going to lie here.

Ok Korgnex. Then I'm sorry. I guess you just do have difficulties with the language.
This is directed towards KingMikeJ, because he is the only one here who believes Burn 2 Night is fake whereas the other Cascio songs are not. So he is the only one who hears that particular difference I was talking about.

If you have some more questions, let me know.

Still no sign of "expert" or "evidence" though, so my liar still stands.

 

[Korgnex]

Erm, there's no language barrier. With a remark like "my musically trained ears" you're clearly describing yourself as an expert, putting yourself on a podest above all people with no "muscially trained ears"
As expected you - of course - now try to claim that this would be totally different from using the word "expert".

Don't insult my intelligence, sir!


You're pretty much confident to have found "evidence":

You can easily point out their ignorance when they say Jason can't sing properly.
The comparison between Monster and Let me let go shows almost the same timbre, style and quality.
How can they then say the Monster-singer is superior? Well, because their brain is cheating them based on the belief it is indeed Michael Jackson.

You are clearly impressed by comparison clips and you treat them like "evidence". In your argumentation you're playing the psychologist and are telling us how the believers' brain is "cheating them" and how you "can easily point out [our] ignorance".

Not confident of having evidence? Sir, you don't have to use the word "evidence" itself, your postings unveil what you consider to be "evidence".


Enough of this. Everyone can read your postings and judge for oneself.

 

[Grent]

Maybe it's time you start talking about the music and stop searching every post for possible insults and so forth.

I know you presented a theory of where we hear mostly Porte and where we hear mostly MJ.
Since I don't find that anymore, could you repost that theory? And could you also use it on the newly leaked songs?
Also, just start to tell us a little more. You always leave out the crucial parts. Do you know how Porte sounds? I would like to know too, I just found one song and don't know whether it's genuine.

Is it your ears only, or do you have a quote that leads to the belief that Porte and MJ are nicely overdubbed?
Just tell us and differentiate between what you think and what you know due to quotes or letters.

 

[Grent]

Erm, there's no language barrier. With a remark like "my musically trained ears" you're clearly describing yourself as an expert, putting yourself on a podest above all people with no "muscially trained ears"
As expected you - of course - now try to claim that this would be totally different from using the word "expert".

Don't insult my intelligence, sir!

Korgnex, please listen. You said I called myself an expert, which I never did. You even wrote "as an expert" as if it was my quote. And of course it is different to either say "I am an expert" or "I have musically trained ears since I mastered musicology from university".

What shall I do? Lie about it?
It all comes down to Bumper, who asked if anyone could analyse music. I said, as a musicologist, which I just am - sorry bout that, I am glad to help. You took that and made "as an expert" out of it.

Everyone can read your postings and judge for oneself.

You're damn right about that one.

You can easily point out their ignorance when they say Jason can't sing properly.
The comparison between Monster and Let me let go shows almost the same timbre, style and quality.
How can they then say the Monster-singer is superior? Well, because their brain is cheating them based on the belief it is indeed Michael Jackson.

You did not get the most important part of this quote. What I was trying to say is, that the "it cannot possibly be Jason, I mean, listen to him - he can't even sing" argument has no grounds since a) Malachi is not that bad and b) the Cascio singer does not sound better regarding singing abilities. Nothing about evidence.

 

[Korgnex]

The posting I was quoting had nothing to do with Bumper's request which you answered in another posting.
And you know this, so can anyone who looks it up...

Since then your postings have became aggressive and only focused on ridiculing other fans.

Now it happened.
Clearly the same singer on all Cascio songs.

[...]

I love how the german disciples of Korgnex love all the Cascio songs ... i
It's hilarious and sad at the same time.

The musicologist has spoken.

 

[Grent]

My god, I know what you quoted ... "musically trained ears", but the quote you referred to before was "as a musicologist" which ... oh god.

The musicologist has spoken.

So has the internet troll.


*ignore*

 

[irma]

Michael Jackson:

Imitated... Impersonated

But NEVER duplicated... we love? you Michael Jackson... RIP

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

@Korgnex & Grent

Guys, guys. Can we make a step back please. Let's settle this in the best possible way.

You are both fans, aren't you? You both love Michael Jackson, don't you?
You both feel insulted, don't you? Fine, so do we all on all sides either openly or implicitly. Now, expressing anger can help to calm down and I hope that once your anger has been evacuated you could share what you know.

@Korgenx,

When I read posts it is true that you always give impression that you know things that some of us don't. So please, if you have already provided all kinds of info in the past, why don't you provide more info now about things we should know and we seem not to.

Indeed, you presented a theory on who sang which line in Breaking News. What did you base your theory on? Can you do it for the rest of the songs so the doubters could pay more attention to those particular lines and most importantly what is your theory based on? Please do inform us.


@Grent

Indeed, I asked a musician to compare a snippet of Monster and Let me let go, and you were the only one in this thread who provided a musical transcription of it. So, I think as a musician your opinion is important because you can translate music into words and our words into music when we can't use the right term for what we hear.


So both of you, why don't you present your evidence from what you know/hear and confront them explaining on what grounds you believe what?


p.s. My questions are very simple to both of you:

listen to this acappella and tell me:

1) Do you hear Michael at all
2) Do you hear the pasted parts of Michael's voice in the middle of sentences especially towards the end?
3) Do you hear another voice that is neither James Porte nor Michael Jackson?
4) Finally, is this kind of song with such leading vocals acceptable to you as fans?

Thanks, here's the link and please listen to the end:

http://www.zshare.net/audio/825030868b4d0741/

 

[Chamife]

"Get Out Of My Mind" is a song by independant French artist Nicolas Piedra (artist name: Ayhnik) that was recorded in 2002. The song could be downloaded for free from a French independant artists network.

It was some ugly fan who took it and labelled it as "Michael Jackson". A lie planted and spread by a fan.
The song was most prominently featured on a Russian MJ fan site along with "Escape". That site claimed that the song would feature Ashanti and Ja Rule...

There was even a statement from the singer when he was informed that his song has been spread as from Michael Jackson.


It's total bullshit that the song would have anything to do with "Beautiful Girl".




I could bet that people like Grent who now call themselves experts didn't know this. But attacking a fan like me who has made threads about fakes years ago and has informed people about the Jason Malachi tracks "Mamacita", "Let Me Let Go" etc. since they started to circulate.

But yeah, we believers must be plain stupid...

My final advice: Never pigeonhole people like Grent did in his posting. Reality isn't black and white, it has colors...

not to mention someone's currently challenging them in a court case which is the best thing any doubter could do in order to achieve their goal which is to uncover their so-called "truth" ...




Hey Bumper! :flowers: I wasn't adressing your posting but the other one by someone else. ;

Oh..you're adressing my post. Thank you for clarifying.

I've heard this song for the first time yesterday and I'm not aware of any controversy and background info surrounding that. I'm totally unprejudiced. The similarity is stunning to me. Hard for me to believe this is a coincidence. Anyway, thanks for the background info on this song. You say these songs don't have anything to do with eachother and that this opinion is bullshit. Ok, thanks for your opinion and I will continue to have/make my own, based on what I see, feel, hear and read.

 

[ginvid]

I'm aware of all that ginvid. I just want the message to get across loud and clear that, as the consumers, we don't want any more of these songs, but as we've seen with Cirque, there is a possibility that we are not being listened to. Have you heard everything that's leaked? Opinions?

No, I have not heard everything that has been leaked. I admit, I am quite out of the loop. Everything that I have heard so far is very disturbing, vomit inducing, and angering. I will not be buying anything else with songs on it that are not MJ singing in the lead unless it is dubbed a duet, and then I will decide on an individual basis.

It pisses me off to no end that these people think it is ok to to deceive consumers this way. And it infuriates me even more that I cannot do anything about it.
I also find it frustrating that some fans have such a hatred for his family and their stupidity that they unwittingly lend their support to a group of people who are equally damaging to MJ's legacy in the long run, but in a much more deceptive way. The family does it out in the open. Others do it in shadows. But the results are the same.

I don't know if the voice on the Cascio songs is JM. But I know, IMO, it is not MJ. I would be willing to be convinced otherwise and deny everything I hear, if I were afforded some communication with those who made the declarations that it was MJ. However, all attempts at communication with them outside of the letter written to the fan boards, has been ignored and steps have been taken to shoot down anyone with a dissenting opinion at all turns. Therefore, I have to come to conlusions on my own. Based off of what evidence I see presented from both sides. My conclusion is that it is not MJ on the majority of the Cascio songs.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

No, I have not heard everything that has been leaked. I admit, I am quite out of the loop. Everything that I have heard so far is very disturbing, vomit inducing, and angering. I will not be buying anything else with songs on it that are not MJ singing in the lead unless it is dubbed a duet, and then I will decide on an individual basis.

It pisses me off to no end that these people think it is ok to to deceive consumers this way. And it infuriates me even more that I cannot do anything about it.
I also find it frustrating that some fans have such a hatred for his family and their stupidity that they unwittingly lend their support to a group of people who are equally damaging to MJ's legacy in the long run, but in a much more deceptive way. The family does it out in the open. Others do it in shadows. But the results are the same.

I don't know if the voice on the Cascio songs is JM. But I know, IMO, it is not MJ. I would be willing to be convinced otherwise and deny everything I hear, if I were afforded some communication with those who made the declarations that it was MJ. However, all attempts at communication with them outside of the letter written to the fan boards, has been ignored and steps have been taken to shoot down anyone with a dissenting opinion at all turns. Therefore, I have to come to conlusions on my own. Based off of what evidence I see presented from both sides. My conclusion is that it is not MJ on the majority of the Cascio songs.

Have you ever listened to this?

http://www.zshare.net/audio/825030868b4d0741/

 

[ginvid]

If Sony or the MJ Estate were fooled, there would be no reason for them not to take the Cascios into a court. They could only profit from suing them - financially and image-wise.

I don't think this is true. If Sony were to admit that they were duped by the Cascios, it would be a financial disater for them. They are already thought of dubiously by MJ fans because of their history. If Sony were duped and found out, they would have to know either before the product was released or after. If they knew before, they have to explain why two separate musicologists who "were renowned in ther filed" were not able to spot the forgery. They would have to explain why they ignored the outcry from fans. They would have to explain why they ignored the outcries from a member of the Estate. And by still releasing the forgeries, they open themselves up to being complicit in a criminal act and are opening themselves up to major lawsuits by fans. All credibility they had left would be shot. It would be a huge embarrassment and the amount of money they would lose, especially over a long period of time would enormous. By admiting they found out about it after the songs were released, they would still have to explain why their musicologists could not see past this. They would still loose any credibility, they would still open themselves up to being sued by fans (who now have proof the songs are fake, the admission of Sony). They would have to explain in detail what steps they took to prove the tracks were fake and prove that this information could not be found out before hand. They will have to make themselves transparent and this is a no-no for every big company.

The Estate will have to explain what made McClain change his mind. They will have to name all of the people who worked with MJ who said it was MJ. All of their reputations will be shot. People will boycott the Estate and they will lose so much revenue. That 10 project deal with Sony that would generate so much money, poof! gone. There would be a huge windfall from this and the Estate would also open themselves up to lawsuits. Can you imagine what people will say if they found out Sony and theEstate new these songswere fake?

No company is going to make themselves vulnerable like this. So if they were duped, it is much easier to just deny everything and keep in the check the few fans who still discuss this. That way they can still keep making money off of 'Michael'. It is more cost effective.

The bottom line is the bottom line.

 

[Korgnex]

^ I disagree. This is not how the law works. If they were duped and didn't know about it at any time, they have nothing to lose but only to gain as the Cascios would be sued for recovery of any damages Sony would have to pay to customers who want a refund for the CD.

When I said "they were duped" I meant exactly that. But in your posting you're altering it to "if they wered duped and found out". Yes, then you are right, of course. That would be a total desaster for them.
But that's not what I have said.




Btw, what do you mean with "their history". Are you one of those that support/believe the theory that they killed him or that they ruined INVINCIBLE or any of the many other stories?
I'm not criticizing or judging, I'm just asking.


Anyway: Sony is out of this. This is a legal fact. They have only acquired the exclusive distribution rights for some years and they have requested the source material to be worked on by high-profile producers.

It's the MJ Estate who is the sole owner of Michael Jackson's copyright on Michael's participation in the original Cascio songs, no-one else.

Here's a copy-paste from what I posted at MaxJax:
===============================

I said I won't post anything more about Cascio tracks. I'll stick to this. Instead I will explain a legal aspect some people don't understand:

The songs were registered on 27th June 2009. However some people get this wrong. On that day the registration was NOT in the bag. At that date it was just an application for the moment, not yet a registration in the bag. As Michael Jackson was no longer with us and as with his untimely death no person was legally authorized to represent him but the not yet constituted MJ Estate with its two heads that couldn't take office at that time, the registration was provisionally invalid (more exact: Eddie and James' work was protected rightfully but not yet Michael's contribution to the songs). It only became valid when John McClain and John Branca took offices and attended to the registration.
Legally there's no need to change the date of registration because the OK from the MJ Estate applies ex post facto (retroactive).

Effective Date Of Copyright Registration
Copyright registration is effective on the day the US Copyright Office receives the appropriate form, copy or copies of the work, and the filing fee from you, until your claim is either refused or accepted.

The registration date (as well as the creation date which is often just a placeholder - as can be seen with many registrations of other songs from MJ where it just says 2009 because the MJ Estate didn't have more concrete data at hand about when a song was actually recorded when they registered the songs) thus doesn't tell much about when the registration was in the bag. It just says that everything they handed in was documented on that day (27th June 2009). There's no way they could fool the MJ Estate because in order to get their approval they had to show everything they wanted to register rightfully on the date of the application.

Applications and fees received without appropriate copies, phonorecords, or identifying material will not be processed by the Copyright Office and are not returned.

As you can see Michael's vocals that were later tested positive had to be included.
Otherwise they would have to fill another application if that material didn't include "appropriate copies, ... identifying material" for what they claimed it to be (Remember, their application lists MJ with this:
Authorship: sound recording, performance, production, compilation, LYRICS.)


Btw, registration with the US Copyright Office usually takes some time, especially when a deceased artist's estate is involved.
So, basically people don't understand that procedure at all. It's impossible to have a rightful registration within 2 days. The 27th June 2009 is NOTHING but the day of the application FOR the registration. And the MJ Estate which is needed for a rightful registration didn't exist until later.

I hope more people would understand this...

Are you seriously saying that the Cascio's had to prove and did prove to the Estate that the voice was Michael and that they did this in 2009 before the copyright office would complete the registration. A bit far fetched considering they didn't know the tracks existed until 2010 don't you think? And as i said before the copyright office have absolutely nothing to do with verifying if what they receive is authentic or not and neither the Cascio's nor anybody else wishing to register anything do not need permission from anyone to simply register a copyright.

You don't understand it. The registration's part that is associated to Michael Jackson is not valid until the MJ Estate think it is. They have to approve it. The requester cannot register sound recordings as Michael Jackson without the MJ Estate's approval. Until there's no approval that part is provisonally invalid.

Try registering sth as from Michael Jackson and you'll see that your application will be rejected or have you ever seen entries in the US copyright office database that have nothing to do with Michael Jackson, yet list him? Nope...


"Jason is going to go global" simply meant his CD-R on demand distribution of his CD "Critical" would be avalaible worldwide for the first time - which was true.


They certainly cannot be unaware of it as the US Copyright office demands confirmation from all involved copyright contenders, so they automatically contacted the MJ Estate once it existed. We don't know when exactly the registration was in the bag. It certainly took several months.

As has been explained several times here: Both co-executors of the MJ Estate have full power together and one can't do anything without the other (e.g. compliance, permission, contestation, acquiescence etc.). So that story about one of them trying his best not to publish them (as claimed by Taryll) can't be true as they wouldn't have to prove the songs would be fake, it would have been sufficient if there wouldn't be any confirmation for their authenticity.

That news article by Roger Friedman says only this:

McClain, unlike Jackson intimates Frank DiLeo and John Branca, has so far not heard the Cascio tapes, I am told.
“He’s resisting it,” says a source, while he’s busy sorting through those 60 tracks.

It's open for interpretation. Roger doesn't know all things. It sounds like McClain didn't have much interest for this kind of demos that he didn't feel strong enough for release in some form, he was rather opting for finished songs. Yet - as we all now - he later approved their commercial usage. It's not possible that he didn't approve it. Branca cannot outfox him. Also please read the album's credits. The only thing that could be true is that McClain doesn't like the tracks personally but he's free to have an opinion, yet that has nothing to do with legal aspects.

Also so far "authorship of the songs and copyright regulations" have never been contested. If Eddie didn't have any stable proof, the MJ Estate and Sony Music could only profit from contesting it.


Actually I just wanted to do a single post but with you commenting about it, I've now made three in a row.

 

[love is magical]

^ I disagree. This is not how the law works. If they were duped and didn't know about it at any time, they have nothing to lose but only to gain as the Cascios would be sued for recovery of any damages Sony would have to pay to customers who want a refund for the CD.

When I said "they were duped" I meant exactly that. But in your posting you're altering it to "if they wered duped and found out". Yes, then you are right, of course. That would be a total desaster for them.
But that's not what I have said.




Btw, what do you mean with "their history". Are you one of those that support/believe the theory that they killed him or that they ruined INVINCIBLE or any of the many other stories?
I'm not criticizing or judging, I'm just asking.

I respectfully disagree with you. If Sony is duped and didn't have any prior knowledge about the scheme, Sony would still rather takes the route that they are taking now - keep a low profile and ignore the dissenting voice. The reputational damage and negative goodwill are much worse than refunds to customers who bought the CD and the overheads related to album production.

Law is really not the ultimate Gospel. Court of law is not always the place to find truth. Furthermore, Sony is a for-profit organization. It exists to make money. Sony doesn't care about justice, truth or artistic legacy. If Sony admits being duped and didn't know anything about it, it would still be a slap in the face. Why would Sony wants to subject the company to such embarassment? The vast majority of people who bought the CD do not listen to Michael Jackson the way hardcore fans do. It's more cost effective and makes better business sense to just let the controversy die.

As ginvid mentioned earlier, bottom line is bottom line. A business is a business. A business does not exist to seek justice and truth. It exists to make money for its shareholders.

BTW, I'm not a conspiracy theorist. However, I think the disagreement Michael had with the then Sony management is one of the reasons why Invincible did not become a bigger hit.

 

[Arklove]

Korgnex, I'm interested to see your answers to Bumper's questions a few posts up

 

[Jesta]

Korgnex, I'm interested to see your answers to Bumper's questions a few posts up

As would I.

 

[ginvid]

^ I disagree. This is not how the law works. If they were duped and didn't know about it at any time, they have nothing to lose but only to gain as the Cascios would be sued for recovery of any damages Sony would have to pay to customers who want a refund for the CD.

When I said "they were duped" I meant exactly that. But in your posting you're altering it to "if they wered duped and found out". Yes, then you are right, of course. That would be a total desaster for them.
But that's not what I have said.

But in order for Sony to ever go to court, they would have to find out that they were duped, right? I said they would have to have found out either before hand or after the fact (the album release). Sony could never sue the Cascios for fraud if they were not aware a fraud took place.

When I spoke to my friend who is an attorney, she said the first thing wouls tell Sony, if they were to find out they were fake, is to admit to nothing, because it leaves them vulnerable. unfortunately, that is the way the law works. Once you admit to something, what you say becomes part of record and can be used against you. To Sony, all of that may be too mych of a headache and they just would not want to risk it. Hence, why even is they were duped, why they would not only remain quiet, but deny everything.

As for my pesonal opinion, I do not think MJ had a problem with all of Sony. I think he had a big problem with Mottola. However, it cannot be denied that Sony has a relationship with MJ fans that is fragile. They know that there is a large faction that already dislikes them and there is a whole nother group just looking for an excuse to dislike them. When you have a difficult relationship with a consumer that you will need on a long term basis, you try to keep as much pressure off of it is as possible. Look at how fans are reacting. They are ready to take on and take down anyone who is standing in their way when they become united. Can you imagine if a united front of MJ decided that Sony was the enemy and went forth together to spread that message? Sometimes you have to think long term. Sony would have too much to lose to go public and say they were fooled into believing that some fake tracks were indeed MJ. IMHO.

 

[ginvid]

Have you ever listened to this?

http://www.zshare.net/audio/825030868b4d0741/

Sorry for the DP. I'm at work (about to get fired) and cannot listen to this now. I will upload when I get home.

Thanks Bumper!

 

[love is magical]

Korgnex,

By now, many of us have basic knowledge of copyright registration and legal aspects regarding intellectual property ownership (thanks largely to ivy). We still have doubts not becasue we choose to ignore the laws or refuse to reason. We still have doubts because what our ears hear do not correspond to what we know of Michael's voice. You can keep giving us legal facts, but it truly doesn't help. The signals our brain neurons processed would not magically change after reading more law book excerpts.

Please stop assuming that people who have doubts are people who have zero legal knowledge. I hope you would discuss the questions that Bumper has and start talking about the "music". Explain to us what we have missed and how you came up with your theory.

I follow this thread religiously. When Grent posted that "million dollar ears" post, I knew for sure he's not directed at you. He didn't aim to ridicule the believers neither. He raised a good point. Some of the believers said they can hear a difference between Cascio tracks and Jason Malachi tracks and claimed Jason has an inferior singing technique and lousy phrasing, which I don't disagree. Hence, Jason is not the Cascio singers. Meanwhile, the believers do not apply the same theory to the difference between the Cascio tracks and Michael Jackson tracks. The singer(s) in the Cascio tracks clearly have a much inferior vocal technique than Michael Jackson. The singer(s) in the Cascio tracks clearly have a much worse phrasing technique than Michael Jackson. Yet, the difference is only attributed to PROCESSING!!! Do you see the point? Some believers also pick and choose the points that fit their thinkings.

 

[Jesta]

burn2nite, why you lurk the way you do? Join in the discussion, it'll be fun!

 

[Arklove]

Korgnex, I'm interested to see your answers to Bumper's questions a few posts up

 

[Jesta]