Michael - The Great Album Debate

[OnirMJ]

I don't see any reason to believe that anything was tampered with or destroyed. It seems that what happened is that Michael did not record songs that had originally been recorded by James Porte, despite Eddie wanting him to. Then Michael dies and the Porte versions are registered with Michael's name tacked on as co-writer and co-performer along with Porte and Eddie (they are all given equal credit). Over the course of the next 9 months, four more songs are written and the entire lot is recorded with Malachi on leads and the finished tracks (complete with all copy pastes) are registered in April 2010, divided up into the original compositions as one registration and the newly written songs as another. They are then offered to Sony/Estate for a million dollars a piece, who jump at the chance as they are desperately searching for material.

Which 4 songs were written after Michael died? Did Estate really paid them 12 MIL $ for those songs? Where did you find that information? I heard somewhere that it was 5 MIL $.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Which 4 songs were written after Michael died? Did Estate really paid them 12 MIL $ for those songs? Where did you find that information? I heard somewhere that it was 5 MIL $.

I think he meant that Eddie asked 12 millions (1m per song), but that he finally got only around 5 million.

 

[dam2040]

I think he meant that Eddie asked 12 millions (1m per song), but that he finally got only around 5 million.

Poor him! I'd like to 'only' have 5 million!

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

Poor him! I'd like to 'only' have 5 million!

Well out of 12 millions he wanted, it's less than a half. Hence only.

 

[StellaJackson]

Which 4 songs were written after Michael died? Did Estate really paid them 12 MIL $ for those songs? Where did you find that information? I heard somewhere that it was 5 MIL $.

I'm going by the Ason (Angelikson) copyright registrations which are split into two files, 9 of 13 and 4 of 13. These two registrations are split into different sets of writers, with Michael only credited on the 9 of 13. Conveniently, no performer is mentioned on either. I would say they are almost certainly the ones that were written after Michael died, and I'd wager that Water is one of them because they wrote it around what Michael said in TII in an attempt to make it look like he was singing that song. I know that makes 13 total, but it may be because of two versions of Monster? A million a track was the asking price. They didn't get anything near that.

 

[Lucilla]

Poor him! I'd like to 'only' have 5 million!

I still think it's a little cheap for 12 unheard "MJ songs.

 

[WildStyle]

I think even if they were actual MJ songs, they way overpaid. They really must have been desperate.

 

[Pentum]

Watch out, we might have a future candidate to fake MJ songs. We already knew how much Jason copied MJ. Now we have Justin Bieber doing the same even worse:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmsofnRTmYw

 

[MusicMan26]

And they still can't spell Billie Jean correctly.

 

[Arklove]

And they still can't spell Billie Jean correctly.

Huge pet peeve of mine! lol....And when people spell his name 'Micheal' ....grrrrr....

 

[kreen]

I'm going by the Ason (Angelikson) copyright registrations which are split into two files, 9 of 13 and 4 of 13. These two registrations are split into different sets of writers, with Michael only credited on the 9 of 13. Conveniently, no performer is mentioned on either. I would say they are almost certainly the ones that were written after Michael died, and I'd wager that Water is one of them because they wrote it around what Michael said in TII in an attempt to make it look like he was singing that song. I know that makes 13 total, but it may be because of two versions of Monster? A million a track was the asking price. They didn't get anything near that.

I love your use of "almost certainly", when that whole theory of yours is based on nothing but your imagination and wishful thinking. So now the Cascio songs not only feature an impersonator, but they were written AFTER MJ died? The plot thickens! And I didn't know the Cascios had publicly released both their asking price for the songs, and the money they actually got from Sony.

Your dismissive "they didn't get anything near that" reveals your personal dislike for Eddie Cascio and James Porte : it just eats at you that they got money for those MJ songs. Yeah, I'm sure they feel terrible at having gotten "only" 5 million dollars. Of couse, Sony and the Estate not being in the habit of funding criminals and fraudsters, the Cascios would have reimbursed every penny by now if the songs were fake, and they'd be sitting in jail or doing community service. But since the songs are authentic, they're enjoying their millions, and I say more power to them!

 

[Arklove]

it just eats at you that they got money for those MJ songs. Yeah, I'm sure they feel terrible at having gotten "only" 5 million dollars. Of couse, Sony and the Estate not being in the habit of funding criminals and fraudsters, the Cascios would have reimbursed every penny by now if the songs were fake, and they'd be sitting in jail or doing community service. But since the songs are authentic, they're enjoying their millions, and I say more power to them!

Do you not get it? Of course it eats at us! How ridiculous! A so-called 'friend' makes millions off of Michael Jackson's name by releasing half-ass songs that sound absolutely NOTHING like MJ has ever sounded, splits the fan community to smithereens, leaves unanswered questions all over the place, refuses to share his experience working with MJ, and you're championing this by saying 'more power to them'???

I bet that tops Eddie's list of most proud moments ever.

 

[ivy]

We know that they've been tampered with though. We received information earlier in this situation that they couldn't just record Jason singing a full song, he doesn't sound enough like Michael to fool anyone that way. So they most likely did multiple takes to get a line to sound right, which we've been told by our own researchers (that's what I'll call them from now on). After doing that for all twelve songs, they put them together, made a complete song out of fragments, and added genuine Michael ad-libs and maybe the odd line from when he was actually singing while being recorded there. One could argue they pitched the voice before sending it to Sony, whatever the case may be, the original demos would be the fragments of lines, they'd be Jason singing the songs prior to Michael's ad-libs being added in.

yet a Jason who doesn't sound like Michael and a song made of fragments were able to fool two legit (as Sony and Estate not involved in fraud in your scenario) and top of the filed forensic musicologists?

You know they check for such stuff, don't you?

And if that's the case - meaning the end work was good enough to fool legit forensic analyst - then every result for any future or additional test will also come back as "Michael" and you will never ever prove this fraud.

Which 4 songs were written after Michael died? Did Estate really paid them 12 MIL $ for those songs? Where did you find that information? I heard somewhere that it was 5 MIL $.

Please give me the source of any payment information. You do realize that even the claim that they been paid is fan created and the same is true for the $5 and $12 million numbers. sure they are getting paid royalties but there's no credible source to say that they were paid for the songs.

and I enjoy Stella's interpretation of copyright registrations. There's no way of knowing what is included in the "collection" registrations and later / after Michael's death registrations doesn't make songs fake or sang by Malachi. Brad Buxter also registered songs in 2010, including Hollywood Tonight.

furthermore

I'm going by the Ason (Angelikson) copyright registrations which are split into two files

which you cannot see what's in them

9 of 13 and 4 of 13. These two registrations are split into different sets of writers, with Michael only credited on the 9 of 13.

rules require that different author requires different registrations.

Conveniently, no performer is mentioned on either.

Well it's because it's "Type of Work: Music" and not "sound recording". (MJ song book was a sound recording) It means it's sheet music and/or lyrics. It cannot be performed. . So it's not convenient or a conspiracy, it's just a fact of reality.

so sorry for debunking your theory.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

yet a Jason who doesn't sound like Michael and a song made of fragments were able to fool two legit (as Sony and Estate not involved in fraud in your scenario) and top of the filed forensic musicologists?

You know they check for such stuff, don't you?

And if that's the case - meaning the end work was good enough to fool legit forensic analyst - then every result for any future or additional test will also come back as "Michael" and you will never ever prove this fraud.

What a double standard.

When a famous forensic expert gets filmed working and analysing the audio files, gives interviews and explains why he believes that the newly discovered songs are sung by Elvis Presley, you claim fraud.

When jointly the Estate/SONY give no info about unnamed forensics, you exclude fraud.

Is that how you debunk other people's theory? By selectively believe in anonymous forensics unseen analysis?

Please give me the source of any payment information. You do realize that even the claim that they been paid is fan created and the same is true for the $5 and $12 million numbers. sure they are getting paid royalties but there's no credible source to say that they were paid for the songs.

And how do you know for a fact that Eddie hasn't been paid for the songs? You think he gave them away for free out of charity?
Also, where is the source that MJ sung those songs? Believers were jubilating when they announced that the worktapes were going to be released as a proof. Two years after, still no worktapes, no nothing. And people still believe the official version despite the lies already reported by Roger Friedman.

and I enjoy Stella's interpretation of copyright registrations. There's no way of knowing what is included in the "collection" registrations and later / after Michael's death registrations doesn't make songs fake or sang by Malachi. Brad Buxter also registered songs in 2010, including Hollywood Tonight.

Why do you enjoy it? Explain.

At least Hollywood Tonight has a demo, a trace on the paper written by MJ. Where are the slightest traces of the Cascio songs? Vanished? Songs that according to Eddie MJ worked hard on and that still according to Eddie's words MJ absolutely wanted to release them, plus backing the theory that MJ would LOVE the current controversy?

furthermore

which you cannot see what's in them



rules require that different author requires different registrations.



Well it's because it's "Type of Work: Music" and not "sound recording". (MJ song book was a sound recording) It means it's sheet music and/or lyrics. It cannot be performed. . So it's not convenient or a conspiracy, it's just a fact of reality.

so sorry for debunking your theory.

You haven't debunked anything. You have just proposed an alternative opinion. When you get some facts, which means, that you need to know for a fact what the registrations contain, then you can proudly say "debunk". So far everything is speculation, opinions and attempts to understand things from different angles. I didn't see Stella's post as a fact, but just as his strong opinion.

Now, let's say that your "fact" is correct. How do you know that MJ was involved at all in what was registered by Eddie? Where does that "fact" come from? So either way, yours or Stella's, you cannot claim this or that when you actually don't know the contents at all.



@Kreen

Your theory is that MJ's Invincible was poor, blahblahblah, yet Eddie apparently wasn't able to sell the Cascio tracks without more than a little help from Invincible album. Also, your theory regarding the voice is that MJ was sick and shell of a man in 2007 when he allegedly recorded the Cascio songs (although Eddie claims the contrary) and you expect people to take your posts seriously?

Find some real arguments, then come to debate. So far your arguments have tarnished MJ's singing capacity more than the tabloids.

 

[OnirMJ]

yet a Jason who doesn't sound like Michael and a song made of fragments were able to fool two legit (as Sony and Estate not involved in fraud in your scenario) and top of the filed forensic musicologists?

You know they check for such stuff, don't you?

And if that's the case - meaning the end work was good enough to fool legit forensic analyst - then every result for any future or additional test will also come back as "Michael" and you will never ever prove this fraud.




Please give me the source of any payment information. You do realize that even the claim that they been paid is fan created and the same is true for the $5 and $12 million numbers. sure they are getting paid royalties but there's no credible source to say that they were paid for the songs.

and I enjoy Stella's interpretation of copyright registrations. There's no way of knowing what is included in the "collection" registrations and later / after Michael's death registrations doesn't make songs fake or sang by Malachi. Brad Buxter also registered songs in 2010, including Hollywood Tonight.

furthermore



which you cannot see what's in them



rules require that different author requires different registrations.



Well it's because it's "Type of Work: Music" and not "sound recording". (MJ song book was a sound recording) It means it's sheet music and/or lyrics. It cannot be performed. . So it's not convenient or a conspiracy, it's just a fact of reality.

so sorry for debunking your theory.

How do you know that there were any forensic musicologists? Because Estate told you so? In my opinion there were no forensic musicologists at all because they would never ever match Cascio vocals with MJ vocals from that time period (Hold My Hand, WBSS 2008). And if there were forensic musicologists then they have done a poor job (they didn't compare vocals with Jason Malachi like that guy did with Elvis) or they were paid to bring results that 1/2 of the Estate wanted to hear! And if there were forensic musicologists why are they keeping results as a secret? Why not make them public so we can all see it??

And Eddie got paid. That is for sure. Even Roger Friedman (their close friend) wrote that Eddie was negotiating with the Estate to sell them the tracks or he would go to the other publishing company and that he hired the best lawyers in the industry. Also Randy Jackson (I know he's not a credible source, but I believe him in this one) said that Cascios got huge amount of money - millions of dollars. If they were MJ's friends they would give the songs to the Estate for free (like Brad Buxer and others did).

 

[OnirMJ]

"But things could get sticky between the Jackson estate and Cascio. I am told that Cascio has engaged a top music entertainment lawyer in Los Angeles, Don Passman. And sources do say that Cascio is “covered,” whatever that means."

"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."

http://www.showbiz411.com/2010/05/03/new-michael-jackson-album-may-pose-legal-problems

 

[ivy]

What a double standard.

When a famous forensic expert gets filmed working and analysing the audio files, gives interviews and explains why he believes that the newly discovered songs are sung by Elvis Presley, you claim fraud.

When jointly the Estate/SONY give no info about unnamed forensics, you exclude fraud.

Is that how you debunk other people's theory? By selectively believe in anonymous forensics unseen analysis?

read better I didn't say a single word about how correct a forensic analyst is or is not. I wrote a theory which started "if that's the case - meaning the end work was good enough to fool legit forensic analyst - then every result for any future or additional test will also come back as "Michael" and you will never ever prove this fraud."

And how do you know for a fact that Eddie hasn't been paid for the songs? You think he gave them away for free out of charity?

I don't and you don't either. This "they asked for a $1 Million each $12M but got much less around $5 million" is pure speculation of the fans yet people talk like it's a fact. Provide me the source. Until you can no one knows it for sure.

Why do you enjoy it? Explain.

because it's factually incorrect and imaginative

You haven't debunked anything. You have just proposed an alternative opinion.

It's not an opinion, it's a fact. For example Stella claimed "they conveniently left out performer", well the fact is registration type is music which is sheet music / lyrics and it cannot be performed. So no one conveniently left out anything which debunks Stella's imaginative copyright claim

When you get some facts, which means, that you need to know for a fact what the registrations contain, then you can proudly say "debunk". So far everything is speculation, opinions and attempts to understand things from different angles. I didn't see Stella's post as a fact, but just as his strong opinion.

go read his post again, he clearly writes it as a fact. he clearly ignores the fact that he doesn't know what's in those collection registrations - such as it can be 9 other songs that they worked on but never recorded-, he claims they were done/ written after his death / early 2010 - which is also a baseless assumption as late registration doesn't mean it's done at that time and plus he doesn't know what is being registered, furthermore he's again quite factually explains $12M versus $5 million payment which is again nothing more than a fan created rumor. All of the above is a fact.

How do you know that there were any forensic musicologists? Because Estate told you so?

Because Randy Jackson also told us so. Go back to his tweets and read he acknowledged forensic musicologists and said he didn't know what they heard which was definitely not he heard. Randy Jackson also accused Sony to pay off the forensic musicologists to fake the results, he said they have $250 Million reasons to fake the tests.

So why are you denying something that's also confirmed by the opposite side? Because it doesn't fit with your fantasy? And if you believe to Randy Jackson why don't you believe him when he said "they did their analysis"

let me post

Randy Jackson ?@randyjackson8
And as to the vocal authenticators, they work for pay. And I wasn't there when they did their analysis

Randy Jackson ?@randyjackson8
I dont know what they heard, surely not what I heard

Randy confirming vocal authenticators DID an analysis, sorry to crush your dreams

And Eddie got paid. That is for sure. Even Roger Friedman (their close friend) wrote that Eddie was negotiating with the Estate to sell them the tracks or he would go to the other publishing company and that he hired the best lawyers in the industry.

It's impossible for anyone to go to another publishing company as MJ Estate owns Michael's name and image. No other company can release the songs without Estate approval. No other publishing company would have paid a dime for the songs they can't release. (Remember when Mann/ Vaccaro posted Opis None and they had to remove it and now being sued - it's impossible) And re-read Friedman, his story to me seems like the lawyer was for copyright / authenticity issues.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

^^ The issue Ivy is that your posts never question the discrepancies, everything seems normal, when in reality we have never had any answers. Of course that everything is speculation, but that's what we are left with. So debunking theories with other theories when in reality nothing is known for sure is quite pointless unless you have some real info.

At the same time, I still don't see why you'd believe the anonymous unnamed forensics more than the named, non-anonymous forensic who claims that the newly discovered songs are sung by Elvis. No matter what, you always seem to defend the official side as if it was Gospel.

 

[ivy]

^^ The issue Ivy is that your posts never question the discrepancies, everything seems normal, when in reality we have never had any answers. Of course that everything is speculation, but that's what we are left with. So debunking theories with other theories when in reality nothing is known for sure is quite pointless unless you have some real info.

bumper you know very well that I stopped discussing authenticity a long long time ago. I have no desire to do so. What annoys me is when people misrepresent facts (such as copyright rules) to make baseless claims (such as conveniently withholding the performer when it's impossible to have a performer in a no performer registration) and present their speculation and/or rumors as facts (the $12 M versus $5 Million).

If you want anyone to take you seriously your theories need to be realistic and factually correct, the minute you start something saying "ooo they conveniently withheld the performer" to the other side you seem to be obsessed and crazy to to point of creating conspiracy when there's none.

and I hope any of the legal attempts that Stella keep mentioning is not based on these assumptions and/or hearsay.

At the same time, I still don't see why you'd believe the anonymous unnamed forensics more than the named, non-anonymous forensic who claims that the newly discovered songs are sung by Elvis. No matter what, you always seem to defend the official side as if it was Gospel.

what you fail to understand is that I don't believe either forensics. I clearly explained a million times my belief is based on my hearing and not on any statement or any expert.

what I have been arguing over and over in regards to Estate/Sony experts is that they highly probably exist and analysis is probably done. I'm basing this opinion on the fact that
1) due diligence requires them to do such an analysis if ever in the future the songs turn out to be fake other wise they'll be facing major problems
2) lying on official statements is also further problematic. It's illogical to think that executors who get 5% each from a billion dollar Estate would lie over fake songs to the fans. (Remember it was a voluntary statement sent out to the fans, they could simply not respond and not mention any expert / test , they didn't have to lie)
3) other side - Randy Jackson - also confirmed that the analysis is done.


you also totally missed the point on the Elvis expert. My point was that you who adamantly argued that forensic experts can be wrong and the tests are more than satisfactory was so quick to accept the Elvis Expert's analysis because his identity was known. You totally ignored his credentials and the fact that Elvis Estate had denied the claims. I was simply pointing out your double standard and not making any authenticity claim in regards to Elvis song.

A question so if tomorrow Estate says the analyst was from "John Doe from FBI and these are the methods he used" would you believe it? If not why are acting like this is all about the name of the expert?

 

[OnirMJ]

read better I didn't say a single word about how correct a forensic analyst is or is not. I wrote a theory which started "if that's the case - meaning the end work was good enough to fool legit forensic analyst - then every result for any future or additional test will also come back as "Michael" and you will never ever prove this fraud."






I don't and you don't either. This "they asked for a $1 Million each $12M but got much less around $5 million" is pure speculation of the fans yet people talk like it's a fact. Provide me the source. Until you can no one knows it for sure.




because it's factually incorrect and imaginative




It's not an opinion, it's a fact. For example Stella claimed "they conveniently left out performer", well the fact is registration type is music which is sheet music / lyrics and it cannot be performed. So no one conveniently left out anything which debunks Stella's imaginative copyright claim



go read his post again, he clearly writes it as a fact. he clearly ignores the fact that he doesn't know what's in those collection registrations - such as it can be 9 other songs that they worked on but never recorded-, he claims they were done/ written after his death / early 2010 - which is also a baseless assumption as late registration doesn't mean it's done at that time and plus he doesn't know what is being registered, furthermore he's again quite factually explains $12M versus $5 million payment which is again nothing more than a fan created rumor. All of the above is a fact.





Because Randy Jackson also told us so. Go back to his tweets and read he acknowledged forensic musicologists and said he didn't know what they heard which was definitely not he heard. Randy Jackson also accused Sony to pay off the forensic musicologists to fake the results, he said they have $250 Million reasons to fake the tests.

So why are you denying something that's also confirmed by the opposite side? Because it doesn't fit with your fantasy? And if you believe to Randy Jackson why don't you believe him when he said "they did their analysis"

let me post

Randy Jackson ‏@randyjackson8
And as to the vocal authenticators, they work for pay. And I wasn't there when they did their analysis

Randy Jackson ‏@randyjackson8
I dont know what they heard, surely not what I heard

Randy confirming vocal authenticators DID an analysis, sorry to crush your dreams




It's impossible for anyone to go to another publishing company as MJ Estate owns Michael's name and image. No other company can release the songs without Estate approval. No other publishing company would have paid a dime for the songs they can't release. (Remember when Mann/ Vaccaro posted Opis None and they had to remove it and now being sued - it's impossible) And re-read Friedman, his story to me seems like the lawyer was for copyright / authenticity issues.

"sorry to crush your dreams" & "Because it doesn't fit with your fantasy" - that was funny. You didn't crush anything. And it is not my fantasy. My opinion still stands. I said that I think that those analysis never happened. Randy says "And I wasn't there when they did their analysis". He wasn't there. They just told him that the analysis were made and that the vocals are MJ. And read again what I wrote earlier:

"And if there were forensic musicologists then they have done a poor job (they didn't compare vocals with Jason Malachi like that guy did with Elvis) or they were paid to bring results that 1/2 of the Estate wanted to hear!"

Exactly what Randy wrote. It doesn't matter if the analysis were done if the results are faked or done poorly.

No, you re-read Friedman:

"The question now, of course, is what happens next. The Jackson estate just signed a record deal with Sony Music that could be worth $200 million, but it includes re-releases of previously recorded music, live albums, and an album of unreleased songs that were in the Sony vaults or recorded during Jackson’s contracted time with the label.

That deal does not include newly discovered material. This could mean that other record companies could bid for the collection of songs."

http://www.showbiz411.com/2010/05/02/exclusive-michael-jackson-recorded-a-new-album-in-2007

But it doesn't matter. I agree with you that other labels could not release the material without Estate's approval. But maybe Eddie didn't know that and he wanted to sell the songs to the highest bidder. Why did he hired "top music entertainment lawyer in Los Angeles" just for copyright issues? Do you think Brad Buxer hired a lawyer too? I don't think so. Because friends don't do that. He just handed over his songs to the Estate.

 

[ivy]

"And if there were forensic musicologists than they have done a poor job (they didn't compare vocals with Jason Malachi like that guy did with Elvis) or they were paid to bring results that 1/2 of the Estate wanted to hear!"

do you remember the forensic expert contacted by max-jax said comparing it with Malachi would be leading and biased.

Don't mix up apples and oranges. That Elvis expert is looking for notoriety and he did the analysis on his own. There's a huge difference between what will hold in court and what won't. I posted years ago that law changed in regards to voice identifications.

Plus as we didn't see the reports of the experts there's no way of knowing if they did a "poor job" or not. It's again speculation based on nothing.

That deal does not include newly discovered material. This could mean that other record companies could bid for the collection of songs."

Friedman is a tabloid journalist, he's not always correct. And in this instance he isn't.

Plus again if you are believing Friendman's word in this regard, why don't you believe when he says the songs are Michael and when he reports about the Jackson's actions/motives?

But it doesn't matter. I agree with you that other labels could not release the material without Estate's approval. But maybe Eddie didn't know that and he wanted to sell the songs to the highest bidder.

And in your mind the other labels are all idiots then? They are in the music business but don't know the first thing about copyright, rights of publicity, and so on. In reality let me tell you that all labels have legal departments and they'll be all very much aware that they cannot release the songs and hence buying them was worthless.

Why did he hired "top music entertainment lawyer in Los Angeles" just for copyright issues? Do you think Brad Buxer hired a lawyer too? I don't think so. Because friends don't do that. He just handed over his songs to the Estate.

eheheh most musicians have entertainment lawyers working for them, again there's nothing suspicious in that regard. Why did Michael hired Branca decades ago, was it because he was faking songs? Lawyers are an effective way of ensuring that your rights are protected in any deal and/or business activity. I'm pretty sure most people do not sign the dotted line without talking to a lawyer.

 

[OnirMJ]

do you remember the forensic expert contacted by max-jax said comparing it with Malachi would be leading and biased.

Don't mix up apples and oranges. That Elvis expert is looking for notoriety and he did the analysis on his own. There's a huge difference between what will hold in court and what won't. I posted years ago that law changed in regards to voice identifications.

Plus as we didn't see the reports of the experts there's no way of knowing if they did a "poor job" or not. It's again speculation based on nothing.




Friedman is a tabloid journalist, he's not always correct. And in this instance he isn't.

Plus again if you are believing Friendman's word in this regard, why don't you believe when he says the songs are Michael and when he reports about the Jackson's actions/motives?




And in your mind the other labels are all idiots then? They are in the music business but don't know the first thing about copyright, rights of publicity, and so on. In reality let me tell you that all labels have legal departments and they'll be all very much aware that they cannot release the songs and hence buying them was worthless.



eheheh most musicians have entertainment lawyers working for them, again there's nothing suspicious in that regard. Why did Michael hired Branca decades ago, was it because he was faking songs? Lawyers are an effective way of ensuring that your rights are protected in any deal and/or business activity. I'm pretty sure most people do not sign the dotted line without talking to a lawyer.

I don't believe Friedman. But it is obvious that he is a close friend with the Cascios. So he is writing what Eddie tells him to write. So I'm saying that he & Eddie are "idiots", not other labels. They thought that other labels will fight for his songs and that he will sell them to the highest bidder. It is obvious to me that he wanted big money and he got it, maybe not the asking price but he did well. Like Murray first asked for 5 MIL and than settled for 1,5 MIL $.

 

[StellaJackson]

I love your use of "almost certainly", when that whole theory of yours is based on nothing but your imagination and wishful thinking. So now the Cascio songs not only feature an impersonator, but they were written AFTER MJ died? The plot thickens! And I didn't know the Cascios had publicly released both their asking price for the songs, and the money they actually got from Sony.

Your dismissive "they didn't get anything near that" reveals your personal dislike for Eddie Cascio and James Porte : it just eats at you that they got money for those MJ songs. Yeah, I'm sure they feel terrible at having gotten "only" 5 million dollars. Of couse, Sony and the Estate not being in the habit of funding criminals and fraudsters, the Cascios would have reimbursed every penny by now if the songs were fake, and they'd be sitting in jail or doing community service. But since the songs are authentic, they're enjoying their millions, and I say more power to them!

What on earth are you even doing here? You don't like Michael. Also, it's pretty clear from your comments that you haven't got the slightest idea what your talking about. Why do you even come on MJ forums?

 

[StellaJackson]

yet a Jason who doesn't sound like Michael and a song made of fragments were able to fool two legit (as Sony and Estate not involved in fraud in your scenario) and top of the filed forensic musicologists?

You know they check for such stuff, don't you?

And if that's the case - meaning the end work was good enough to fool legit forensic analyst - then every result for any future or additional test will also come back as "Michael" and you will never ever prove this fraud.

I just wish someone would actually take the time to debunk all the issues with the songs. But they can't.



Please give me the source of any payment information. You do realize that even the claim that they been paid is fan created and the same is true for the $5 and $12 million numbers. sure they are getting paid royalties but there's no credible source to say that they were paid for the songs.

and I enjoy Stella's interpretation of copyright registrations. There's no way of knowing what is included in the "collection" registrations and later / after Michael's death registrations doesn't make songs fake or sang by Malachi. Brad Buxter also registered songs in 2010, including Hollywood Tonight.

furthermore



which you cannot see what's in them



rules require that different author requires different registrations.



Well it's because it's "Type of Work: Music" and not "sound recording". (MJ song book was a sound recording) It means it's sheet music and/or lyrics. It cannot be performed. . So it's not convenient or a conspiracy, it's just a fact of reality.

so sorry for debunking your theory.

You haven't haven't actually debunked anything. Your information is entirely wrong. It has nothing to do with the fact that they were registered after Michael's death either. Lots of stuff was registered after, it doesn't mean it's fake. The fact remains that the lead vocals don't appear in the June 27th registration. The first time they appear is in the Ason Compilations.

 

[kreen]

What on earth are you even doing here? You don't like Michael. Also, it's pretty clear from your comments that you haven't got the slightest idea what your talking about. Why do you even come on MJ forums?

Ah, the last resort of the cornered conspiracy theorist : "why don't you just LEAVE then!". If only reason, reality and common sense could be sent away from our presence when they clash with our feelings and beliefs...

"You don't like Michael" : you are as bad at assessing people on the Internet as you are at hearing MJ on the Cascio tracks, because I love MJ so much, I actually have a statuette of the HIStory statue sitting on my mantelpiece, at home, which everybody who comes into my house sees as soon as they get in. So yeah, I hate MJ so much I insist on everybody knowing I'm a huge 33-year-old MJ nerd the minute they walk into my house.

 

[ivy]

The fact remains that the lead vocals don't appear in the June 27th registration. The first time they appear is in the Ason Compilations.

how? please explain.

The ason compilations - 2010- registrations are type: music which is by copyright registration explanations are sheet music and/or lyrics. It doesn't include an audio or sound recording which means that the lead vocals or any vocals or any performance is not present or given to the copyright office in 2010.

The MJ song book - registered in June 2009- is a music and sound recording which means the music (sheet music and the lyrics) is performed and 2 audio copies is submitted to the copyright office, that's why it also has the "performance" credit in the details.

sorry but however you roll the dice, this is a fact according to copyright registration rules.

So even though you can argue that the 2009 MJ Song book sound recording registration / audio files did not include Michael's vocals and/or lead vocals, no vocals or no audio was provided with 2010 Ason registration.

 

[StellaJackson]

Ah, the last resort of the cornered conspiracy theorist : "why don't you just LEAVE then!". If only reason, reality and common sense could be sent away from our presence when they clash with our feelings and beliefs...

"You don't like Michael" : you are as bad at assessing people on the Internet as you are at hearing MJ on the Cascio tracks, because I love MJ so much, I actually have a statuette of the HIStory statue sitting on my mantelpiece, at home, which everybody who comes into my house sees as soon as they get in. So yeah, I hate MJ so much I insist on everybody knowing I'm a huge 33-year-old MJ nerd the minute they walk into my house.

Your a fan who came on here and made horrid remarks about how Michael "died wearing a condom catheter." That isn't normal behaviour for a fan imo. I know you love to belittle us and call us conspiracy theorists etc but the fact remains that there is no evidence that connects Michael to these songs. They sound extremely dissimilar to him, yet exactly like Jason Cupeta, including his vibrato, pronounciation, accent, timbre etc. No adequate explanation has been given for this so it is only natural for the fans to want answers. If you don't understand that then your in the wrong place. You can believe the songs are Michael, but if, instead of actually contributing something to the debate, you just choose to come in here and insult people, then you should expect the same back. No matter how much you want to shift the goalposts so it looks like we are just "anti-Cascio", the reality is that neither I, nor any other doubter, cares where these songs came from. They could have come from Quincy Jones and it wouldn't change the fact that they do not sound anything like Michael Jackson. I would do anything to be proven wrong on this. Who wants to think that Eddie, a supposedly close friend of Michael, did this and there are now three fake songs in Michael's discography with nine more in the vault? I certainly don't. No one does. But I can't deny what I hear. And that is not the person who I've been listening to for the last 17 years. We just want answers.

 

[StellaJackson]

how? please explain.

The ason compilations - 2010- registrations are type: music which is by copyright registration explanations are sheet music and/or lyrics. It doesn't include an audio or sound recording which means that the lead vocals or any vocals or any performance is not present or given to the copyright office in 2010.

The MJ song book - registered in June 2009- is a music and sound recording which means the music (sheet music and the lyrics) is performed and 2 audio copies is submitted to the copyright office, that's why it also has the "performance" credit in the details.

sorry but however you roll the dice, this is a fact according to copyright registration rules.

So even though you can argue that the 2009 MJ Song book sound recording registration / audio files did not include Michael's vocals and/or lead vocals, no vocals or no audio was provided with 2010 Ason registration.

Because "Type of work: music" can and does refer to sound recordings also. An example of this would be the song This Is It:

This is it / Michael Jackson.
Relevance:
Type of Work: Music
Registration Number / Date: PAu000668598 / 1984-11-16
Title: This is it / Michael Jackson.
Description: 1 sound cassette.
Copyright Claimant: Mijac Music
Date of Creation: 1980
Authorship on Application: words & music: Michael Jackson.


This is clearly aural in nature as it is on an audio cassette, yet is defined as music and doesn't list a performer either. Plus Cascio and Porte are credited with "production", separately to lyrics etc.

 

[ivy]

Because "Type of work: music" can and does refer to sound recordings also. An example of this would be the song This Is It:

This is it / Michael Jackson.
Relevance:
Type of Work: Music
Registration Number / Date: PAu000668598 / 1984-11-16
Title: This is it / Michael Jackson.
Description: 1 sound cassette.
Copyright Claimant: Mijac Music
Date of Creation: 1980
Authorship on Application: words & music: Michael Jackson.


This is clearly aural in nature as it is on an audio cassette, yet is defined as music and doesn't list a performer either. Plus Cascio and Porte are credited with "production", separately to lyrics etc.

Actually PA is performing arts and the PA registration only covers the sheet music and lyrics and NOT the performance. Rather than giving the stuff on paper you can also give an audio copy -such as the cassette example - however you aren't required to do so.

SR is sound recording which not only covers the sheet music and lyrics but also the performance. For anything to be considered a sound recording you MUST provide audio records.

a little from the rules

File Form PA if you are seeking to register the musical or dramatic work, not the “sound recording,” even though what you deposit for copyright purposes may be in the form of a phonorecord.

File Form SR if you are seeking to register the “sound recording” itself, that is, the work that results from the fixation of a series of musical, spoken, or other sounds, but not the underlying musical or dramatic work. (Ivy's note : That underlined section means performance of the work)

File Form SR if you are the copyright claimant for both the underlying musical or dramatic work and the sound recording, and you prefer to register both on the same form.

File both forms PA and SR if the copyright claimant for the underlying work and sound recording differ, or you prefer to have separate registration for them.

Musical compositions may be embodied (fixed) in “copies,” objects from which a work can be read or visually perceived, directly or with the aid of a machine or device, such as manuscripts, books, sheet music, film, and videotape. They may also be fixed in “phonorecords,” objects embodying fixations of sounds, such as tapes and phonograph disks, commonly known as phonograph records. For example, a song (the work to be registered) can be reproduced in sheet music (“copies&#8221 or phonograph records (“phonorecords&#8221, or both. (Ivy's note: the underlined section clearly shows that for "music" classification it can be sheet music or an audio file or both)

PA form says - Unpublished Work: Deposit one complete copy (or phonorecord)

SR form says - Unpublished Work: Deposit one complete phonorecord

So what do we know

-For MJ song book - june 2009 SR Sound recording registration - an audio file of the performance of the songs was provided.
-Mj song book 2009 SR sound recording registration protects the vocals / performance or the "sounds".
-For Ason compilations - 2010 registrations - an audio file might or might not be provided.
-The Ason compilation registrations did not protect any vocals or performance or any "sounds". So it's impossible for the 2010 registration to cover any new vocals or any new performance
- There's no way to know what was included in "MJ song book" and what was included in "Ason compilations". They could be the same thing, they could be two totally different things. Actually as no previous versions or previous registrations were noted on the form it's probable that these are two different registrations.

So the type of 2010 registration (PA) and given the fact that it doesn't cover the sound recording/ performance/ vocals debunks your theory that they recorded the songs in 2010 and did a separate registration for the vocals to establish copyright on them.

 

[StellaJackson]

Actually PA is performing arts and the PA registration only covers the sheet music and lyrics and NOT the performance. Rather than giving the stuff on paper you can also give an audio copy -such as the cassette example - however you aren't required to do so.

SR is sound recording which not only covers the sheet music and lyrics but also the performance. For anything to be considered a sound recording you MUST provide audio records.

a little from the rules

File Form PA if you are seeking to register the musical or dramatic work, not the “sound recording,” even though what you deposit for copyright purposes may be in the form of a phonorecord.

File Form SR if you are seeking to register the “sound recording” itself, that is, the work that results from the fixation of a series of musical, spoken, or other sounds, but not the underlying musical or dramatic work. (Ivy's note : That underlined section means performance of the work)

File Form SR if you are the copyright claimant for both the underlying musical or dramatic work and the sound recording, and you prefer to register both on the same form.

File both forms PA and SR if the copyright claimant for the underlying work and sound recording differ, or you prefer to have separate registration for them.

Musical compositions may be embodied (fixed) in “copies,” objects from which a work can be read or visually perceived, directly or with the aid of a machine or device, such as manuscripts, books, sheet music, film, and videotape. They may also be fixed in “phonorecords,” objects embodying fixations of sounds, such as tapes and phonograph disks, commonly known as phonograph records. For example, a song (the work to be registered) can be reproduced in sheet music (“copies&#8221 or phonograph records (“phonorecords&#8221, or both. (Ivy's note: the underlined section clearly shows that for "music" classification it can be sheet music or an audio file or both)

PA form says - Unpublished Work: Deposit one complete copy (or phonorecord)

SR form says - Unpublished Work: Deposit one complete phonorecord

So what do we know

-For MJ song book - june 2009 SR Sound recording registration - an audio file of the performance of the songs was provided.
-Mj song book 2009 SR sound recording registration protects the vocals / performance.
-For Ason compilations - 2010 registrations - an audio file might or might not be provided.
-The Ason compilation registrations did not protect any vocals. So it's impossible for the 2010 registration to cover any new vocals or any new performance
- There's no way to know what was included in "MJ song book" and what was included in "Ason compilations". They could be the same thing, they could be two totally different things.

So the type of 2010 registration (PA) and given the fact that it doesn't cover the sound recording/ performance/ vocals debunks your theory that they recorded the songs in 2010 and did a separate registration for the vocals to establish copyright on them.

No, my theory still stands. They didn't do a separate registration of the vocals. That's my point. Cascio/Porte never copyrighted anything as being MJ that isn't. That's why they are covered. It was Sony who would later copy protect the three album songs as songs performed by MJ, but Eddie Cascio never claimed in any of his registrations that the vocals are Michael.