Estate, Cascio and Porte Sued Over Three Songs on the "Michael" Album - Vera Senova Class Action

[Birchey]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Except, "Monster" was SUPPOSED to be that big hit...Only it didn't work out as planned. So they're pretty comparable. And Monster doesn't hold up with ANY of Michael's hits.

EDIT @ Birchey's question, I recall one official Monster remix that came out, I don't know if it was legally released or not but it was out there, it was like 7 minutes long, by Jody Den Broeder. Some house music DJ.




EDIT: Don't know if that's fanmade or not, but I recall one video single art a while back.

LOL I got a name check 4th comment down in that video xD This is sooooo hilarious, man listening to Monster for first time in about 2 years+ the vocals sounds sooooooooooo bad.

Yeah these were on the Sony servers, there was 3 or 4 mixes I believe.

 

[Warszawa320]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

That was kinda my point, they didn't hit big in normal music business so all a sudden started working on Christian music.

But Christian music would be really very comfortable market for a family man like Eddie. I don't think he even tried to pursue any other field after becoming a father himself. It's the same with his father. After traveling the world and having an opportunity to experience the Hollywood life (with Michael) he preferred to stay in NJ suburb. This is what MJ liked about this family. They are not publicity hungry and they are very close family.

 

[Condor9333]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

THIS SAIS IT ALL:

Yesterday, 06:57 AM

kreen

I'm the one who had the long email exchange with that Montrone (was that his name?) guy, and he said there was nothing suspicious about Porte's vocals being on the tracks, as that would be to prevent leaks. He also (when I wrote to him) believed it was MJ on the CD.

Cascio registering what he had recorded with MJ in the 48 hours after his death makes PERFECT sense, as those recordings had all of a sudden become extremely valuable, and the media were all over how everybody was going into MJ's house and taking hard drives and everything. Brad Buxer also registered a bunch of tracks after MJ's death.

The MJ songbook lists MJ as being a performer on the tracks. So either they had SOME MJ vocals to register, or they had already decided, 2 days after his death, to pull off the hoax. Which makes no sense. And why is everybody talking about how the Cascio tracks feature complete adlibs? The reason they cut and pasted all those adlibs from other songs is precisely because the songs lacked adlibs. And multi-tracked vocals? I don't know about that either : I hear one main track and a lot of Porte on the choruses. Montrone has said that Porte does a killer MJ impersonation by the way...

 

[OnirMJ]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

THIS SAIS IT ALL:

Yesterday, 06:57 AM

kreen

I'm the one who had the long email exchange with that Montrone (was that his name?) guy, and he said there was nothing suspicious about Porte's vocals being on the tracks, as that would be to prevent leaks. He also (when I wrote to him) believed it was MJ on the CD.

Cascio registering what he had recorded with MJ in the 48 hours after his death makes PERFECT sense, as those recordings had all of a sudden become extremely valuable, and the media were all over how everybody was going into MJ's house and taking hard drives and everything. Brad Buxer also registered a bunch of tracks after MJ's death.

The MJ songbook lists MJ as being a performer on the tracks. So either they had SOME MJ vocals to register, or they had already decided, 2 days after his death, to pull off the hoax. Which makes no sense. And why is everybody talking about how the Cascio tracks feature complete adlibs? The reason they cut and pasted all those adlibs from other songs is precisely because the songs lacked adlibs. And multi-tracked vocals? I don't know about that either : I hear one main track and a lot of Porte on the choruses. Montrone has said that Porte does a killer MJ impersonation by the way...

The MJ songbook does not list MJ as being a performer on the tracks. It lists Eddie Cascio, James Porte & Michael Jackson as co-authors of something that contains some kind of performance and lyrics. It can be performance by James Porte.

Cascio songs have enough ad-libs to consider them complete songs. What they copy pasted was MJ's breaths in between some words, MJ's signature screams and some words (like "Why" in Monster). Also some MJ ad-libs, but there are plenty Jason's ad-libs there on all 12 songs.

 

[Petrarose]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Okay I am waiting patiently for the response from the other side. To me, that would be more interesting.

 

[Kapital77]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Eddie, is that you?

Hahaha i thought the same when i read his post.

Eddie, if you are here reading, tell Jason that this will end sooner or later.

 

[krikzil]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I hope sooner rather than later.

 

[WhoIsIt89]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

A lot of the ad-libs on the songs are in fact Jason's. Only specific trademarks did they actually copy & paste and his breathes. Which brings me to this, why would they copy & paste Michael's breathes in a song that Michael Jackson supposedly recorded? Wouldn't they already be there, why would they need to copy and paste breathe sounds? It makes no sense.


I've also seen no proof of this so-called conversation either.

 

[WildStyle]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I've decided to stop feeding the trolls.

 

[kreen]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

The MJ songbook does not list MJ as being a performer on the tracks. It lists Eddie Cascio, James Porte & Michael Jackson as co-authors of something that contains some kind of performance and lyrics. It can be performance by James Porte.

Not true. Here is what it says, verbatim :

Michael Joseph Jackson; Domicile: United States; Citizenship: United States. Authorship: sound recording, performance, production, compilation, LYRICS.

So two days after MJ's death, Eddie CLAIMED MJ was the "author" of the "performance" of a sound recording. He ALSO listed himself and Porte as OTHER authors of the performance.

Let me be clear : this doesn't prove MJ was actually on that sound recording as the author of the performance. But it does prove that Eddie was ALREADY claiming MJ was on that sound recording two days after his death. So if MJ is not on that sound recording as a performer, it means Eddie came up with the idea of the hoax -- involving Porte -- in less than 48 hours after MJ's death. And I find that hard to believe.

 

[kreen]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I've also seen no proof of this so-called conversation either.

Do you mean my email correspondence with Montrone? I archived all of that : I'll send it you if you'd like. PM me.

 

[kreen]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Birchey : I don't hear 4 tracks of "MJ" vocals on most Cascio tracks. I hear one main vocal line, and usually on the choruses a bunch of stacked-up vocals that could be the same singer as the main melody, but it's hard to tell.

I guess we'd have to go through all 12 tracks, and actually analyze every one (yes, you guys would have to hold your noses while doing that, but it would be in the interest of science). Some tracks are over-produced, like Burn Tonight, but others are very simple and almost intimate, like All I Need. I certainly don't hear 4 stacked-up, overdubbed vocals on All I Need.

By the way, what exactly did you find when you ventured into Sony's servers? I seem to recall somebody saying that you AT FIRST came to the conclusion that some of the vocals were indeed MJ's. Or maybe you're not allowed to talk about it?

 

[Petrarose]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

^^I don't think people should be encouraging people to disclose things that they found out while engaged in criminal activity, especially since there was a court case. I mean it does not look good for the forum.

 

[OnirMJ]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Not true. Here is what it says, verbatim :

Michael Joseph Jackson; Domicile: United States; Citizenship: United States. Authorship: sound recording, performance, production, compilation, LYRICS.

So two days after MJ's death, Eddie CLAIMED MJ was the "author" of the "performance" of a sound recording. He ALSO listed himself and Porte as OTHER authors of the performance.

Let me be clear : this doesn't prove MJ was actually on that sound recording as the author of the performance. But it does prove that Eddie was ALREADY claiming MJ was on that sound recording two days after his death. So if MJ is not on that sound recording as a performer, it means Eddie came up with the idea of the hoax -- involving Porte -- in less than 48 hours after MJ's death. And I find that hard to believe.

"Authorship: sound recording, performance, production, compilation, LYRICS."

Authorship!!! He is the co-author of sound recording, performance that contains production and lyrics. Eddie may have registrated songs recorded by James Porte (demos) that MJ helped writing & producing. Nowhere it says that Michael Jackson is the performer of that performance or that the registration contains 12 songs. It may have been 4 songs/demos by James Porte.

 

[Tygger]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I don't care about The Cascio's, Estate, Branca,The Jacksons and who's on a picture with who...
..I want the songs off his discography, because it isnt' him.

This sounds too good to be true, but I still have hope and I'll stay openminded...Always..

This, this, and most importantly, this.

 

[SheilaMJFan4Ever]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Are ANY of the vocals on the album authentically Mike's? I didn't buy it, didn't listen to any tracks, wasn't interested (it seemed like it was a rush to get something out to make a fast buck off of his death).

 

[HIStory]

Somebody implied Friedman had been told by the Cascios there were no outtakes, and that he had personally heard the "work tapes" of MJ from the sessions. If you read what he said back then, he never says he personally heard the work tapes, only that he's been told about them (from Frank, maybe?). And while he says they are not outtakes, he doesn't say anyone has told him the outtakes were deleted or destroyed.

Does it matter how he words it? The fact that instead of showing outtakes they tried to show a tape of Michael talking and with his kids in the background should give us the idea that like Taryll said there are no outtakes probably. The point is that more sources than one seem to point into that direction. And one of those sources (Friedman) is sympathetic to the Cascios.

This is what Friedman wrote:

But now sources tell me that there were “work tapes” made during the Cascio sessions. These aren’t outtakes of the songs, but tapes running in the studio while Michael discussed what was going on with Eddie Cascio and other members of the Cascio family. Jackson’s own kids even make cameo appearances on the tapes. At some point, the work tapes will be released, although it’s unclear by whom. The main thing is, there’s plenty of evidence of Michael Jackson working with Eddie Cascio.

http://www.showbiz411.com/2010/11/1...work-tapes-will-prove-its-his-voice-on-tracks

Why would you just show a tape of MJ chatting as "evidence" if you have better evidence? And did they actually ever show even this tape of MJ talking? They probably realized it would not prove anything.

The whole business of the existence/non-existence of outtakes is moot anyway, when you think about it. Because if Eddie hired an impersonator, then of course he has outtakes -- outtakes of the impersonator. So what would be stopping him from releasing "fake" outtakes -- outfakes! -- of the impersonator still doing his MJ thing, but with false starts, mumbled lyrics, etc? It would still be the same voice as on the released songs anyway, so not proving much.

I would imagine some things would be harder to hide behind the production in case of raw outtakes.

Moreover the demand for outtakes came up during that meeting where they showed the tracks, acc. to Taryll. Acc. to him the answer was that the computer broke and the hard drive was destroyed. So how would it look then if Eddie then went back to the studio with whoever the impersonator was and they created "outtakes" in the hindsight and then Eddie would say: "well, the hard drive isn't destroyed after all"? Plus of course it could be checked when the material was created. BTW, if the impersonator recorded the songs some time in 2008 or 2009 then the dates of the outtakes obviously would not correlate with the time MJ spent with the Cascios.

But this lawsuit is good exactly for that: to bring forth any evidence each side has. The songs do not sound like Michael at all to me, but if someone can prove otherwise I will accept that. But so far instead of evidence we have excuses and that makes the whole thing only more suspicious.

And while you are entitled to your opinion that these are great songs I don't think they are up to Michael's standards at all. Like someone said earlier in this thread they are like someone trying to guess what MJ would do and sweating to create "MJ-like" songs, but it's a struggle and they fail. These songs literally made my head ache at one point - never happened with Michael's music.

 

[Pentum]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Are ANY of the vocals on the album authentically Mike's? I didn't buy it, didn't listen to any tracks, wasn't interested (it seemed like it was a rush to get something out to make a fast buck off of his death).

Try listen to it

 

[OnirMJ]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Are ANY of the vocals on the album authentically Mike's? I didn't buy it, didn't listen to any tracks, wasn't interested (it seemed like it was a rush to get something out to make a fast buck off of his death).

Seriously? 7 tracks are real Michael Jackson songs. You should buy those 7 songs. It is a wonderful thing, releasing real MJ songs. Also there is a song Hollywood Tonight on it which is one of the best Michael Jackson songs ever.

 

[Albion]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Surely if there is any clear evidence of Michael singing on these tracks it would have been presented to the estate negating the need to get the opinion of musicologists and people who had worked with him.

 

[Warszawa320]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Does it matter how he words it? The fact that instead of showing outtakes they tried to show a tape of Michael talking and with his kids in the background should give us the idea that like Taryll said there are no outtakes probably. The point is that more sources than one seem to point into that direction. And one of those sources (Friedman) is sympathetic to the Cascios.

This is what Friedman wrote:



http://www.showbiz411.com/2010/11/1...work-tapes-will-prove-its-his-voice-on-tracks

Why would you just show a tape of MJ chatting as "evidence" if you have better evidence? And did they actually ever show even this tape of MJ talking? They probably realized it would not prove anything.



I would imagine some things would be harder to hide behind the production in case of raw outtakes.

Moreover the demand for outtakes came up during that meeting where they showed the tracks, acc. to Taryll. Acc. to him the answer was that the computer broke and the hard drive was destroyed. So how would it look then if Eddie then went back to the studio with whoever the impersonator was and they created "outtakes" in the hindsight and then Eddie would say: "well, the hard drive isn't destroyed after all"? Plus of course it could be checked when the material was created. BTW, if the impersonator recorded the songs some time in 2008 or 2009 then the dates of the outtakes obviously would not correlate with the time MJ spent with the Cascios.

But this lawsuit is good exactly for that: to bring forth any evidence each side has. The songs do not sound like Michael at all to me, but if someone can prove otherwise I will accept that. But so far instead of evidence we have excuses and that makes the whole thing only more suspicious.

And while you are entitled to your opinion that these are great songs I don't think they are up to Michael's standards at all. Like someone said earlier in this thread they are like someone trying to guess what MJ would do and sweating to create "MJ-like" songs, but it's a struggle and they fail. These songs literally made my head ache at one point - never happened with Michael's music.

I think it's a lot more mature and business savvy to put any "out takes" in the safe before anyone would be able to put their hands on. This staff was too valuable (together with everything else about Michael). I don't know if you remember that Michael's own family took from the rented house even the things didn't belong to him. His own family was the one selling his staff on the auction and you would like to criticize Cascio for telling that any other files are destroyed. It would be extremely dumb if it would really be the true but even more stupid to admit that more documentations still existed. IMO there was no need for Cascio to share anything valuable about Michael before. It doesn't look he really cares so much about public opinion. You could compare his ways to Michael's. Michael probably would be able to stop some rumors about him if he would share with the public some aspect s of his life more. But he had choose not to do it. I've always said that only court papers served would be able to force Eddie to present the proof if there is one. There was absolutely no reason for him to do it before. He had no reason to care about Michael's fans At All. Especially after all the bullying.

 

[Electro]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I personally prefer Let Me Let Go over Monster. But my jam has to be Mamacita. That one is a classic. Also Biggerman and Burn Tonight are better than anything on HIStory and Invincible together!

That's sarcasm.... i hope. :scratch:

edit.. alright, it is. should have read the posts before first.

 

[SoCav]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I think it's a lot more mature and business savvy to put any "out takes" in the safe before anyone would be able to put their hands on. This staff was too valuable (together with everything else about Michael). I don't know if you remember that Michael's own family took from the rented house even the things didn't belong to him. His own family was the one selling his staff on the auction and you would like to criticize Cascio for telling that any other files are destroyed. It would be extremely dumb if it would really be the true but even more stupid to admit that more documentations still existed.

So if all that was true, why wouldn't he open up that safe to the Estate and show them his outtakes, to actually prove to them that the vocals were MJ's? How can it ever be considered business savvy of him to not show all this proof that he supposedly has, when that could have squashed the rumours and controversy that tremendously hurt the album?

The only logical conclusion imo is that he showed them nothing simply because he has nothing.

 

[HIStory]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

I think it's a lot more mature and business savvy to put any "out takes" in the safe before anyone would be able to put their hands on. This staff was too valuable (together with everything else about Michael). I don't know if you remember that Michael's own family took from the rented house even the things didn't belong to him. His own family was the one selling his staff on the auction and you would like to criticize Cascio for telling that any other files are destroyed. It would be extremely dumb if it would really be the true but even more stupid to admit that more documentations still existed. IMO there was no need for Cascio to share anything valuable about Michael before. It doesn't look he really cares so much about public opinion. You could compare his ways to Michael's. Michael probably would be able to stop some rumors about him if he would share with the public some aspect s of his life more. But he had choose not to do it. I've always said that only court papers served would be able to force Eddie to present the proof if there is one. There was absolutely no reason for him to do it before. He had no reason to care about Michael's fans At All. Especially after all the bullying.

Sorry, but you are simply making up unplausible scenarios. This is not hiding some unregistered material from someone so that some idea or song cannot be stolen. Here we are talking about songs that the Estate/Sony bought from the Cascios and which were released. After the songs were registered and released there was no reason to hide outtakes and backup material when the songs' authenticity was questioned. No one can steal a song that is already registered and published, so there was no risk involved in Eddie showing backup material for these songs.

 

[Warszawa320]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

So if all that was true, why wouldn't he open up that safe to the Estate and show them his outtakes, to actually prove to them that the vocals were MJ's? How can it ever be considered business savvy of him to not show all this proof that he supposedly has, when that could have squashed the rumours and controversy that tremendously hurt the album?

The only logical conclusion imo is that he showed them nothing simply because he has nothing.

Hello, do you have any proof the Estate even asked about it? In my opinion they had their own research on the subject and they were not even interested about Cascio's "proof". The Estate knew some fans hate Cascios the same way as Jackson family does so it was no sense to "pursue" the subject. The best thing was just to ignore it and not to use Cascio's songs at all, at least for awhile. There was really no need to use the songs since some very vocal fans are against just every other "Cascio's song". What was the reason even argue about it now. This staff could be hidden for 40-50 years and after that it would be totally different executors and different public. There is also more in my post than you quoted above so please read it and comment if you want.

 

[OnirMJ]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

The Estate knew some fans hate Cascios the same way as Jackson family does so it was no sense to "pursue" the subject.

No one hated Cascios then. Only few people knew about them. I didn't know who they are. Never heard of them before. So stop bullshitting. Fans hate them now because of what they did. Just like we hate Wade and all other friends turned backstabbers.

 

[analogue]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

Why wouldn't the Estate ask for proof from The Cascio's? Asking for them to provide proof is just common sense

 

[OnirMJ]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

There was really no need to use the songs since some very vocal fans are against just every other "Cascio's song". What was the reason even argue about it now. This staff could be hidden for 40-50 years and after that it would be totally different executors and different public. There is also more in my post than you quoted above so please read it and comment if you want.

There is only 12 Cascio songs recorded in "2007 in the basement". All 12 songs leaked on the internet in full (some in their original unedited form) and all 12 are fake. Michael recorded Wanna Be Startin' Something 2008 lead and background vocals there and For All Time synths. No one questions those songs even Angelikson is credited on both of them. Frank Cascio just sold on an auction Michael's tape with 1997 demo of Seeing Voices. No one questions that one either. Because there is no goat on it. Because it is real song.

 

[Warszawa320]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

No one hated Cascios then. Only few people knew about them. I didn't know who they are. Never heard of them before. So stop bullshitting. Fans hate them now because of what they did. Just like we hate Wade and all other friends turned backstabbers.

Please stop this bullshit. It was always problem among Jacksons and their fans about Cascio family. Maybe you didn't know about it. How you would feel being a Jackson and not having access to your relative (except the trial) and other family could talk to him daily. There was no other family Michael spent so much time with. You would not have problem with Cascios if Tarryl had not talked about it. It is my opinion and this is what I do believe in. Of course you will say differently and I don't have to believe you.

 

[analogue]

Re: Estate, Cascio & Porte sued - Forensic Analysis says MJ is NOT singing the 3 songs on "MICHAEL"

From what I've read on this forum there are more Anti-Jackson people than there are Anti-Cascio people