Michael - The Great Album Debate

[ivy]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

But you weren't able to prove that it was a brand new registration. The original registration could have been amended to reflect Teddy's songwriting credit. So, my point stands.

I was. Updated registrations list the previous registration number and the changes for the basis of new updated registration. It didn't have that so it's a new registration.

 

[kreen]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

But you weren't able to prove that it was a brand new registration. The original registration could have been amended to reflect Teddy's songwriting credit. So, my point stands.

There's a lot of examples of MJ songs being registered years after they were recorded. For instance, Seven Digit, a MJ/Bottrell song, was only recently registered, even though it dates back to, like, 1989.

 

[samhabib]

Re: A List of Questions Regarding the Cascio Tracks

Dude, at least stand corrected when you're shown to be wrong.

Give me a break. Someone has just sold bogus tracks as Michael Jackson for millions. So I'll wait until I hear anything else before I take, as face value, that Michael Jackson didn't register a whole world of songs years before his death.

 

[samhabib]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

There's a lot of examples of MJ songs being registered years after they were recorded. For instance, Seven Digit, a MJ/Bottrell song, was only recently registered, even though it dates back to, like, 1989.

Bill Bottrel claims he wrote a whole host of Michael Jackson songs that he didn't write. He claims, for example, that he wrote Streetwalker. When we know he didn't - from Michael's own deposition tape and Quincy's take of events on the Bad extended edition CD. So, like I said, I'll wait until I've heard all of these tracks.

 

[kreen]

Re: A List of Questions Regarding the Cascio Tracks

Give me a break. Someone has just sold bogus tracks as Michael Jackson for millions. So I'll wait until I hear anything else before I take, as face value, that Michael Jackson didn't register a whole world of songs years before his death.

So now Brad Buxer ALSO registered fake MJ tracks? Wow. Even though we actually now have one of those songs, called Hollywood/Hollywood Tonight?

 

[kreen]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Bill Bottrel claims he wrote a whole host of Michael Jackson songs that he didn't write. He claims, for example, that he wrote Streetwalker. When we know he didn't - from Michael's own deposition tape and Quincy's take of events on the Bad extended edition CD. So, like I said, I'll wait until I've heard all of these tracks.

Uh? When did Bill Bottrell claim he wrote Streetwalker? He did produce the music for it, which is no mystery.

 

[samhabib]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Uh? When did Bill Bottrell claim he wrote Streetwalker? He did produce the music for it, which is no mystery.

He posted his take on Gearslutz. It took another studio head to remind him of a couple of things - for example he complained about not being credited on 'Earth Song' (I think) and it turned out he was credited. Another studio head then took his take to pieces.

 

[love is magical]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

I didn't mean you personally but more in general terms. I really cannot understand the downplaying of other people's actions and power of provocation.

sure it would be best if he didn't use cursing towards the fans but he experienced the same behavior. why not blame the fans as well? It seems like we are advocating that such behavior is okay and only Teddy is supposed to be the "big one". perhaps it's my culture don't know but I come from a culture that thinks "hitting back is okay if someone hits you first".

also let's look to criticizing. it's one thing to say that his works aren't good and it's completely another thing to say he's lying and his works are fakes. so it would make sense he would get different levels of defensive depending on the type of criticism.

I said it before my understanding that he doesn't think "literally" alive. and why do we solely focus on Teddy? Okay let's classify him as "not stable", how about other people? on what basis are we discrediting Bruce Swedien for example?

Engaging in personal attacks is never okay. For me, it doesn't matter who initiated the attack first. It's wrong to respond to personal attacks by attacking the person back. An eye for an eye is not right.

Persoanl attacks and verbal abuse from fans or from anyone are not tolerable. That's why it bothers me to see the trend in 2300 Jackson Street section.

I realize Teddy didn't go crazy on his tweeting for no reasons. He was pressured by fans. Okay. But, if Teddy is confident about his works, then you know what. It's better for him to stand up tall and talk about the subject matter - the songs. Unfortunately, he didn't. How can I contiune to believe in him when the best response he came up with is to apologize for screwing up the production.

It's always true that when people are running out of valid points or are not honest with themselves, they go personal. They want to avoid the subject. Teddy's action on this subject dosen't paint him in good light.

I focus more on Teddy because Teddy is indeed the producer of the Cascio tracks. He's involved in the project. Bruce Swedien is not. And, honestly, who know what Bruce listened to when Sony/the Estate conduceted the so-called analysis.

Teddy is vocal about the matter. Bruce is not. Has Bruce released any statement on the album? Okay, his silence means confirmation, right? Fine.

 

[kreen]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

He posted his take on Gearslutz. It took another studio head to remind him of a couple of things - for example he complained about not being credited on 'Earth Song' (I think) and it turned out he was credited. Another studio head then took his take to pieces.

I read that whole thread as it was happening, and I don't remember it happening like that at all.

Anyway, what is important is that MJ songs have indeed often been registered years after they were recorded. In fact, it's common practice in the industry, MJ or not. Sometimes songs are forgotten, sometimes they're not registered until they have a chance to be released, sometimes they're not registered for some legal/credit-sharing issue, and sometimes they're not registered for fear of bootleggers.

 

[samhabib]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

I read that whole thread as it was happening, and I don't remember it happening like that at all.

Well you should go back online and read it again.

Anyway, what is important is that MJ songs have indeed often been registered years after they were recorded. In fact, it's common practice in the industry, MJ or not. Sometimes songs are forgotten, sometimes they're not registered until they have a chance to be released, sometimes they're not registered for some legal/credit-sharing issue, and sometimes they're not registered for fear of bootleggers.

12 songs recorded in 3 months were forgotten? Are you being serious when you suggest that? That suddenly he became busier than he had been for 10 years and 'forgot' about it?

Sometimes they're not registered because one of the names might sue. If they were still alive. Good thing he was dead when these songs were registered, then.

 

[ivy]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

registration of the songs is not a "must". Legally speaking copyright is established the minute the songs are created. registration is only helpful in establishing ownership / providing proof if someone steals your song.

There's also something that is called "a poor man's copyright" which basically you put the lyrics and/or copy of the CD/cassette in an envelope, seal it, sign in, mail it to yourself by registered mail and keep the envelope sealed. It's perfectly fine and acceptable method to establish "creation date" and "ownership".

All this registration talk is fruitless.

 

[samhabib]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

registration of the songs is not a "must". Legally speaking copyright is established the minute the songs are created. registration is only helpful in establishing ownership / providing proof if someone steals your song.

There's also something that is called "a poor man's copyright" which basically you put the lyrics and/or copy of the CD/cassette in an envelope, seal it, sign in, mail it to yourself by registered mail and keep the envelope sealed. It's perfectly fine and acceptable method to establish "creation date" and "ownership".

All this registration talk is fruitless.

No it isn't. The fact that the songs weren't even registered during his lifetime means that there's absolutely NO proof that he was ever aware of these ridiculous songs.

 

[ivy]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

No it isn't. The fact that the songs weren't even registered during his lifetime means that there's absolutely NO proof that he was ever aware of these ridiculous songs.

do you work in USPS? or even read the part about "poor man's copyright"?

 

[samhabib]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

do you work in USPS? or read the part about "poor man's copyright"?

I'm a qualified product designer and I work in multimedia, so save the patronising tone. I know about copyrights, I've registered enough in my time.

What is the relevance of the 'poor man's copyright' in this case? You haven't got a document to prove that Michael Jackson knew ANYTHING about these songs. So what is the relevance of your question?

 

[love is magical]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Sam did bring up a good point. Did Michael, in his life, fail to register a total of twelve songs recorded with one producer?

Of course, there are songs that Michael didn't register. May be he forgot, may be he didn't care about them, may be because of other things. Who knows? But, if Michael was serious enough to record twelve songs in four months, yet he didn't register any one of them?

Also, "poor man's copyright" is indeed irrelevant. Did Michael utilize "poor man's copyright" method to register any one of his songs in his life? I always think Michael was very conscious about copyright issue. First, he's an owner of one of the largest music publishing company. He knew the value of intellectual right. Second, he was sued left and right all the time over music authorship. He knew the importance of obtaining proof of music copyright.

 

[kreen]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Of course, there are songs that Michael didn't register. May be he forgot, may be he didn't care about them, may be because of other things. Who knows? But, if Michael was serious enough to record twelve songs in four months, yet he didn't register any one of them?

Maybe he didn't plan on dying? But the whole discussion, as usual, is pointless, because the same fact can be interpreted in two completely different ways.

You say the fact those songs were registered after MJ's death prove they're fake.

But I say the fact they were registered so soon after MJ's death proves he DID record them. Because otherwise we'd have to assume that the Cascios, upon hearing of the death of MJ, sat down and came up with the idea for the biggest, most unlikely, most legally dangerous hoax ever perpetrated in the history of popular music, decided to execute it, and provided the Copyright Office with the required information, in a period of 24 hours. Isn't it more realistic to think that the songs were registered so soon after MJ's death because the Cascios realized they now had to do it, lest some other person came forward in the confusion to claim the songs were theirs.

 

[moonwalkingsteve]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

I just want to say thankyou to Ivy, I was going to post my reply to the questions posted on here but Ivy has said everything i would have put. I know she is getting a lot of negativity on this thread but I agree with her 100% and hope she will continue to give such articulate replies to some of ridiculously emotive and over sensitive reactions of some posters.

Sure the voice on these songs sound strange in places but there are a lot of possibilities for why that is and i think its better people keep an open mind.

 

[Pentum]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Sure the voice on these songs sound strange in places but there are a lot of excuses for why that is and i think its better people keep an open mind.

Just helped you out on this one.

You're welcome.

 

[moonwalkingsteve]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Just helped you out on this one.

You're welcome.

Rather than bite back ill just say that you may believe it is unlikely that these tracks are michael jackson but it is not an impossibility - id be happy to provide you with a dictionary definition as to the word 'possibility' if it helps and maybe for others a definition on what is 'fact' and what is 'opinion'.

 

[samhabib]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

But I say the fact they were registered so soon after MJ's death proves he DID record them.

Only in a bizarre, parallel universe does that sentence even make sense. I've read some incredible theories on here recently. The best one being 'it sounds different but that proves it's Michael Jackson'. But this sentence here, that the fact that the songs were registered after his death (ie. that there's no proof that Michael Jackson knew anything about these songs) is proof, incredibly, that Michael Jackson recorded these songs... quite unbelievable.

In other words the theories are that if it doesn't sound like him, that means it's him. If he never registered the songs, then he definitely recorded them.

Quite unbelievable.

 

[lom kit]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

You say the fact those songs were registered after MJ's death prove they're fake.

But I say the fact they were registered so soon after MJ's death proves he DID record them. Because otherwise we'd have to assume that the Cascios, upon hearing of the death of MJ, sat down and came up with the idea for the biggest, most unlikely, most legally dangerous hoax ever perpetraded in the history of popular music, decided to execute it, and provided the Copyright Office with the required information, in a period of 24 hours. Isn't it more realistic to think that the songs were registered so soon after MJ's death because the Cascios realized they now had to do it, lest some other person came forward in the confusion to claim the songs were theirs.

Yeah, living in denial, makes you come to strangest/weirdest conclusions. :doh::hysterical:

 

[Arklove]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

Only in a bizarre, parallel universe does that sentence even make sense. I've read some incredible theories on here recently. The best one being 'it sounds different but that proves it's Michael Jackson'. But this sentence here, that the fact that the songs were registered after his death (ie. that there's no proof that Michael Jackson knew anything about these songs) is proof, incredibly, that Michael Jackson recorded these songs... quite unbelievable.

In other words the theories are that if it doesn't sound like him, that means it's him. If he never registered the songs, then he definitely recorded them.

Quite unbelievable.

Yeah, living in denial, makes you come to strangest/weirdest conclusions. :doh::hysterical:

:lol: I shall bite my tongue :shutup:

 

[love is magical]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

1. In a period of four months, Michael managed to record 12 songs with Eddie Cascio, songs with complete lyrics and harmonies. The Cascio tracks sound even more complete than Hollywood Tonight. Is it consistent with Michael's past work habit?

2. Michael was willing to settle with sub-standard recording equipment. The output of such recording is below standard, worse than a phone voice message. Is it consistent with Michael's past perfectionist standard?

3. Michael failed to register not one song, but a total of twelve songs. Is it consistent with Michael's past work habit?

4. Despite the completeness of the songs, people keep saying these are guide demos and how musicians don't sing in full in demos. Okay, let's assume all these songs are "guide demos", is it consistent with Michael's past singing habit? Did he ever sound so bad in demos?

5. Is the unusually weak lyrics consistent with Michael's past song writing ability?

I must be in denial to come up with all these inconsistencies. Wait, do I want to be in a river in Egypt now?

 

[lom kit]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

^
to:
1. and where did you got that info?
3. How many of the will.I.Am songs are if any registered?
4: yes he did. the early demos of BJ.

 

[Arklove]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

He sounds bad in his BJ demos?? Really?? This is bad? He sounds fantastic!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6bRTyv-3Qo

sorry for my messy post....I tried to embed but the computers here at work are likely about 20 years old.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/k6bRTyv-3Qo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen>

 

[kreen]

Only in a bizarre, parallel universe does that sentence even make sense. I've read some incredible theories on here recently. The best one being 'it sounds different but that proves it's Michael Jackson'. But this sentence here, that the fact that the songs were registered after his death (ie. that there's no proof that Michael Jackson knew anything about these songs) is proof, incredibly, that Michael Jackson recorded these songs... quite unbelievable.

To quote MJ in LWMJ, "you're making it all wrong".

The date of the registration of the songs proves nothing, one way or another. But if you say that it seems to indicate that the tracks are fake, because they would have been registered before had they been real, I'll counter that by saying what I said earlier, which is that :

I find it much easier to believe that MJ simply didn't bother registering the songs, than to believe the other possibility, which is that the Cascios came up and executed from scratch the most daring hoax in history in a 24-hour period after MJ's death.

Besides, now that I'm thinking about it, weren't the Cascio tracks, in their pre-MJ state, actually registered before 2007? I seem to remember reading on Roger Friedman's blog that the songs were indeed registered before, under the names of Cascio and Porte, and that the 2007 registration only added MJ. I'll try to find that article.

And here it is :

Indeed, two days after Jackson died–on June 27, 2009–Cascio filed a copyright claim along with Michael Jackson and another songwriter for something called “MJ Songbook.” The filing is just for lyrics. An earlier filing. from March 2008, is labeled “JPEC Collection.” The song titles in each collection are not specified in the Library of Congress’s database, but it’s possible that Cascio updated his 2008 filing after Jackson died to reflect the superstar’s contribution to material Cascio had already written–and wisely registered.


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

 

[Pentum]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

4: yes he did. the early demos of BJ.

Point is that there are NO typical methods Michael used in his demos in any of the Cascio songs. Nothing!

I've said it many times; no mumbling, no falsetto to save voice, nothing. They are all straight forward. It only sounds like a man trying his best to sound like Michael.

MJ in 1992 rehearsing The Love You Save sounding lazy like he is doing a demo: Saving voice, falsetto parts, singing low in parts, almost mumbling: http://soundcloud.com/pentum/the-love-you-save-92

MJ in 2009 rehearsing The Love You save sounding almost exactly the same as in 1992, doing the exaclty same thing: http://soundcloud.com/pentum/the-love-you-save-2009

 

[kreen]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

1. In a period of four months, Michael managed to record 12 songs with Eddie Cascio, songs with complete lyrics and harmonies. The Cascio tracks sound even more complete than Hollywood Tonight. Is it consistent with Michael's past work habit?

2. Michael was willing to settle with sub-standard recording equipment. The output of such recording is below standard, worse than a phone voice message. Is it consistent with Michael's past perfectionist standard?

3. Michael failed to register not one song, but a total of twelve songs. Is it consistent with Michael's past work habit?

4. Despite the completeness of the songs, people keep saying these are guide demos and how musicians don't sing in full in demos. Okay, let's assume all these songs are "guide demos", is it consistent with Michael's past singing habit? Did he ever sound so bad in demos?

5. Is the unusually weak lyrics consistent with Michael's past song writing ability?

1- Why do you say the Cascio track are complete? First of all, we've only heard 5 of them, and the fact they were the ones considered for release could indicate they are the 5 most complete ones. Secondly, those 5 songs do indeed sound incomplete, with their lack of ad-libs and the need to use a backing vocalist for choruses. And doesn't "All I Need" only feature like one verse, repeated twice?

2- MJ was living with his whole family with the Cascios, free of charge : he probably felt he owed them the favor. If I spent 4 months at your place with my 3 kids, eating your food, I'd also feel like I owe you one.

3- Absolutely : like I said before, a lot of MJ songs were only registered after his death, or when products like TUC were released. And even now, songs like STTR and the Will.I.Am tracks are not registered.

4- He doesn't sound that bad. Listen to KYHU again. The reason MJ hums the melody instead of actually singing the words on demos like "In the Back" or "Beautiful Girl" is because he wrote those songs, but hadn't finished the lyrics. But the Cascio tracks were probably written by Cascio and James Porte themselves. So he had all the lyrics.

5- He probably didn't write the lyrics. And they're run-of-the-mill pop lyrics, like much of what MJ has written or sung.

 

[AnnieRUOkay89]

Re: Michael - The Great Album Debate (Only Go Here if You Want To Continue The Controversy)

 

[samhabib]

To quote MJ in LWMJ, "you're making it all wrong".

The date of the registration of the songs proves nothing, one way or another. But if you say that it seems to indicate that the tracks are fake, because they would have been registered before had they been real, I'll counter that by saying what I said earlier, which is that :

I find it much easier to believe that MJ simply didn't bother registering the songs, than to believe the other possibility, which is that the Cascios came up and executed from scratch the most daring hoax in history in a 24-hour period after MJ's death.

Besides, now that I'm thinking about it, weren't the Cascio tracks, in their pre-MJ state, actually registered before 2007? I seem to remember reading on Roger Friedman's blog that the songs were indeed registered before, under the names of Cascio and Porte, and that the 2007 registration only added MJ. I'll try to find that article.

And here it is :

Indeed, two days after Jackson died–on June 27, 2009–Cascio filed a copyright claim along with Michael Jackson and another songwriter for something called “MJ Songbook.” The filing is just for lyrics. An earlier filing. from March 2008, is labeled “JPEC Collection.” The song titles in each collection are not specified in the Library of Congress’s database, but it’s possible that Cascio updated his 2008 filing after Jackson died to reflect the superstar’s contribution to material Cascio had already written–and wisely registered.


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

In other words the Cascio's amended the registrations to add Michael Jackson's name after he died? And this is supposed to help your case? Haha It just makes it more obvious that they wouldn't have fucking dared registered those songs with his name on them while he was alive. That makes it even worse for your case!