Hey Bumper where have you been? I have missed you.
I haven't watched TII much (many beautiful moments, but also confronting moments ). What song are you referring too? Want to enjoy that tooyou're right. who has the guts to release demos where the singer doesn't mean to do something..or he mumbles...doesn't know what words to sing, and still sounds magnificent? That was Michael. It was like when he cried after Motown25 because he thought it wasn't good enough, and some boy came up to him and gushed about his dancing. Even if Michael tried, he couldn't screw up. His voice was just too strong for that. I remember the This Is It rehearsals, where he was weak, and whispering, and still, the entire choir behind him couldn't be heard, because of the power of his voice. They seemed so weak in comparison. I just about fainted when i witnessed that. A whisper from a sick weak man is greater than a whole bunch of someone elses' full professional healthy singing voices. I mean that's just crazy. I never heard of that, before.
Haaa! I've been around , just had nothing to say really. Thanks for your warm words
@Bumper
There's a hugeeee difference between doing it knowingly and willingly and being duped. If the company is not knowing it then they are clearly not daring to do such a thing.
Let's give another example : Assume that you plan for a week, make arrangements, prepare and go shot someone - it's premeditated murder. Assume that someone breaks in your house and you shot that person - it's self defense. In this example both times the outcome would be you shooting a person but how and why and your culpability would be two hugely different things.
Let's give another example : Assume that you buy, hide and take a trip to transfer drugs between your country and another one, it would make you a drug smuggler. Assume that a friend of yours has given you a package asking you to deliver it to their relative during your trip, police stops you and they find drugs in the package. In both examples you would be transferring the drugs between two countries but while the first version that you knowingly and willingly did the smuggling would be criminal, but the second one when you had no idea of what you were doing would be a totally different situation, you would be a victim, a person being taken advantage of someone else in that situation.
Color me surprised. I would have thought that the the difference between knowing and willing and unknowing and unwilling would be clear and I wouldn't have need to type all of these. But I guess in the quest to disagree with me no matter what people lose their common sense. No biggie.
Milli Vanilli example is clear, You have one producer in the video era finding a nicer face that could dance , it's not the first time he did it, it's not the last time. He doesn't even want to fraud the masses, he just wants a local disco hit. He hides what he did from every officials by recording it secretly at 4 AM and /or by clever album credits. Companies releasing it without knowing if these people sang or not.
So sorry regardless of how many irrelevant videos or album covers you post ( I at least post the relevant album credits - not contracts or administrative papers) it's not going to change the fact that Milli Vanilli example doesn't include an evil record company that said "yess let's put these dancers so that we can fraud the people around the world and make money muhahahaha" , they didn't know, they weren't willing, they didn't dare to take a risk. So it cannot be used as an example for "see record companies do such things".
However Milli Vanilli case can be used to support Stella's theory that Sony could be duped to believe these are the legit vocals. None of these people were there when these songs were recorded, so they have no first hand idea about who sang it or not. Combine that with your theory of vocal analysis is not definitive and prone to errors and you have a nice strong example for making your case. Try focusing on that rather than wasting your time trying to disagree with me.
Gee you finally admitted what I have known for a long time--you have nothing to say really. Sometimes it is good to own up to things. At one point I thought your kids took you to a spa in Arizona and left you there. I was thinking of sending the police to check out the place and see how you were doing. I am glad you have finally come forward with this public statement about having nothing to say. Now everything is back to normal in the thread.
Gosh,
I don't know how to make myself clear. Um, nobody here is saying that what you say is wrong. But nobody here is focusing on the administration and a company that was duped.
The point is, no matter whether the company was duped or not, what matters is the fact that there clearly were false claims and presentation to the consumers that those two guys were the singers.
In other words, in our situation, nobody gives a damn if SONY or the Estate got duped. They anyway covered their asses and they always can claim that they got duped.
The point is that if someone manages to dupe others, no matter at which level (Eddie's, Teddy's, Sony's, Estate's,...) it is completely a possible scenario, yet many people are claiming inhere that nobody would take such risks as it would have implied that many people would be involved in sharing the secret.
Further on, the point is, if Eddie was the only one knowing the secret with a bunch of people, it is not an as impossible scenario as many tried to claim here.
They all washed their hands off by saying "we hired forensics, they say it's MJ" and that was it. If later somehow it's revealed that it is an impostor, well SONY or the Estate could always claim that they were duped just like the companies claimed they were duped with Milli Vanilli.
So, nobody actually cares about who or which company got duped, but what people really care about is the fact that there indeed was false claim that the voices belonged to those two guys and that such secret was shared by a bunch of people!
Back then nobody really knew their voices, so nobody complained. But in our case, the huge fanbase knows MJ's voice and they hear that something IS worng with those vocals. Yet again, the Estate and SONY wash their hands off by stubbornly saying "we hired forensics, they say it's MJ" without actually further investigating, without listening to the fan base and without holding back the release of the tracks until the problem gets solved.
The ultimate point is, neither the Estate nor SONY give impression that they actually care. I am backing my claim by seeing that they anyway released those tracks despite the huge protests and by seeing that they simply wash their hands off from any possible guilt thanks to the unnamed "forensics' analysis" which actually allows them to play the poor victim card if ever those tracks are revealed to be fake. It'll be extremely easy for them to say "we unfortunately got duped by Eddie and misinformed by the (unnamed) forensics, we are terribly sorry".
@Bumper
if that's your "ultimate" point then refrain from claiming the "record company dared to do such a thing".
Without knowledge they couldn't be daring anything, it's as simple as that. If I stand at the edge of a cliff and I jump that's daring. If you come behind me and push me, that's not me daring anything.
You have no evidence that Arista knew, or used loopholes to cover their asses in their quest to defraud the millions. to the contrary the vocal credit in US edition when the European versions didn't have such credit demonstrates that Arista didn't know a damn thing. If they did, they would have been smarter and continued the no /vague credit.
Also Arista weren't able to "wash their hands" even though they didn't know and never accepted any responsibility. They faced over 25 lawsuits and had to agree to refund the album and concert monies to anyone requested. So the example also shows that no contract, administrative papers or "we didn't know" protects companies. If and when such fraud is uncovered, the companies are required to refund the money at least. Arista could not play the "victim card" even though they didn't know. While Frank Farian was fined around half a million for the scheme he created , Arista's refund plan was around $25 Million. So one can even argue that such event was more financially harmful to the record company then the mastermind and the imposter.
@Bumper
if that's your "ultimate" point then refrain from claiming the "record company dared to do such a thing". Without knowledge they couldn't be daring anything, it's as simple as that. If I stand at the edge of a cliff and I jump that's daring. If you come behind me and push me, that's not me daring anything.
You have no evidence that Arista knew, or used loopholes to cover their asses in their quest to defraud the millions. to the contrary the vocal credit in US edition when the European versions didn't have such credit demonstrates that Arista didn't know a damn thing. If they did, they would have been smarter and continued the no /vague credit.
Also Arista weren't able to "wash their hands" even though they didn't know and never accepted any responsibility. They faced over 25 lawsuits and had to agree to refund the album and concert monies to anyone requested. So the example also shows that no contract, administrative papers or "we didn't know" protects companies. If and when such fraud is uncovered, the companies are required to refund the money at least. Arista could not play the "victim card" even though they didn't know. While Frank Farian was fined around half a million for the scheme he created , Arista's refund plan was around $25 Million. So one can even argue that such event was more financially harmful to the record company then the mastermind and the imposter.
I only brought up Millli Vanilli as an example for those who like to say a record company would never do something like or similar to what some believe happen with the Cascio tracks because it's to risky. But, the past show that yea they could if they wanted too and one actually did.
that the secret CAN be kept among more than two people in the music industry
This is something I've been sort of saying all along. Sony aren't to blame for the creation of the songs and there is no evidence to suggest they had any involvement. They always have the get out clause of "we got duped". I'm sure people had doubts or suspicions and turned a blind eye, but that isn't a crime.
This is cool Ivy. So with this that means Sony is still reliable for what Eddie and James may have done? Should the Cascio tracks be fake
@Bumper
then perhaps you should read better when you decide to join to a conversation. The post that prompted my response was this
so yeah the discussion was about a record company doing it in the past and be able to do it again.
It's also kinda wrong to refer to Frank Farian's production entity "Far Music Production" as a real company, because it's not really a company such as Jab Me Music, Angelikson or Ghost Manor. Regardless of the name of " Far Music Production" it's still one person - Frank Farian.
Well in Milli Vanilli case just days after the "Girl You know it's true" became a hit the guy who was paid $7500 to rap on it went to the media saying he sang on the record. So the secret wasn't really kept in that instance.
ivy;3696579 said:@Bumper
then perhaps you should read better when you decide to join to a conversation.
Ivy, thanks for the official documents, but I don't think that anyone contested nor talked about the administrative papers.
Now read again what has been said in this thread for a zillionth time regarding Milli Vanilli. The argument stands:
Some people used the argument that no company would ever take any risks to use fake singers and claim that vocals belong to them when in reality the vocals belong to others. In other words, what's on the paper nobody really cares because what's on the paper is NOT the issue. The issue is presenting to people two guys and falsly claiming that the vocals we hear belong to them. Now I don't know why you are even twisting somehting that is crystal clear. The vocals do not belong to those two guys, which means that the company DID dare to falsly claim what should have never been claimed in the first place.
Now, don't you see what others are trying to say? If company can cover their asses with a bunch of papers and falsly claim something, then they do it. The administrative papers and the contracts may be ambiguous, but the two guys presented as singers (who actually aren't) are unambiguously presented as if the vocals belonged to them and to no one else. I don't know why is it so complicated to understand. By extention, people say that if it was done once, it could be done twice, three times and many other times as long as the companies are administratively covered and ultimately as long as they can generate huge profits.
I don't know why you need to go to great extents such as posting contracts and administration to simply "correct people" when actually nobody is denying those papers. Why turning the blind eye on what the people are really trying to say here?
The case is simple, we have videos showing us two guys to whom the vocals don't belong, yet unambiguosly presented as if the vocals do belong to them on the cover of their album, in their music videos and even during live performances. So companies do dare such things. Period.
[youtube]sZG-VvlErJY[/youtube]
[youtube]sjcsgROJ83c[/youtube]
[youtube]QrTpPbD6VoQ[/youtube]
[youtube]ReklDIQS-n8[/youtube]
[youtube]NwrL9MV6jSk[/youtube]
[youtube]ds_APrR4pz0[/youtube]
It's hard to believe that Artista didn't know about it and just got duped? Especially when the albums were already out in europe.
But anyways how ignorant of record companies if this is how they operate and don't pay attention to what those working for them are doing?! However Sony was warned long before and hired their own experts so the "duping" theory can't be used on them.
It's hard to believe that Artista didn't know about it and just got duped? Especially when the albums were already out in europe.
But anyways how ignorant of record companies if this is how they operate and don't pay attention to what those working for them are doing?!
However Sony was warned long before and hired their own experts so the "duping" theory can't be used on them.
Well, sadly it can. They can always say that forensics assured them it was Michael. So if one day it is revealed otherwise they can always play that forensics' analysis card.
Well you need to account for the differences between countries. From the moment Milli Vanilli songs were released they were suspicion that they didn't sing. They had these heavy German accents when speaking and none while singing. Some said perhaps they were working to perfect their pronunciation for the recording. Plus in Europe it really didn't matter that much. There had been other lip syncing groups (Boney M , Technotronics, Black Box) , it didn't matter.
Arista who saw the success of Milli Vanilli wanted to release their albums in USA, they got the rights, unknowingly and unsuspectingly assumed that they are singing , gave them the vocals credit, sold millions of albums and then woke up to a scandal. Well probably they realized something wasn't right as the time went on but I think they didn't have a clue when they put "vocals : rob &fab" on the album insert.
As for the record companies I don't think attending to recording sessions is a habit of them and in this instance they were just getting the US distribution rights.
see I was waiting for the forensics discussion to start so yay.
the discussion up to this point has been "would big companies do such thing?" (emphasis added on big) some say yes, some say no. I'm saying Arista / Milli Vanilli can't be used as an example for "yes" as they didn't know.
The question then becomes a matter of profit versus risk. How much risk is there , how much profit is there and is it worth to take the risk for it. Arista example demonstrates that the big companies - in our example Sony / MJ Estate - has a lot more to use financially than the producer or the imposter. Like Stella said it's a lot more reasonable to believe that Sony believed the word of a 25 year friend of Michael and most probably Sony wouldn't like to strain their already weak relationship with MJ fans by angering them more.
From Estate standpoint it's even a lot more clearer. You got 2 men who are getting 10% of everything they bring in - which averages to $4 Million a year for each of them currently. You have a family that wants to remove them from their position for 3 years, you have an audit request. You have the fact that only a mishandling of the Estate can remove them from their positions. So you see that these people have no motivation to be a part of such thing. To the contrary they have all the reason in the world to stay as far away as anything that can make them lose their $4 Million a year job.
So like Stella theorizes it's a lot more reasonable to think that Sony and MJ Estate or at least MJ Estate had no involvement / no knowledge of this alleged fraud.
Now it brings us to the forensics. If you think they had no knowledge / no involvement then there's no reason to suspect the legitimacy of the forensic experts. If you believe for example Executors would not want to lose their jobs then you can be assured that they would have brought in the best expert for a legitimate analysis.
Then you are given the information that the experts have determined it's Michael. so you are left with 3 possibilities
- it's really Michael
- the imposter is good enough to fool that it's Michael - every expert would also come to it's Michael conclusion
- it's inconclusive - even though some might say Michael and some say not Michael, it could never be determined for certain
Note: I'm confused about what kind of penalty you expect that you think that they can get out of it. They are the distributor and they cannot be able to get out of customer reimbursement - in other words refunds regardless of their involvement / knowledge - just like Arista.
So if its not MIchael, there is now reason the Executors can be kicked from their job
So if its not MIchael, there is now reason the Executors can be kicked from their job
only if they knew
the trust document says Executors cannot be held responsible for the mistakes that happen during "good faith" actions.
If we assume that there's a fraud
- if they knew, they participated in it for whatever reason / motivation, yes they can be removed from executor position
- if they didn't knew, hired a legit expert that said it's Michael etc, in other words they had "good faith" - believed the songs to be legit and didn't have the "bad" intentions of fraud and such, they won't be seen responsible for the mistake
but this reality demonstrates that it's highly unlikely that the executors would participate in such alleged fraud knowingly and willingly and it would also make it highly likely that they had a legit investigation into the song authenticity - assuming that they want to keep their Executor position which comes with $4 Million a year salary
so if we conclude that they genuinely thought the songs to be Michael and that you still believe the songs not to be Michael for certain, then you are dealing with a fake that's good enough to fool every test and every expert or at least give inconclusive results which cannot be proven or debunked either way.
Every?
Name one single test that has been done and one single expert that took part in the analysis. Where's that official analysis report?
I know that there's been one Sony expert and one Estate expert.
I meant that if this goes to court to remove Executors for the alleged fraud and if they argued "look we didn't know , our expert said those are legit songs", the action would be to hire other experts to test the songs.
And those independent / court appointed / paid by the other side experts would also come back with "It's Michael" result.
Which would make every party in this event to walk away free and innocent. That would either mean it's really Michael on the songs or that the fake is good enough to fool every expert or test to come up with "It's Michael" determination.
After the latest coup against the Executors that I'm 100% sure that they didn't and they won't be showing their hand. I do understand that you as a fan want the transparency and the information but the Executors are dealing with complex dynamics and they wouldn't be going around making stuff public.