mjjesamor;3256442 said:
Ivy i don't understand why you keep resorting to the legal issue. We know full well that they have covered their asses sufficiently to make it virtually pointless going to court.
correction : there's nothing that can "cover" anyone from going to court. Do you know that a man is suing Michael Jackson for stealing his herpes medicine formula? Do you know that Billie Jean Jackson suing Michael for being the father of her children then giving them to Tom Cruise and then abducting her with his mother?
So winning or losing a case is a different thing but you can go to court regardless.
and really what makes you think that Jackson's are the people that says "I can't win so I'll stay out of the court"? Joe Jackson's lawsuit against the executors has been thrown out due to he didn't have a basis, 3 out of 5 claims of Katherine Jackson against AEG has been thrown out as well. So they had no legal basis but it didn't stop them from going to court. why stop now?
BUMPER SNIPPET;3256641 said:
There is NO EVIDENCE! Waveform is not an evidence,it is just an analysis, nothing more.
and isn't that better for doubters, more power in the courtroom?
BUMPER SNIPPET;3256631 said:
For the same reasons Michael hadn't done it himself back in 2001/2. SONY know how to protect themselves legally.
and what was he going to sue them for?
mjjesamor;3256646 said:
Legal Problems For Eddie Cascio?
Monday, May 3rd 2010
"It is now thought that things may become difficult between Eddie Cascio and Michael’s Estate over the ownership of the songs Michael recorded with him in 2007. Cascio has therefore engaged Don Passman, a top music entertainment lawyer in Los Angeles.
Authorship of the songs and copyright regulations could be contested, especially if Michael was the sole author and owner of the songs.
John Branca and Frank Dileo have heard the tracks and say that Michael’s vocals sound great, but John McClain, who is selecting new tracks from the Sony collection to be released later this year, has so far not heard them"
Ivy i am particularily interested in this line "Authorship of the songs and copyright regulations could be contested, especially if Michael was the sole author and owner of the songs"
What are the conditions necessary to 'contest authorship of songs AND copyright'?
I was looking at the copyright records again and you have three records.
Number 1. 'MJ songbook' Amount of songs not specified. Authorship is listed as Eddie, Michael and Porte. Right and permissions to Porte alone. Date of creation listed as 2009. Date of application the 27th of June 2009.
Number 2 and 3. A month or two before the public and the Estate are made aware of the existence of the Cascio tracks we have two new registrations listed as 'ASON compilation 4 of 13' and 'Ason compilation 9 of 13' both registered on the 18th of March 2010. Date of creation listed as 2007. The interesting part is that whilst the '9 of 13' compilation is listed -authorship by Eddie, Cascio and Porte. The '4 of 13' compilation ONLY LISTS eddie and Porte. No mention of Michael anywhere. Wasn't it originally 4 tracks meant to go on the album? How much do you want to bet that that registration is for 'monster' 'breaking news' 'keep your head up' and the song that ended up not going on the album? (probably the one that Bacharach rejected-nice one Bacharach, you did good!)
This is unreal! This is ass covering pure and simple. Plain as day. Monkey business going on. In the words of Riley 'a conspiracy from a to z'
let's read them better
ASON compilation 4 of 13 - is registered as music which means no audio was submitted, it's probably in lyrics , musical notes on a paper.
Authorship: music, lyrics, musical arrangement, text, editing, Production.
ASON COMPILATION 9 of 13 - is again registered as music again which means no audio, lyrics and musical notes on paper.
in this one Cascio, Porte and Michael is listed on the ownership.
Let's compare them
Edward CascioAuthorship: music, lyrics, musical arrangement, text, editing, Production.
James Porte; Authorship: music, lyrics, musical arrangement, text, editing, Production.
Michael Jackson Authorship: music, lyrics.
It basically tells you that Cascio and Porte did majority of the work on the songs and Michael added /changed music /lyrics.
so by looking to this collection 4 out of 13 has nothing to do with Michael, collection 9 out of 13 is songs that Cascio and Porte did and Michael made changes to.
Ps : Cascio and Porte has other songs that are not related to MJ such as JPEC collection etc. so why would it be interesting if they had songs that they did and Michael didn't even know?
The news article that you have posted actually explains "why the rush for a quick registration in 2 day after MJ's death?".
see the thing is anyone that's listed on the song gets two rights 1) power to allow or not allow releasing of the songs (remember will.i.am) and 2) get money for the copyrights if the songs are released.
of course you can see that it will be better if you are the sole owner.. you can do whatever you want without the need of asking people and will get all the copyright money.
The article hints that they might challenge Cascio and Porte saying that MJ wrote the songs and they didn't - in other words they might try to get the full control of the songs by removing them.
and people asking why they rushed to register them? this is why - to protect the ownership.
To answer your question "What are the conditions necessary to 'contest authorship of songs AND copyright'?" : anybody can contest an authorship of a songs (remember Michael being sued for it for several times?). It all becomes a case of what evidence do you have, who can prove what and like I said before "copyright registration" is a piece of good information to prove the ownership in such cases.
