Michael - The Great Album Debate

[ivy]

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

is it a little naive for Sony to think they can stop the leaked songs from spreading around by ordeing fan forums to ban people?

I kinda feel like they accomplished that in this case, don't you agree? no full song, no more snippets, no snippets from other songs.

one of those friends can always upload.

that I wouldn't recommend.

once security is breached, there is not that much Sony can do.

not quite

leaking is a risk that Sony should have considered and should have put in extra caution at the very beginning.

let me ask a question : you go to a bank and see the safe open with no guards anywhere. does it make it okay to get money out of the safe?

furthermore assume that you seen a man walk into the safe get money and walk out of the bank without getting caught. You say okay I'll do it too. You get the money but got caught. Would the defense of "but that other man got money and nothing happened to him" help you?

 

[Aniram]

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

ivy, your posts are so great.

 

[love is magical]

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

I kinda feel like they accomplished that in this case, don't you agree? no full song, no more snippets, no snippets from other songs.

Oh well... don't say it too fast. It's less than a week since they are banned. Who knows? May be more leaks will come out the next few days.

Remember we had snippets of BG and STTR first, then the whole songs leaked weeks later.

that I wouldn't recommend.

You wouldn't recommend. Yet, many people still do so.

not quite

I don't consider banning people an effective way of preventing future leaks. Leaking and piracy are nothing new. It's almost impossible to stop. I saw many DVD's of not-yet-released movies selling by the street vendors in Chinatown.

let me ask a question : you go to a bank and see the safe open with no guards anywhere. does it make it okay to get money out of the safe?

Of course not.

But, if I was the auditor of the bank, I would have issued them a big fat letter detailing the material weakness in the bank's internal control system. The material weakness is serious enough to cause substanial financial loss. The executives of the bank would not be too thrilled in such situation and would face diffcult time in board meetings.

The bank is responsible to institute a reliable security system to guard its assets.

furthermore assume that you seen a man walk into the safe get money and walk out of the bank without getting caught. You say okay I'll do it too. You get the money but got caught. Would the defense of "but that other man got money and nothing happened to him" help you?

No, that defense is not valid.

But, I would argue the following.

First, is life sentence too harsh?

Second, any precedence? did previous offenders who get caught received life sentence?

 

[ivy]

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

You wouldn't recommend. Yet, many people still do so.

and if they face anything because of it , it's their responsibility then.

Of course not.

But, if I was the auditor of the bank, I would have issued them a big fat letter detailing the material weakness in the bank's internal control system. The material weakness is serious enough to cause substanial financial loss. The executives of the bank would not be too thrilled in such situation and would face diffcult time in board meetings.

The bank is responsible to institute a reliable security system to guard its assets.

true but bank security is another issue. Like you agreed lack of security doesn't make it okay.

No, that defense is not valid.

But, I would argue the following.

First, is life sentence too harsh?

Second, any precedence? did previous offenders who get caught received life sentence?

Like I said we heard that Tak and one other person was arrested. so if true and that's the precedence banning from a forum could be argued to be a lot less than an actual legal action.

you consider the maximum action that could be done in a forum as the base - banning - and see that as a "life sentence". Step outside the forum and into the real life. Consider actions that could be done in the real life and in a legal sense and then compare it to "banning from a forum".

 

[Aniram]

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

Probably at least a lifetime ban from the bank. :lol: "It's that guy again! Shit, press the button!"

 

[samhabib]

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

Probably at least a lifetime ban from the bank. :lol: "It's that guy again! Shit, press the button!"

Yeah... get the 'expert button pusher!'

 

[Aniram]

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

Hello Sam! Good to see you today Knew there'd be some sort of quick Cascio button-pushing reference.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

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

If Pentum and Kapital had been banned for a MJ song link I could understand, but for providing a link which leads to a song that is not sung by MJ, I don't understand.

 

[Aniram]

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

Ha!

 

[love is magical]

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

and if they face anything because of it , it's their responsibility then.

No one is saying it's not their responsibility. The lingering question here is more like "why there is no punitive action against people who posted links to download BG and STTR?"

You said Pentum and Kapital are considered the "leakers" by Sony. I still cannot grasp this completely. All they did was to left a post with a link, which is not that different than the way people shared links to download BG. Does it really matter whether the initial leakers are friends of theirs?

true but bank security is another issue. Like you agreed lack of security doesn't make it okay.

Lack of security is definitely not okay. Back to your example about the money in a safe. We tend to blame the one who steal money from the bank. Legally speaking, the bank did nothing wrong. But, from an operational standpoint, the bank is to blamed for its lack of adequate security system.

If the example happens in real life, I'm 100% sure someone in the bank's management will be held responsible.

Like I said we heard that Tak and one other person was arrested. so if true and that's the precedence banning from a forum could be argued to be a lot less than an actual legal action.

you consider the maximum action that could be done in a forum as the base - banning - and see that as a "life sentence". Step outside the forum and into the real life. Consider actions that could be done in the real life and in a legal sense and then compare it to "banning from a forum".

Why compare Pentum to Tak? Tak obtained the tracks illegally and sold them for profit. Did Pentum sell any snippets to people? Pentum was not even the leaker. He posted a link. Birchey posted a link too. He even started a thread, in which he posted a link to download the snippet. I saw it. The thread is deleted.

 

[Aniram]

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

Wow. love is magical... This is such a sad situation indeed.

 

[love is magical]

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

^what situation is sad? the bank? the person who stole money from the safe? tak? pentum? birchey?

damn... so many people are involved. i'm confused. lol... :lol:

 

[love is magical]

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

If Pentum and Kapital had been banned for a MJ song link I could understand, but for providing a link which leads to a song that is not sung by MJ, I don't understand.

don't you know the idiots at sony thought MJ sung souljah boy.

 

[ivy]

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

No one is saying it's not their responsibility. The lingering question here is more like "why there is no punitive action against people who posted links to download BG and STTR?"

perhaps there was who knows or perhaps they couldn't identify the people. people could fall through the cracks but that cannot be a defense (my example of a man stealing and getting away and you being caught)

You said Pentum and Kapital are considered the "leakers" by Sony. I still cannot grasp this completely. All they did was to left a post with a link, which is not that different than the way people shared links to download BG. Does it really matter whether the initial leakers are friends of theirs?

I didn't say leakers to be correct. I said initial distributors. and if the actions were in sync, then it might matter. I saw Kapital posting "water is coming".

If the example happens in real life, I'm 100% sure someone in the bank's management will be held responsible.

and most probably someone was held responsible. we don't know and that's just another part of the story.

Why compare Pentum to Tak? Tak obtained the tracks illegally and sold them for profit. Did Pentum sell any snippets to people? Pentum was not even the leaker. He posted a link. Birchey posted a link too. He even started a thread, in which he posted a link to download the snippet. I saw it. The thread is deleted.

I didn't compare Pentum to Tak. I mentioned the legal actions we heard were : arrests - copyright infringement claims - cease and desists and banning. If those are the possible actions I do not think that banning from a forum is the worst that could happen. You called banning a "life sentence" ,my point was there are several much more worse options. I actually think MJJC's receiving of "comply or else" is a lot worse than saying "you can't post on this forum". Nobody seems to consider about MJJC and the consequences. You are focused on who is banned but forget that MJJC is at the receiving end of the legal threat and not the banned people.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

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

don't you know the idiots at sony thought MJ sung souljah boy.

Why am I not surprised? And the same people make me believe that MJ is singing on the Cascio tracks?

 

[love is magical]

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

^^Ivy, I feel you shifted the focal point of our question. No one is saying "fu*k MJJC and save Pentum." I believe I even said so myself that you guys needed to do what you need to do to protect this place. We are not against MJJC for banning Pentum and Kapital. We just keep wondering why Sony reacted so fiercely against these two particular members.

For us, seeing a multi-billion conglomerate hunting down two particular members is startling. Instead of asking the owner of this forum to enhance its policy on preventing leaks from being shared, they asked to have two specific members banned indefinitely.

So, when ask for more transparency and openess, we are all face-less small potatos. However, in terms of sharing a poor quality snippet, we are too important to be ignored.

 

[love is magical]

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

Why am I not surprised? And the same people make me believe that MJ is singing on the Cascio tracks?

and they are supposed to be the professional in their fields. we are all supposed to be amaterus.

not trying to pat on my back, they may want to hire me to teach them Music of Michael Jackson 101.

 

[ivy]

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

^^Ivy, I feel you shifted the focal point of our question. No one is saying "fu*k MJJC and save Pentum." I believe I even said so myself that you guys needed to do what you need to do to protect this place. We are not against MJJC for banning Pentum and Kapital. We just keep wondering why Sony reacted so fiercely against these two particular members.

For us, seeing a multi-billion conglomerate hunting down two particular members is startling. Instead of asking the owner of this forum to enhance its policy on preventing leaks from being shared, they asked to have two specific members banned indefinitely.

So, when ask for more transparency and openess, we are all face-less small potatos. However, in terms of sharing a poor quality snippet, we are too important to be ignored.

those are question for Sony, I cannot answer them simply because I don't know. When I came to this thread the question I saw was "what's the difference" and I tried to explain that to my best of ability and how the first leaks cannot be a legitimization point. that's all I can bring to this discussion.

 

[Aniram]

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

Pentum and Kapital77 are probably the most famous of the 'doubters' and the ones that most vehemently defend the Cascio/Malachi Controversy.

I'm sure they've sent many letters, e-mails, comparisons, done lots of activism to get awareness of this whole thing out and exposed. They are constantly defaming them as well as sharing leaked material.

It's logical that Sony would see them as harmful to business no matter if this is all true or not.

 

[love is magical]

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

Pentum and Kapital77 are probably the most famous of the 'doubters' and the ones that most vehemently defend the Cascio/Malachi Controversy.

I'm sure they've sent many letters, e-mails, comparisons, done lots of activism to get awareness of this whole thing out and exposed. They are constantly defaming them as well as sharing leaked material.

It's logical that Sony would see them as harmful to business no matter if this is all true or not.

You know what. I really hope what you said is true. If Pentum and Kapitol's actions can change Sony, I'll join the activism in a heart beat.

 

[Aniram]

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

We should all actively be requesting more transparency and evidence about these vocals from Sony! We should always be raising questions about them until we the fans are satisfied.

Of course you can never satisfy everybody, there will always be people who suspect Best Of Joy and Hollywood Tonight, as well as Hold My Hand, might be fake.

But what so many of us fans are asking for isn't unrealistic or difficult whatsoever...

However, we can probably also agree that Sony perhaps caused this whole entire controversy on purpose? If that is the case they will definitely remain silent for as long as possible. The longer they do that is more confirmation to us that something very strange is going on.

 

[KingMikeJ]

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

Can somebody please PM me a link to the 2nd snippet of Soldier Boy so I can make up my own mind?

 

[Jesta]

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

If only SONY developed Kinect, or otherwise I could've made a Big Brother/Skynet joke for the reason as to why everyone's scared to post snippets on here.

 

[Aniram]

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

Listen to the Cascio songs that are already released and make up your mind. You still can't tell if it's him or not? It's the same in every song. It sounds like him in places but other spots it's very strange. I think that's what everyone hears. That's why we need some proof because it's blatant that these vocals are quite different than typical Michael Jackson vocals.

I can't even stand these Cascio tracks anymore, really. If I ever listen to Breaking News I am waiting for the very end when it's only the copy-and-paste "hee-hee's" and "ow's".

Other than that I find myself listening to Hollywood Tonight(Throwback), Best Of Joy and Hold My Hand the most.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

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

those are question for Sony, I cannot answer them simply because I don't know. When I came to this thread the question I saw was "what's the difference" and I tried to explain that to my best of ability and how the first leaks cannot be a legitimization point. that's all I can bring to this discussion.

I am sorry but nothing was answered. The result is there:

All I need - leaked (no warning from SONY)
Stay - leaked (no warning from SONY)
snippet of Water & Soldier boy - leaked (two members banned for life)

-DUH!

 

[Aniram]

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

I think Stay and All I Need were on early versions of Michael, like I said they almost made the cut.

Soldier Boy and Water were never put anywhere near the Michael album, I believe, but they have been worked on. Maybe this is evidence that they are faked because why would they have already finished all of these tracks when they were only working on several of them for the album? I don't know, it's just another wacky hypothesis of mine.

 

[ivy]

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

I am sorry but nothing was answered. The result is there:

All I need - leaked (no warning from SONY)
Stay - leaked (no warning from SONY)
snippet of Water & Soldier boy - leaked (two members banned for life)

-DUH!

I did explained that with an example

let me ask a question : you go to a bank and see the safe open with no guards anywhere. does it make it okay to get money out of the safe?

furthermore assume that you seen a man walk into the safe get money and walk out of the bank without getting caught. You say okay I'll do it too. You get the money but got caught. Would the defense of "but that other man got money and nothing happened to him" help you?

as you can see in this example even if the conditions are the same one man walking away doesn't mean that the next people could or should walk free as well. and you can't use "but that man walked free (or no warning)" as a defense (meaning I should walk free/no warning).

secondly it can also be argued that the conditions aren't the same. Like I said for the previous leaks the source was "TAK" and as far as we heard a legal action in other words "a warning" was done against TAK. This event created another action and warning that included members and MJJC. So even though actions and people it was aimed different, they did something in both cases.

For rest you need to contact sony as I said those are things I can't answer because simply I don't know.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

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

I did explained that with an example



as you can see in this example even if the conditions are the same one man walking away doesn't mean that the next people could or should walk free as well. and you can't use "but that man walked free (or no warning)" as a defense (meaning I should walk free/no warning).

secondly it can also be argued that the conditions aren't the same. Like I said for the previous leaks the source was "TAK" and as far as we heard a legal action in other words "a warning" was done against TAK. This event created another action and warning that included members and MJJC. So even though actions and people it was aimed different, they did something in both cases.

For rest you need to contact sony as I said those are things I can't answer because simply I don't know.

I am sorry Ivy, but that's not a clear answer. That's just a hypothesis with an exemple.

The facts are the facts. That is to say, no warnings whatsoever were issued and all of sudden a ban for life was demanded for a snippet link. Usually when something wrong is done you see the link removed and a warning with a promise not to do it again. Here there was no warning at all.

 

[ivy]

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

Well I'm not Sony's legal team , am I? Only they can give you the clear answer you are looking for.

My stealing from the bank example is to show you that legally you can't make the defense of "they got no warning so I should not get any warning". furthermore any legal action they took up to this point -including taking down the songs / comparisons on YouTube with the basis of copyright infringement - shows that they are taking action or issuing warnings. They can pick and choose what action to take, what warning issue.

and if I was to speculate I could have also argued that perhaps the newer songs are to be included in a future release and that's why they prompted a more harsh request than the songs that wouldn't make the cut.

Simply put as long as we aren't in the minds of Sony and their legal team , we won't know all the clear answers.

 

[BUMPER SNIPPET]

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

Well I'm not Sony's legal team , am I? Only they can give you the clear answer you are looking for.

My stealing from the bank example is to show you that legally you can't make the defense of "they got no warning so I should not get any warning". furthermore any legal action they took up to this point -including taking down the songs / comparisons on YouTube with the basis of copyright infringement - shows that they are taking action or issuing warnings. They can pick and choose what action to take what warning issue.

and if I was to speculate I could have also argued that perhaps the newer songs are to be included in a future release and that's why they prompted a more harsh request than the songs that wouldn't make the cut.

Simply put as long as we aren't in the minds of Sony and their legal team , we won't know all the clear answers.

Thanks but I can also draw hypothesis and speculate. I was pointing out at SONY's hypocrisy and you are trying to find logic to their hypocrisy with might-be-this, might-be-that answers. I actually am not interested in any excuse from their part, I am purely interested in justice. If they didn't do it for All I Need and Stay, they shouldn't have done it for the stupid snippets of Water and Soldier Boy. What kind of justice is that?