Latest on MJJC

Michael - The Great Album Debate

kreen said:
Nobody stays at the top foverer, and all artists go through phases of creativity and inspiration. If MJ had lived, maybe he would have produced another "Thriller", but we'll never know.

MJ, as an entertainer, has had peaks and valleys. I mean, MJ on stage in 1988 during the Bad tour is not the same MJ as the one who lip-synchs the "Off the Wall Medley" during the HIStory tour. And MJ in the eighties, who was so prolific that he would often just give hit songs to other artists because he had material coming out of his ears, is not the same artist as MJ circa 2001, who relied on outside producers for 14 of the 16 Invincible songs.

I mean, no one but MJ could have come up with something like "Centipede", but "Heaven can Wait" could have been on any RnB singer's album.
Click to expand...


Michael Jackson at the "peak" of his career (no lip-sych?):

[youtube]7XZGJiY2a3o[/youtube]
 
When I first heard 'All I Need' I didn't know anything about The Cascio's and when I heard 'Michael' sing:

You are all I need in my life
You are all I dream here at night
Close your eyes imagine I'm, taking you, away
Tonight

I was like...
92376288a2bba472ffb5e1ad2fc20de4.gif


1302021063_gazelle-swallowing.gif



It really didn't sound like something Michael would sing normally. Odd (again).
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
Michael Jackson at the "peak" of his career (no lip-sych?):

[youtube]7XZGJiY2a3o[/youtube]
Click to expand...

That performance has gone down in history....So magical, so legendary...And the last thing people think of when they see that performance is the fact that he was miming it...

It's hard for me to continue to read comments from those who put Michael's talents down to justify these Cascio songs..
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
Michael Jackson at the "peak" of his career (no lip-sych?):

[youtube]7XZGJiY2a3o[/youtube]
Click to expand...

While I believe the HIStory Tour to be his weakest of all tours due to his pre-dominant lip-syncing and song choice in places, it can't be forgotten that performing to an audience in the same way that Michael did day-in day-out has a big physical strain on him. There is a general consensus that lip-syncing can be tolerated in a live performance if the show's scope would jeopardize the vocal performance or if a live voice would make no difference to the piece. The HIStory Tour's lack of a live voice didn't detract from its theatrical qualities, both in terms of a "narrative" or through his dancing. Also, this was in promotion of an album where he was singing with a lot of grit in most songs, which is what he would do when singing live. If HIStory was an album that relied on falsetto a lot, I can see one's issues with lip-syncing most songs, but no prolonged use of falsetto is seen in the album, and thus not in the tour.

Now I wouldn't call the HIStory Tour an artistic decline. Michael was physically slowing down in years and he wasn't as energetic as he was in Bad. However, his dancing was still precise and he continually brought in a more theatrical quality into his pieces to give the songs more of an on-stage character, independent of the character created in his short films sometimes!
 
Last edited:
Thanks for helping me to upload all the snippets from the legally released Cascio tracks Pentum and making the comparisons. You are legally within your right to do this as long as it's only for the released ones. Hopefully they will last now that they are on like 30 file sharing sites! I have all the discs copied too to give out at fan events etc.
 
Jesta said:
Now I wouldn't call the HIStory Tour an artistic decline.
Click to expand...

Absolutely not! Earth Song, anyone? TDCAU? Stranger In Moscow? Little Susie? Some of his most courageous artistic endeavours were during the HIStory era...Ghosts, Is It Scary...Brilliant, if you ask me...
 
Arklove said:
Again, you know it's just a way to avoid answering uncomfortable questions ;)
Click to expand...

Actually, I've answered every single question a dozen times each, as you know if you've been following this thread. There are some questions I don't know the answer to -- but again, a few unexplained details don't invalidate all that is easily explained. As for everything that is subjective -- well, it is subjective.

And as for the idea that this should go to court : I understand that it seems a dauting task for regular people like ourselves on a message board to organize a lawsuit, but the important people -- the Jacksons, the Estate, Sony, even all of the artists whose name has been associated with the Cascio songs -- all of those people would have indeed launched a lawsuit if they had reason to think the songs are fake. The fact they haven't means that whatever proof the Cascios have -- whether it's forensic analysis or work tapes or witnessess -- is good enough to prevent a lawsuit.

I see from the interview with Jermaine that this forum has had some contact with him, probably through a manager I suppose? So really, would it be so difficult to build a readable, concise, clear summary of all of the evidence the doubters have brought forward in this thread, and hand it over to Jermaine?
 
kreen said:
Actually, I've answered every single question a dozen times each, as you know if you've been following this thread. There are some questions I don't know the answer to -- but again, a few unexplained details don't invalidate all that is easily explained. As for everything that is subjective -- well, it is subjective.

And as for the idea that this should go to court : I understand that it seems a dauting task for regular people like ourselves on a message board to organize a lawsuit, but the important people -- the Jacksons, the Estate, Sony, even all of the artists whose name has been associated with the Cascio songs -- all of those people would have indeed launched a lawsuit if they had reason to think the songs are fake. The fact they haven't means that whatever proof the Cascios have -- whether it's forensic analysis or work tapes or witnessess -- is good enough to prevent a lawsuit.

I see from the interview with Jermaine that this forum has had some contact with him, probably through a manager I suppose? So really, would it be so difficult to build a readable, concise, clear summary of all of the evidence the doubters have brought forward in this thread, and hand it over to Jermaine?
Click to expand...

Kreen, you know exactly what questions we're talking about..But it's ok, because in all reality, you can't answer the questions...Neither can the doubters...

Actually, you never answered my question about why you feel Michael declined artistically after, what, Bad?

I never claimed Michael was perfect, but he didn't become the type of artist he was by releasing mediocre garbage, or the type of quality the Cascio songs represent...Whatever he did, he did something right, and we're giving him credit where credit is due..
 
Last edited:
kreen said:
Nobody stays at the top foverer, and all artists go through phases of creativity and inspiration. If MJ had lived, maybe he would have produced another "Thriller", but we'll never know.

MJ, as an entertainer, has had peaks and valleys. I mean, MJ on stage in 1988 during the Bad tour is not the same MJ as the one who lip-synchs the "Off the Wall Medley" during the HIStory tour. And MJ in the eighties, who was so prolific that he would often just give hit songs to other artists because he had material coming out of his ears, is not the same artist as MJ circa 2001, who relied on outside producers for 14 of the 16 Invincible songs.

I mean, no one but MJ could have come up with something like "Centipede", but "Heaven can Wait" could have been on any RnB singer's album.
Click to expand...

To be honest with you, I don't want another Thriller. I don't want him to replicate what he did in the 80's. I want him to follow his heart, follow what he feels are the right things to do. If he wants or needs to collaborate with other producers and writers, so be it. It doesn't diminish him as an artist.

I certainly do not expect any artist to be at the peak all the time. Instead of suggesting an artist is experiencing an "artistic decline", people would consider that maturing of an artist, which is totally natural. The fact that Michael Jackson could follow up the success of Thriller with BAD, then follow up the success of BAD with Dangerous, then followed up the success of Dangerous with HIStory is a feast that is worthy to be studied by every recording artist.

If Heaven Can Wait was on Usher's album, the song would be hailed as an artistic breakthrough. Yet, on Invincible, it's considered a run-of-the-mill R&B song. I really wonder why. May be you are right, Heaven Can Wait can appear on any R&B album, just like how Human Nature can appear on any adult contemporary album. Yet, only Michael Jackson could deliver the songs the way he did.

So, in the 80's, when Michael ruled the world, it's not an issue that Baby Be Mine, Thriller, Human Nature, PYT and Lady In My Life were penned by other writers. Fast forward, after solidifying the status of being one of the greatest artists of all time, it's a sin to have an album with materials written by others. How could anyone consider an artist going through an artistic decline when the artist was able to write an extremely creative work, like Morphine? Many songwriters are considered GREAT; despite the fact that their discographies are not anywhere as diverse and creative and far-reaching as Michael's.

If Invincible was released by any artist, but Michael Jackson. I'm sure the critical response would have been much more friendly. Just because the songs were not penned by Michael doesn't mean the songs were not close to Michael's heart. Do you think You Are My Life would sound the way it is if Michael was not a father? It's an album that represents Michael at that point of his life. To be able to let his works to mature with him take courage, it means Michael moved on from what made him a star and popular first. He moved away from his comfort zone. As daring as Madonna, she's still singing Give Me All Your Loving in 2012.
 
I think we should look into how these are being taken down so fast. There is absolutely no reason why snippets of released songs only a few seconds in length can't be uploaded. I can go to online stores like Amazon and CD Universe and listen to longer snippets of those songs. We should contact these sites like Soundcloud and see what their policy is and who's complained to them.
 
MusicMan26 said:
I think we should look into how these are being taken down so fast. There is absolutely no reason why snippets of released songs only a few seconds in length can't be uploaded. I can go to online stores like Amazon and CD Universe and listen to longer snippets of those songs. We should contact these sites like Soundcloud and see what their policy is and who's complained to them.
Click to expand...

That's why it was uploaded in the first place. We now know that someone here is reporting them.
 
technically even 1 second of a song could be copyright infringement. there's not an acceptable level.

furthermore it doesn't need to be someone reporting stuff. We had discussed this months ago with samhabib. youtube has an content ID system. If the copyright owners make an application and send reference material, they cross reference it to uploaded material and remove it automatically. as you can see below soundcloud also has the same system in place and they would automatically take down anything that had received a take down notice.

-----------------------------

What is Content ID?
YouTube's state-of-the-art technologies let rights owners:

Identify user-uploaded videos comprised entirely OR partially of their content, and
Choose, in advance, what they want to happen when those videos are found. Make money from them. Get stats on them. Or block them from YouTube altogether.
It's up to you.

How does Content ID work?
Rights holders deliver YouTube reference files (audio-only or video) of content they own, metadata describing that content, and policies on what they want YouTube to do when we find a match. As you can see soundcloud also has the same system (see info below). I would say that most probably by now Sony / Web sheriff made an content removal request.

We compare videos uploaded to YouTube against those reference files.

Our technology automatically identifies your content and applies your preferred policy: monetize, track, or block.

http://www.youtube.com/t/contentid

------------------------------------------

Soundcloud

Starting in the last few weeks we’ve turned on an automatic content identification system, similar to those used on other major media sharing sites. The system is used primarily for identifying audio that rightsholders have requested to be taken off SoundCloud. This is good news because it makes it easier for artists, labels and other content owners to control how the content they’ve created is available.

http://blog.soundcloud.com/2011/01/05/q-and-a-content-identification-system/
 
Pentum;3619877 said:
Sadly, they don't. I wonder why..
Click to expand...

Willy;3619876 said:
Already gone. Someone really doesn't like your files.
Click to expand...

MusicMan26;3620057 said:
I think we should look into how these are being taken down so fast. There is absolutely no reason why snippets of released songs only a few seconds in length can't be uploaded. I can go to online stores like Amazon and CD Universe and listen to longer snippets of those songs. We should contact these sites like Soundcloud and see what their policy is and who's complained to them.
Click to expand...

Calisto;3620135 said:
File removed.
Click to expand...

StellaJackson;3620147 said:
That's why it was uploaded in the first place. We now know that someone here is reporting them.
Click to expand...

ivy;3620152 said:
technically even 1 second of a song could be copyright infringement. there's not an acceptable level.

It doesn't need to be someone reporting stuff. We had discussed this months ago with samhabib. youtube has an content ID system. If the copyright owners make an application and send reference material, they cross reference it to uploaded material and remove it automatically. as you can see below soundcloud also has the same system in place and they would automatically take down anything that had received a take down notice.

-----------------------------

What is Content ID?
YouTube's state-of-the-art technologies let rights owners:

Identify user-uploaded videos comprised entirely OR partially of their content, and
Choose, in advance, what they want to happen when those videos are found. Make money from them. Get stats on them. Or block them from YouTube altogether.
It's up to you.

How does Content ID work?
Rights holders deliver YouTube reference files (audio-only or video) of content they own, metadata describing that content, and policies on what they want YouTube to do when we find a match. As you can see soundcloud also has the same system (see info below). I would say that most probably by now Sony / Web sheriff made an content removal request.

We compare videos uploaded to YouTube against those reference files.

Our technology automatically identifies your content and applies your preferred policy: monetize, track, or block.

http://www.youtube.com/t/contentid

------------------------------------------

Soundcloud

Starting in the last few weeks we’ve turned on an automatic content identification system, similar to those used on other major media sharing sites. The system is used primarily for identifying audio that rightsholders have requested to be taken off SoundCloud. This is good news because it makes it easier for artists, labels and other content owners to control how the content they’ve created is available.

http://blog.soundcloud.com/2011/01/05/q-and-a-content-identification-system/
Click to expand...


As Ivy Stated above The take downs are not manual for the most part. Sony, Universal, Warner etc .. Use the Content ID sytem. Your content is automatically scanned for a ID match against copyright content audio and vids already on file by youtube or soundcloud. The owners have decided ahead of time what happens to your upload. They can put an add on it - monitor views. or remove the content. Its done automaticially. Thats why many are removed so qiuckly. Ive had vids removed withing seconds for copyright after uploading . The adds go on right away too ... Its AUTOMATED ...

Any manual reports would probably take days to be removed. It has to go though the mail and be adressed and investigated first. Sometimes it takes longer. The scanners can make mistakes. Ive had content cited for copyright by an entity that didnt own the copyright. I made a claim against it and had my vid reinstated.
 
Hm, I doubt the scanners make mistakes when analyzing a sound wave. I bet it was deleted during this whole Cascio debacle, no? I think it's a mix of automated deletion and manual deletion going on. This was also evidenced in a personal letter from a JAB ME person to Youtube, I think, that was requesting a sound clip be taken down?

I'm just kind of curious what it was, the clip that the scanners made a mistake?
 
Aniram said:
Hm, I doubt the scanners make mistakes when analyzing a sound wave. I bet it was deleted during this whole Cascio debacle, no? I think it's a mix of automated deletion and manual deletion going on. This was also evidenced in a personal letter from a JAB ME person to Youtube, I think, that was requesting a sound clip be taken down? I'm just kind of curious what it was, the clip that the scanners made a mistake?
Click to expand...

It had nothign to do with casico songs and was not even a Michael's song. Was back in 2008 - It was a song on my MJ tribute vid and was cited by warner If I remember correctly, who didnt hold the copyright on that song at that time. I didnt make it clrear above. They scanned correct, They named the correct song but just had the wrong source for the copyright holder for some reason. I made a claim against it. It took over a month before reistated my video. Yes there is both manual and scanned content claims made. But for most part larger companies use the content ID.

What do you mean a pesonal letter to youtube from JAB ME - how would we see what JAb Me
writes to Youtube. Are you speaking of the copyright infringment statements posted on vids?
 
I believe that the JAB ME removals are manual. I made a PARODY where I sang a few of the Cascio tracks, and it ended up being deleted. I dubbed a video of Vitas with Breaking News and that was deleted too. Finally, I posted a piano version of Water (and it even got some good comments) and then they took notice of it.

Did MJ himself mind about his concerts being on YouTube? NO. He was surprised that they still existed when Travis Payne showed him videos. Although MJ was quite tech-savvy I don't think he ever caught up to the YouTube MJ movement (although stuff like most of the "HD UPSCALE ENHANCEMENTS" weren't done until MJ passed away leading towards 2010. However we had a lot of videos of amateur concerts thanks to certain users)...
 
But these instant removals are not manual. You have to go though a process for each claim made
the instant removals are ID scans ..

Copyright Infringement Notification
To file a copyright infringement notification with us, you will need to send a written communication that includes substantially the following (please consult your legal counsel or see Section 512(c)(3) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act to confirm these requirements):

i. A physical or electronic signature of a person authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.

ii. Identification of the copyrighted work claimed to have been infringed, or, if multiple copyrighted works at a single online site are covered by a single notification, a representative list of such works at that site.

iii. Identification of the material that is claimed to be infringing or to be the subject of infringing activity and that is to be removed or access to which is to be disabled, and information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to locate the material. Providing URLs in the body of an email is the best way to help us locate content quickly.

iv. Information reasonably sufficient to permit the service provider to contact the complaining party, such as an address, telephone number, and, if available, an electronic mail address at which the complaining party may be contacted
.
v. A statement that the complaining party has a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.

vi. A statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
To expedite our ability to process your request, such written notice should be sent to our designated agent via our online copyright complaint form below. You will need a YouTube account in order to utilize this tool.

Copyright Complaint Webform http://www.youtube.com/copyright_complaint_form

If there are many videos to be removed, or you expect to have an ongoing need to remove potentially infringing content from YouTube, we suggest that you sign up for our Content Verification Program, which electronically notifies us, removing any room for error. YouTube also offers industry-leading Content Identification and Management tools.

If you prefer to contact us via postal mail, email, or fax, you may do so here.

Please note that under Section 512(f) any person who knowingly materially misrepresents that material or activity is infringing may be subject to liability for damages. Don't make false claims!
Please also note that the information provided in this legal notice may be forwarded to the person who provided the allegedly infringing content.

Claimant information will be published on the YouTube site in place of disabled content.
Click to expand...
 
Someone exlain to me this. Hereunder no single file I uploaded was from Angelikson, yet they claimed copyright infringement. First file that I had named BW is a JM snippet, second is MJ and Stevie Wonder snippet:


Hi there, bumper_snippet,

this is Melanie from SoundCloud writing. I'm getting in touch because we've received a take-down notice from Angelikson Music about content used and uploaded without their permission:

http://soundcloud.com/bumper_snippet/bw
http://soundcloud.com/bumper_snippet/get-it

If you don't own the rights to this/these track(s) or don't have the permission from the artist, label or rights holder to upload, publish and distribute the material, this content cannot be hosted on SoundCloud.

In the meantime, the material has been hidden. Please get back to us within 2 working days if you have the correct permissions before we delete the material permanently. If you feel like this report has been sent by mistake, it would be great if you could provide us with any documents in your possession that show these permissions. Feel free to upload your own music anytime and please don't hesitate to contact me for further information.

For reference:
Our terms of use: http://soundcloud.com/terms-of-use
Our Community Guidelines: http://soundcloud.com/community-guidelines

Best regards,

Melanie
SoundCloud
 
I do not believe the take downs are automaticly. Why? Because some times when I upload something, it stays 1 day, two days, three days, four days, five days and a week. Some times it stays for some hours. It always depends. Last night was a day when the copyright claimer obviously had some time off..

It doesn't take that long to to file a copyright claim on SoundCloud. Also, like frank and BUMPER says, they have removed content that had nothing to do with the Cascio stuff - is that automaticly JAB ME too?
 
both qbee and I said takedowns can be a mixture of automatic and manual. Generally manual takedown notices will take 24 to 48 hours to do, a lot more faster ones seems to be automatic takedowns. I know this from the time when I was working with a national band. so I'm kinda having hard time to believe that even though someone complained manually they were that fast to remove it.

Also you need to compare the stuff you upload. I believe youtube's content system had problems with shorter snippets and changed music, so for example if you only put a short snippet and make it play slower it might fool the content system and can take more time to find it or require a manual request. (that's the reason why you see mirrored videos on youtube, it's trying to fool the content id system).

if the songs got nothing to do with cascio songs then yes it must be a manual request. Then probably they are making requests without listening to the songs. You can always disagree with the takedown notice.
 
Anyway, they seem more active when it comes to taking down files then come forward and answer some questions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top