Latest on MJJC

Nov 17 News & Mentionings

I don't think either side did the right thing. This should have been though well thoroughly beforehand. I hope they can settle this while they have a chance. I hate to say it. But this could start a big PR mess all over again for Michael if he loses. That is what is frightening me at this moment even more than the case itself.
 
Last edited:
TSCM said:
The prince has been pushing his musical agenda for years, before Michael there was something in the works involving Jermaine that never developed. The way his lawyer is talking (about how the court will see what a great song writer he is), it appears his main agenda is still to get his name and image out there as a musical talent.
Click to expand...

Well that's what I've been saying all day long. LOL!

The Prince wants to be a SUPERSTAR SONGWRITER, and in my opinion, that's the real reason for this case. I mean, I still can't get over the fact that they will be playing HIS song in court.

According to the Yahoo article, the Prince is set to testify on Wednesday, I wonder when they are planning to play his song.
 
if you ask me Michael was taken advantage of as he has been many times before.it is quite disturbing to think that the prince manipulated michael at such a vulnerable time when everyone knew he wasn' t well.
sick.
 
TSCM said:
The fact that the prince was pushing his musical works and dreams onto Michael DURING the trial, and had Michael record a new song for him ONE DAY after the trial ended, is both disgraceful and insensitive. Michael barely made it out of the court that last day and had to go to the hospital afterwards, yet he was still asked to record a song for the prince the following day? The prince has been pushing his musical agenda for years, before Michael there was something in the works involving Jermaine that never developed. The way his lawyer is talking (about how the court will see what a great song writer he is), it appears his main agenda is still to get his name and image out there as a musical talent.

The main weakness I see in Michael is that he has a very difficult time saying no to anyone, for any reason. He's too generous, and this gets him into waves problems as history has shown.
Click to expand...

Michael's too damn trustworthy. He trusts everyone and then feels wrong when he realizes what he's dealing with. That's why I don't think we'll see a settlement this time around.
 
mjfan4ever2009 said:
I don't think either side did the right thing. This should have been though well thoroughly beforehand. I hope they can settle this while they have a chance. I hate to say it. But this could start a big PR mess all over again for Michael if he loses.
Click to expand...

Yeah but there's already a big PR mess dealing with the Neverland situation. :lol:
 
If there was no agreement between the Prince and Michael that Michael will record for him then why has Michael responded awknowledging that he did agree? This case would have been thrown out of court if there was no immediate proof that Michael did the Prince wrong.. Either way, we should all see how it pans out and if Michael has to pay up we should respect the courts decision and vice versca.
 
TSCM said:
The fact that the prince was pushing his musical works and dreams onto Michael DURING the trial, and had Michael record a new song for him ONE DAY after the trial ended, is both disgraceful and insensitive. Michael barely made it out of the court that last day and had to go to the hospital afterwards, yet he was still asked to record a song for the prince the following day? The prince has been pushing his musical agenda for years, before Michael there was something in the works involving Jermaine that never developed. The way his lawyer is talking (about how the court will see what a great song writer he is), it appears his main agenda is still to get his name and image out there as a musical talent.

The main weakness I see in Michael is that he has a very difficult time saying no to anyone, for any reason. He's too generous, and this gets him into waves problems as history has shown.
Click to expand...

:clapping::clapping::clapping::clapping:

It seems that Michael was offered an escape from all that troubled him here in exchange for something. If you give gifts and pleasantries in exchange for something and then when that something doesn't happen and you kick them out, strong arm or remove them THEN sue them, isn't that akin to blackmail?
 
DenisRS said:
PatrickS77 and Timmy84:

Where did you ever read that Michael signed anything beyond "2Seas Records" contract, which in itself has nothing to do specifically creating albums, musicals, books?
Click to expand...

The sheikh is suing the pop music legend for allegedly reneging on a 7,000,000 US dollar (£4.7 million) "pay-back" agreement designed to repay money he advanced to Jackson during his worst financial troubles.

He claims he and Jackson entered into a "combined rights agreement" (CRA) under which the troubled superstar was committed to a recording contract, the production of an autobiography and a musical stage play.
Click to expand...
I assume that also includes an advance payment on any future recording... I guess we will learn more in the next 12 days!

Again: countless people (from Gregory Peck and Marlon Brando to Arvizos) lived from weeks to months at Michael's hospitality and received "gifts" and pay checks just of generosity with really big money. Jackson gave away like everything he had to his guests.

So then why would Michael necessary expect that some friend of him, who is tens times more reach than himself, will require a payback for his friendly help?
Click to expand...
Just because Michael is giving his stuff away for free doesn't mean others have to do the same... especially someone who seems more or less a stranger... besides, I doubt that letting someone stay at a Neverland guest unit racks up 7 mio in bills!
 
He claims he and Jackson entered into a "combined rights agreement" (CRA)...
Click to expand...
You gotta love these non-existent, fabricated legal terms that this attorney cited.
 
TSCM said:
You gotta love these non-existent, fabricated legal terms that this attorney cited.
Click to expand...

Well you know how it is, when you lack the facts, you just make something up. LOL!

One more thing, the various articles don't make it clear. Is the Prince saying that he gave MJ a check in the amount of $7 million, or is the Prince just ADDING up everything he gave MJ and it totals $7 million.
 
mjfan4ever2009 said:
I might sound stupid. But I was wondering if there really is such a thing as a CRA
Click to expand...
Nope, no such thing. If you Google the term the only results returned are those from the articles today that quote his attorney.
 
Big Apple2 said:
One more thing, the various articles don't make it clear. Is the Prince saying that he gave MJ a check in the amount of $7 million, or is the Prince just ADDING up everything he gave MJ and it totals $7 million.
Click to expand...
He seems to be adding everything up!

"Al Khalifa's first payment, for $35,000, went toward paying the utility bills at Neverland, Jackson's 2,500-acre (1,000 hectare) ranch and miniature amusement park in California, Thanki said. When Jackson was found innocent of the molestation charges in June 2005, Al Khalifa footed $2.2 million in legal bills, the lawyer said. "

"Al Khalifa moved Jackson and his entourage to Bahrain almost immediately after the trial, setting up a recording studio for him in Manama, the Gulf state's capital. The sheikh, who is the governor of the Bahrain's Southern Province, supplied Jackson with $500,000 in cash to subsidize his lifestyle and splashed out on a $350,000 European vacation for Jackson and his associates in February of 2006, Thanki said. "

"The lawyer said Jackson and the sheikh became close friends and at one time both lived in a palace in Abu Dhabi owned by Al Khalifa's father, Sheikh Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa, Bahrain's king. The singer stayed nearly a year in Bahrain as a guest of the son, but the relationship soured when Jackson repudiated a business deal Thanki said they had agreed to. "

http://music.yahoo.com/read/news/61882079

And so on....
 
PatrickS77 said:
He seems to be adding everything up!
Click to expand...

Thanks, that's what I'm thinking also.

Maybe the Prince should have given MJ a lump sum check for $7 million, and stamped at the bottom of the check: ADVANCE FOR FUTURE WORK!

LOL! I mean, is the "agreement" going to list each of these expenditures as part of an advance on future work? Some how I don't think so.
 
The combined rights agreement could be the terms of something that both Michael and the Prince agreed to WITHIN a signed contract. For instance the contract COULD have looked like this;

"Mr. Jackson agrees to sign this contract to create a combined right agreement between himself and Prince Al Khalifa whereby Mr. Jackson agrees to record under 2seas Record Label."
 
PatrickS77 said:
I assume that also includes an advance payment on any future recording... I guess we will learn more in the next 12 days!
Click to expand...
TSCM said:
You gotta love these non-existent, fabricated legal terms that this attorney cited.
Click to expand...

There is no information that there was any other contract beyond frame-type one for "2Seas Records".

Just because Michael is giving his stuff away for free doesn't mean others have to do the same... especially someone who seems more or less a stranger... besides, I doubt that letting someone stay at a Neverland guest unit racks up 7 mio in bills!
Click to expand...
There were hundreds of thousand dollar checks, and very expensive gifts from Michael to his friends or even to simply families in need. Jackson gave away more than $50 million right out from the pocked not only through 39 charitable organizations, but also making personal direct donations, sometimes big.

And those $7 million for the Prince is like $100 thousand for Michael, or even less, and it was obvious to everyone, including Jackson, how small those money were for the royal family.

So how people here make big deal of it, as if Michael should have understand that "that big" amount of money were not a friendly help, but bear obligation, is beyond me.

And the Prince was not just a stranger. He was a long-time friend to Jarmaine Jackson, and was recommended to Michael by his brother. Prince also became, as he himself claims through his representatives, a close friend to Jackson in time during the trial and after that.

Anyone could develop the feel of friendship with this time, the more so part of it was one of the hardest times in Michael's life.

So when Prince turned out to require something as payback, Michael could even feel being betrayed again.What was easy going, free discussion of probable collaboration turned out to be as his supposed "obligation" to Prince, and what was a help from a friend in the time of need turned out to be condition of a bargain.

This could easily be the reason why this "friend" is probably no longer actual to Michael, and why those projects were dropped.

And, with this, why still some insist that Michael is responsible, when we do not have information to claim so yet?
 
Last edited:
Foxy.. said:
If there was no agreement between the Prince and Michael that Michael will record for him then why has Michael responded awknowledging that he did agree? This case would have been thrown out of court if there was no immediate proof that Michael did the Prince wrong.. Either way, we should all see how it pans out and if Michael has to pay up we should respect the courts decision and vice versca.
Click to expand...

:doh:

GOD! This is just... (((SIGH)))

Both sides are just stupid...
 
DenisRS said:
There is no information that there was any other a contract beyond frame-type one for "2Seas Records".
Click to expand...
I said, we will learn more in the following days!

There were hundreds of thousand checks, and very expensive gifts from Michael to his friends or even to simply families in need. Jackson gave away more than $50 million right out from the pocked not only through 39 charitable organizations, but also making personal direct donations.
Click to expand...
Who f-ing cares... that's Michael, that doesn't have anything to do with the prince!

And the prince was not just a stranger. He was a long-time friend to Jarmaine Jackson, and was recommended to Michael by his brother. Prince also became, as he himself claims through his representatives, a close friend to Jackson in time during the trial and after that.
Click to expand...
Whether he was a lifelong friend of Jermaine remains to be seen... to Michael he was a stranger... at least that's what it seems to be!

And, with this, why still some insist that Michael is responsible, when we do not have information to claim so yet?
Click to expand...
Oh, and why do blame others, when we have no information that the others are to blame??

Again, fact of the matter is, Michael lived of that prince's dime over a year! He did profit from him! Whether it was a gift or not, who cares? Michael profited and had agreed to record that album! Then he left!
 
PatrickS77 said:
Again, fact of the matter is, Michael lived of that prince's dime over a year! He did profit from him! Whether it was a gift or not, who cares? Michael profited and had agreed to record that album! Then he left!
Click to expand...

Well the matter is, did MJ sign a contract to that effect or was it part of a discussion that went no where.
 
Big Apple2 said:
Well the matter is, did MJ sign a contract to that effect or was it part of a discussion that went no where.
Click to expand...

Either way you see it, I think it's crazy that Michael was ready to sign a deal and he did live with the dude for a year. And Michael HIMSELF said he was SUPPOSEDLY given the money as a "gift". It's messy.
 
troubleman84 said:
Either way you see it, I think it's crazy that Michael was ready to sign a deal and he did live with the dude for a year. And Michael HIMSELF said he was SUPPOSEDLY given the money as a "gift". It's messy.
Click to expand...

What's really going to be messy "and ugly," is if the Prince's song SUCKS!

LOL! I can't want to see what they think of the Prince's "masterpiece."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top