|
|
Post by outlawbooster on Nov 5, 2011 4:17:22 GMT -5
I certainly can blame Monte for supporting the release of this music. This told me everything I need to know. How does this make Monte supporting the release? Was he suppose to hire a lawyer? Monte was working on his new cd long before this new bastard cd was done...Show one way that he supported this bastard cd... |
|
|
|
Post by gelly14 on Nov 5, 2011 4:25:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by outlawbooster on Nov 5, 2011 4:30:01 GMT -5
I think some Adam fans do not care about reality...Don't be surprised if this might come back to bite them in the butt...I repeat, where does Monte support this bastard cd?
|
|
emmuzka
Member
Posts: 193
Location:
|
Post by emmuzka on Nov 5, 2011 4:37:21 GMT -5
I certainly can blame Monte for supporting the release of this music. That told me everything I needed to know. I don't blame Monte, but I despise him. I see the lawsuit as the final proof of Malcolm's character as a huge sleaze bag. That Monte continued his relationship with him, even just a working relationship, tells about Monte's character, too; Either Either Monte is just fine about working with sleaze bags, or he is so gullible that he didn't notice Malcolm's sleaze bag-ness. Either way, I reserve the right to despise Monte's character because of it. |
|
|
|
Post by bridgeymah on Nov 5, 2011 4:37:30 GMT -5
Monte who?
Oh that guy who played guitar for Adam on his last tour ...
I don't know who did what with who when where or how but I'm starting to feel like I'm in a three stooges skit (who's on first?)
|
|
|
|
Post by justgill on Nov 5, 2011 4:42:24 GMT -5
Being a bit of a word nerd, this jumped out at me:
• The plaintiff also is seeking declaratory relief that it owns a 50% publishing share of the recordings, that it has an unconditional right to promote and sell the recordings, that neither the Music Services Agreement nor the Co-Publishing Agreement was validly rescinded, and that these agreements remain in effect.
Why did that word need to be there? Does it imply that Adam really thought he had finished with this 'contract' but they've 'found' a little 'loophole', or is it just me, as usual, reading too much into other's words :-/
|
|
emmuzka
Member
Posts: 193
Location:
|
Post by emmuzka on Nov 5, 2011 4:49:54 GMT -5
I think some Adam fans do not care about reality...Don't be surprised if this might come back to bite them in the butt...I repeat, where does Monte support this bastard cd? In his blog/website he wrote this long speech about how he didn't have any power over the BFM publishing of the timing of the publishing. After that he told that he is proud of the album and wrote "if you don't like it, don't buy it, if you like it, buy it, but down illegally download it." (not quoted verbatim.) Later he took his speech down (incidentally at the same time when BFM was taken down from Amazon, which makes me feel like he got a some sort of notice/heads up from Malcolm). There are a bunch of screen captures of the writing, you can probably find one easily enough. Additionally, Monte's album's twitter account (not Monte's personal account) tweeted how they just didn't care if BFM would hurt Adam's career. We don't know who wrote that tweet, maybe Monte, maybe his wife or a friend. |
|
|
|
Post by gelly14 on Nov 5, 2011 4:58:22 GMT -5
|
|
emmuzka
Member
Posts: 193
Location:
|
Post by emmuzka on Nov 5, 2011 5:10:48 GMT -5
Being a bit of a word nerd, this jumped out at me: • The plaintiff also is seeking declaratory relief that it owns a 50% publishing share of the recordings, that it has an unconditional right to promote and sell the recordings, that neither the Music Services Agreement nor the Co-Publishing Agreement was validly rescinded, and that these agreements remain in effect. Why did that word need to be there? Does it imply that Adam really thought he had finished with this 'contract' but they've 'found' a little 'loophole', or is it just me, as usual, reading too much into other's words :-/ I think you are right. With that word, the suit suggests that actions were taken to rescind the agreements, but for some reason these actions wouldn't have been completed or valid. That might mean that the bona fide -clause (?) could be taken in consideration: If Adam stood in justified belief that he had truly ended the contracts, he can't be blamed for continuing them, at least concerning the issue of breaching the AI contract. Also it might be that by not acting before this, Malcolm already wavered his rights away. By law, in some cases not acting can be sen as a silent approval. For example if you copyright some technical concept but then do nothing about it, and some other company takes your idea and develops it further and in ten years time makes serious money with it, you have no grounds to demand a portion of the profits because you didn't act in a timely manner. |
|
|
|
Post by reihmer on Nov 5, 2011 5:12:15 GMT -5
|
|
