posted
Well, if Michael Jackson ownes the rights to the songs (didn't he buy them?) and he has to pay settlements to kids all the time, he might have to sell off the rights.
Posts: 1766 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by brojack17: Well, if Michael Jackson ownes the rights to the songs (didn't he buy them?) and he has to pay settlements to kids all the time, he might have to sell off the rights.
Michael Jackson also once owned "On Wisconsin."
That has no relevance, I just thought I'd throw it out there. Posts: 3932 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Really, BB? I think you're living in denial -- or maybe you've just managed to avoid the steady stream of media coverage. For years, from before it became a cause celebre.
Qaz, well put. SHE's the reason we all have to suffer so!
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Strider: Sony owns half the rights I think.
At one time, Sony owned half of the Beatles catalogue and MJ owned the other half. About 5 years ago, MJ leveraged himself almost into bankruptcy to buy the other half. It's the only asset he has that's worth a crap anymore.
And he doesn't 'sell' the songs; he licenses their use. He retains the rights to them no matter how many commercials or crappy movies they're used in.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Really, BB? I think you're living in denial -- or maybe you've just managed to avoid the steady stream of media coverage. For years, from before it became a cause celebre.
Part of the reason I do not believe it is because of the media frenzy.
He has been found innocent insofar as he has been accused, I think if that there was proof of the vile things he is accused of, a conviction would have been obtained at the very least the last time he went to court.
I see him as a tragic man who had his childhood stolen from him, and finds the company of children to be more enjoyable then the company of adults. And who can blame him? Look how the adult world treats him? They treat him like he is a freak of nature, the tabloids and newspapers have only exacerbated the problem with their horrible commentary on his lifestyle, (saying he wants to look white even though he has vitiligo) nonsense about him wanting Joseph Merrick's bones, ad infinitum ad naseum.
I think he is partially to blame in that he does act eccentric and in this day and age if somebody prefers the company of children for whatever reason we assume its partially or wholly sexual in nature.
I don't care how many times he is accused of child molestation, being accused X number of times does not make it any more true.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
He has bought off multiple accusers. And child molestation is a very difficult thing to prove.
I do not believe he is guilty of everything he has been accused of. However, given the evidence of his horrible judgement when it comes to children (dangling a baby off a balcony comes to mind, as does sleeping in the same bed as unrelated minors, AFTER the first few accusations, and without the knowledge or permission of the parents), I am sadly pretty sure that the way he expresses his damaged childhood is harmful to the children around him.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by rivka: He has bought off multiple accusers. And child molestation is a very difficult thing to prove.
Both true, but buying off accusers is not an admission of guilt. There are perfectly good reasons to do it. I still subscribe to innocent until proven guilty.
quote: I do not believe he is guilty of everything he has been accused of. However, given the evidence of his horrible judgement when it comes to children (dangling a baby off a balcony comes to mind, as does sleeping in the same bed as unrelated minors, AFTER the first few accusations, and without the knowledge or permission of the parents), I am sadly pretty sure that the way he expresses his damaged childhood is harmful to the children around him.
I think I agree with you. I believe his behavior could be harmful to children, maybe even harmful beyond doubt. I just do not believe he sexually molested anyone.
I would not let my kids hang out with him, but if I was sitting next to him in an airplane I'd strike up an amiable conversation insofar as he felt like conversing.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, so would I. I don't think he should be shunned or anything. I just think he should never be allowed unsupervised access to children.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
