Can Anyone Please Help?
- Thread starter madmoza
- Start date
in_a_loveless_world
Gentle Misfit
I am also looking for 'I keep mine hidden'
Kumo
Banned
http://www.amazon.com/Sweet-Tender-...782219?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1178325381&sr=8-16
If you can still buy it, you shouldn't be asking for it here...
Kumo
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
suparni
human being
hehehe... i just read this same quote from kumo from the girl asking for kill uncle entire cd . . . I wonder what others think about the ethics regarding Morrissey purchasable tracks vs smiths - given the whole legal issue with joyce and royalties.
clearly - i have had the smiths stuff before ever having to think about these things... and I have purchased Morrisseys latest albums despite the fact that I know exactly where to get them for free... just on principal and as a show of support. but what about that Smiths thing? What if you don't like joyce? Not that I am saying this is my position... no, I am not taking a position but rather wondering about what others think... maybe i should post this in another section but as it came up... ? ? ?
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Kumo
Banned
Joyce tried to get a larger share of the royalties, and since there was no express agreement between the parties. The Judge granted him his cut. Moz defaulted and got all kinds of fines. I think Moz acted really petty. I don't blame him for fighting it, but when he lost he should have paid up.
Kumo
suparni
human being
So I guess that is your way of saying "I do not support free downloading of Smiths songs" - sorry, i hate to hear folks calling Morrissey petty, when obviously he feels strongly about being credited, respected, and paid for his creative genius...
but of course i did ask... perhaps not exactly the question that was answered but fair enough.
Personally I think it is quite difficult to judge somebody and call them petty when the subject matter is as sensitive as artwork and creation... especially in this case when it is as close and personal as Morrissey and Marrs creations are -
Joyce was a part of it fine... but to judge Morrissey as petty for resisting and reacting seems a bit delusional and out of touch to me.
Kumo
Banned
When he lied or was seriously misinformed, on his posting on True-to-you, it seemed very petty to me...
"1. From '83 to '87 M Joyce happily and willingly received 10% of Smiths recording royalties."
Hello, no express contract, doesn't mean crap.
"6. In 2001, as a final payment of back royalties, Johnny Marr paid Joyce 260 thousand pounds, plus "costs." At this time I was in the US and was not served with court proceedings, so Joyce obtained a Default Judgment. He then put forward a claim from me for 688 thousand pounds - well above and beyond the amount Johnny Marr was ordered to pay. In my absence, the figure was not contested."
This is complete non-sense, Joyce couldn't have gotten a default judgment Moz was in court. How could the Judge call Moz all those witty things, if he wasn't there? You can only get a default judgment if the other party never showed up and no representative was sent in his place.
So here either Moz is lying, or just completely misinformed.
8. By grabbing the full total of Smiths royalties from Warner Music (and this means that when the public buy a Smiths CD in the UK, the royalties go to Joyce, and have done so since 2001) Joyce has knowingly deprived Andy Rourke of his 10% Smiths royalties, and has deprived producers John Porter, Stephen Street, Grant Showbiz and Steve Lillywhite (for "Ask") of their entitlements. Joyce did not declare to the courts that others - namely, the above - were also beneficiaries to the Warner Music royalties.
I find this also completely absurd, WMG wouldn't just hand over a 100% royalties without a court order, and the judgment stated Joyce was entitled to 25% not 100%. If this really did happen any of the other 3 Smtihs could have corrected it with 1 letter from their respective council.
"In total, Joyce has cost me 1 million, 515 thousand pounds... Joyce was wealthy. Now, he is extremely wealthy."
I am sorry 1.5 million pounds is anything but extremely wealthy. It makes Morrissey sound very petty. Mike has very little ability to generate new income. Moz could sell his poop in a box and fans would buy it. Moz made about 300,000 pounds profit on selling is LA house. Moz could do nothing for the rest of his life and just collect off his investments and never have want of anything. Which leads us to the real question...
Should Mike be entitled to the money? I don't know, it all depends on if the 1890 Partnership Act was correctly applied.
Moz should have paid more attention and taken the advice of his legal council rather than posting rants on a fanzine message board.
Now as for why you shouldn't exchange Smiths recordings on this site. Music labels have been aggressive taking action against internet pirates and thieves. If this site is seen as a conduit for illegal file exchanges, this site could be shut down and spoil it for everyone.
With out of print Smiths B-sides and unreleased material, record companies would have a difficult time finding damages. How can they claim lost profits on recordings they refuse to sell?
So by all means freely carry on with your love of the Smiths and exchanging out of print recordings.
Kumo
Kumo
suparni
human being
When he lied or was seriously misinformed, on his posting on True-to-you, it seemed very petty to me...
"1. From '83 to '87 M Joyce happily and willingly received 10% of Smiths recording royalties."
Hello, no express contract, doesn't mean crap.
"6. In 2001, as a final payment of back royalties, Johnny Marr paid Joyce 260 thousand pounds, plus "costs." At this time I was in the US and was not served with court proceedings, so Joyce obtained a Default Judgment. He then put forward a claim from me for 688 thousand pounds - well above and beyond the amount Johnny Marr was ordered to pay. In my absence, the figure was not contested."
This is complete non-sense, Joyce couldn't have gotten a default judgment Moz was in court. How could the Judge call Moz all those witty things, if he wasn't there? You can only get a default judgment if the other party never showed up and no representative was sent in his place.
So here either Moz is lying, or just completely misinformed.
8. By grabbing the full total of Smiths royalties from Warner Music (and this means that when the public buy a Smiths CD in the UK, the royalties go to Joyce, and have done so since 2001) Joyce has knowingly deprived Andy Rourke of his 10% Smiths royalties, and has deprived producers John Porter, Stephen Street, Grant Showbiz and Steve Lillywhite (for "Ask") of their entitlements. Joyce did not declare to the courts that others - namely, the above - were also beneficiaries to the Warner Music royalties.
I find this also completely absurd, WMG wouldn't just hand over a 100% royalties without a court order, and the judgment stated Joyce was entitled to 25% not 100%. If this really did happen any of the other 3 Smtihs could have corrected it with 1 letter from their respective council.
"In total, Joyce has cost me 1 million, 515 thousand pounds... Joyce was wealthy. Now, he is extremely wealthy."
I am sorry 1.5 million pounds is anything but extremely wealthy. It makes Morrissey sound very petty. Mike has very little ability to generate new income. Moz could sell his poop in a box and fans would buy it. Moz made about 300,000 pounds profit on selling is LA house. Moz could do nothing for the rest of his life and just collect off his investments and never have want of anything. Which leads us to the real question...
Should Mike be entitled to the money? I don't know, it all depends on if the 1890 Partnership Act was correctly applied.
Moz should have paid more attention and taken the advice of his legal council rather than posting rants on a fanzine message board.
Now as for why you shouldn't exchange Smiths recordings on this site. Music labels have been aggressive taking action against internet pirates and thieves. If this site is seen as a conduit for illegal file exchanges, this site could be shut down and spoil it for everyone.
With out of print Smiths B-sides and unreleased material, record companies would have a difficult time finding damages. How can they claim lost profits on recordings they refuse to sell?
So by all means freely carry on with your love of the Smiths and exchanging out of print recordings.
Kumo
Kumo
First and foremost... never did I suggest in any way that one might do such downloading here - you inserted that from your own mind into the question... but I think it is anyhow good to mention and quite true.
As for Morrissey not posting rants on fanzine sites if he feels inspired to do so... well Kumo, at nearly 400 posts (9 a day) I definitely do not think that you have any right to judge him on that. Just because money, judges, and old laws from 1890 are surrounding him... it does not mean he might not want to have a rant once in a while...
and to suggest otherwise would make you petty - putting old judges and money before sensitivity toward ones art and creativity...
vAndreav
on the flesh rampage
i actually just logged on here to see if i could find I keep mine hidden, too, after receiving a copy of the Girlfriend in a Coma on vinyl today and listening to it on there, now i want to add it to my ipod, so can anyone help?
and while we're at it, does anyone have I Misses You or Don't blow your own horn?
madmoza
Member
Kumo.
Am I to believe that you have NEVER downloaded any music you have'nt payed for? I have EVERY Smiths/Morrissey track on vinyl and I am purely looking for a couple of tracks to stick on my MP3 player that is all.
I wasn't looking for a full page of legal mumbo jumbo. You can't always get what you want off E-bay or Amazon! Nine times out of ten you get ripped off on E-bay anyway. Just think about it mate, sometimes people are genuinely just looking for a simple request.
Am I to believe that you have NEVER downloaded any music you have'nt payed for? I have EVERY Smiths/Morrissey track on vinyl and I am purely looking for a couple of tracks to stick on my MP3 player that is all.
I wasn't looking for a full page of legal mumbo jumbo. You can't always get what you want off E-bay or Amazon! Nine times out of ten you get ripped off on E-bay anyway. Just think about it mate, sometimes people are genuinely just looking for a simple request.
thewarroom
Scorpion Kicker
People really should stop suggesting that we look on ebay. If someone is selling a used copy of the Sweet and Tender Hooligan single, for instance, the only person making money is the auctioneer who is charging too much to begin with.
Similar threads
