Quincy Jones will Geld vom Estate einklagen

    Diese Seite verwendet Cookies. Durch die Nutzung unserer Seite erklären Sie sich damit einverstanden, dass wir Cookies setzen. Weitere Informationen

    • Estate actually did their initial answer to Quincy Jones complait a short while ago. In the answer they deny Quincy Jones claims and list the following affirmative defenses :
      Estate hat seine erste Antwort auf Quincy Jones Klage vor kurzer Zeit eingereicht. In der Antwort verneinen Sie Quincy Jones Ansprüche und listen die folgenden Einwände auf:

      - failure to state a cause of action Scheitern mit dem Klagegrund
      - lack of subject matter jurisdiction Fehlende sachliche Zuständigkeit
      - federal preemption (US Copyright act 17 U.S.C. 301) Bundes Vorkaufsrecht (US Copyright Act 17 USC 301)- unclean hands
      - estoppel Duldung
      - laches Verwirkung
      - waiver Verzicht-
      prevention / frustration of performance Prävention der Leistung-
      failure to mitigate damages Fehlende Schadensminderungsansprüche-
      failure to submit creditor's claim Scheitern einen Anspruch für Gläubiger einzureichen
      - statue of limitations Verjährung

      Quelle: Ivy,MJJC

      Weiß jemand was die unclean hands bedeuten? Das ist doch glaube ich eine jur. Umgangssprache.

      Edit:
      Mit dem Antrag die Richterin zu disqualifizieren/auszutauschen war der Estate offensichtlich nicht erfolgreich
      01/03/2014 CCP 170.6 Application Filed
      Filed by Attorney for Defendant/Respondent

      01/14/2014 Ex-Parte Application (TO REQUEST THE COURT TO SUA SPONTE RECONSIDER ITS RULING ON DEFT'S DISQUSALIFICATION MOTION PURSUANT TO 170.6 )
      Anfrage an das Gericht ihre Entscheidung bzgl. des Disqualifikationsantrages zu überdenken, ausgefüllt von Anwälten der VerteidigungFiled by Attorney for Deft/Respnt

      Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 2 mal editiert, zuletzt von LenaLena ()

    • Update: Parties had disputes about protective order and discovery issues and still hearings are ongoing to resolve such disputes. Trial has been delayed to October 2015.

      Update: Die Parteien hatten Streitigkeiten zur Schutzorder und Ermittlungsangelegenheiten und es finden immer noch Anhörungen statt um diese zu beseitigen. Der Prozess ist verschoben auf Oktober 2015.

      Quelle: Ivy
    • Update:
      Latest developments: Parties are still having ongoing discovery disputes. Estate and Sony have filedntheir summary judgment motions. Jones is trying to amend his complaint. Estate and Sony has also filed a motion to seperate the liability and damages sections of the trial. They want first a trial to happen to determine liability and a second trial to happen to determine damages if they are found liable. Due to all of the ongoing disputes and active motions, trial once again delayed to June 2016.

      Die beiden Parteien haben nach wie vor Streitigkeiten über anhaltende Ermittlungen. Estate und Sony haben ihren Zusammenfassungsurteil-antrag (Abweisung der Klagepunte vor Prozessbeginn) eingereicht. Jones versucht seine Klage zu erweitern. Estate und Sony haben zudem einen Antrag gestellt die Schuldfrage und die Schadenersatzansprüche zu trennen. Sie möchten das zunächst ein Prozess über die Schuldfähigkeit geführt wird und einen 2. Prozess falls eine Schuldfähigkeit ermittelt wird um die Schadensersatzansprüche zu bestimmen. Auf Grund der angehenden Streitigkeiten und aktiven Anträge ist der Prozess erneut verschoben, auf Juni 2016.

      Quelle: Ivy, MJJC

    • Der Richter hat das Summary Judgement-Antrag vom Estate abgelehnt und lässt Jones 10 Mio. Klage gegen den Estate somit zum Prozess im Juni zu. Auch den Antrag von Jones seine Klage zu erweitern hat er zugelassen.


      Nochmals zum Hintergrund: Es geht um die posthumen Release wie, This is it, Immortal, Bad 25, MJ-One-Show.Viele von Michaels Mega-Hits wie Thriller, Billie Jean, oder Beat It wurden re-edited für die Projekte durch eine dritte Partei und Jones sagt, man hätte ihm zuerst die Möglichkeit geben müssen dies zu tun. Estate-Anwalt Moddaber sagt: sie behaupten nun sie haben die ersten Rechte dies zu tun, obwohl sie das nie zuvor behauptet haben, also zu Jacksons Lebzeiten wo es auch zahlreiche Projkete gab wo von Jones produzierte MJ-Songs von anderen reedidet wurden.


      Ich denke diese Klage (und das Abwarten der Ergebnisse) ist auch der Hauptgrund warum der Estate keinerlei Veränderungen beim jeztigen Re-Release zum Orginal OFF The Wall-Album vornahm.


      Quincy Jones' Lawsuit Against Michael Jackson Estate to Go to Trial
      The legendary producer sued the artist's estate and Sony in 2013, claiming he was shorted royalties from posthumous releases.

      The legendary producer sued the artist's estate and Sony in 2013, claiming he was shorted royalties from posthumous releases.
      A $10 million lawsuit filed by Quincy Jones over projects made after
      Michael Jackson's death will proceed to trial this summer, after a judge
      denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment on Thursday.

      In 2013 Jones sued Sony
      Entertainment and MJJ Productions, a song company controlled by the
      King of Pop's estate, claiming master recordings he worked on were
      wrongfully edited and remixed to deprive him of backend profit
      participation on works including the This Is It film and soundtrack
      album and the 25th anniversary edition of Bad.

      Jones' attorney Henry Gradstein argued the movie "couldn't have been
      made without these recordings" and said tracks the Jackson Estate does
      not control were licensed at fair market value, but the ones they did
      were licensed for $50,000 despite being worth much more.

      Judge Michael L. Stern said there are two basic contracts at issue and
      both sides' arguments are rely on fundamental contract law that "you
      learn in the first six months of law school" without any "diversions or
      frills."

      Despite the simplicity of the arguments, Stern said there are factual
      disputes that are going to require extrinsic evidence -- including how
      to define musical terms like "remix" and "coupling."


      Many of Jackson's mega hits, including "Thriller," "Beat It," and "Billy
      Jean," were re-edited for the projects. Jones says MJJ breached his
      contract by allowing third parties to exploit the works "without first
      providing a reasonable opportunity to Jones to perform such remixes
      and/or re-edits."


      Defense counsel Zia F. Modabber argues "their position is they have the
      perpetual right to not have anyone else touch it without Mr. Jones'
      permission" although for years Jones did not complain about others
      remixing songs he produced for Jackson.


      Modabber asked the court to remove Sony from the lawsuit on the grounds that any money paid to Jones would come from MMJ, not Sony, but Stern denied that request.


      Stern also denied Gradstein's motion to amend their complaint saying
      "we've come too far" to make tweaks that aren't consequential.


      It's also worth mentioning that of all the world famous songs at issue
      in this case Stern said he's only ever heard of one -- although he
      didn't specify which.


      After the hearing Gradstein said "Quincy has a righteous case" and
      defendants' efforts to block it from proceeding to a jury were a
      "complete and utter failure."


      Modabber had no comment after the hearing other than "We'll see what
      happens in June," alluding to the trial that is set for June 15.

      The Jackson Estate is also represented by Howard Weitzman.


      http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr...jackson-869579
    • Der Prozess rückt näher und Termine für Zeugenfestlegung, Jury-Instructions etc. fanden bereits letzte Woche statt. Am 13.09. findet eine finale Status-Konferenz statt und wenn nichts mehr dazwischen kommt beginnt am 11.10.16 der Prozess.


      09/06/2016 Statement of Case (JOINT )
      Filed by Attorney for Pltf/Petnr


      09/06/2016 List of Witnesses (JOINT )
      Filed by Attorney for Pltf/Petnr


      09/06/2016 Jury Instructions (DISPUTED [PROPOSED] JURY INSTRUCTIONS )
      Filed by Attorney for Pltf/Petnr


      09/06/2016 Jury Instructions ([PROPOSED] DISPUTED JURY INSTRUCTIONS )
      Filed by Attorney for Deft/Respnt


      09/06/2016 Miscellaneous-Other (JOINT STATEMENT OF COUNSEL RE MOTIONS IN LIMINE NO. 1 )
      Filed by Attorney for Deft/Respnt


      09/06/2016 Jury Instructions (JOINT [PROPOSED] JURY INSTRUCTIONS )
      Filed by Attorney for Pltf/Petnr


      09/06/2016 Proof of Service
      Filed by Attorney for Deft/Respnt


      09/06/2016 Supplemental Declaration (IN SUPPORT OF REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 1 )
      Filed by Attorney for Deft/Respnt


      09/06/2016 Reply/Response (IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO BIFURCATE EQUITABLE AND LEGAL CLAIMS OR ALTERNATIVELY LIABILITY AND DAMAGES PHASES OF TRIAL )
      Filed by Attorney for Deft/Respnt


      09/06/2016 List of Exhibits (JOINT )
      Filed by Attorney for Pltf/Petnr



      Future Hearings


      09/13/2016 at 08:30 am in department 62 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
      Final Status Conference(DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO BIFURCATE/MOTION IN LIMINE)


      10/11/2016 at 08:30 am in department 62 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012
      Jury Trial
    • Der Prozessbeginn (eigentlich kommende Woche) wird erneut verschoben.
      Grund: Sony bislang vom gleichen Anwaltteam wie der Estate vertreten hat beantragt für sich ein neues Anwaltteam zu beauftragen, da Jones Klage zumindest einen Klagepunkt erhält für den der Richter nun grünes Licht gab, die auch Konfflikt zum Estate verursachen.

      Jones sagt, dass Sony Permanentdownloads als Lizenzen hätte behandeln müssen und nicht als Verkäufe. Dies hätte sowohl MJJ der Firma vom MJ-Estate als Jones zu größeren Einnahmen verholfen.

      hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/…934930?utm_source=twitter
    • Richter hat entschieden, dass Jones seine 10 Mio. Klage gegen den Estate nicht mehr erweitern kann. Grund: Die Klage sei 3 Jahre alt und er hätte genug Zeit gehabt seine Klagegründe vorzubringen.

      Intressant auch, dass Jones nun offensichtlich sein Anwalt-Team gewechselt hat. Er wurde ja ehemals von Grandstein/Marzan vertreten, der bis vor kurzem auch Robson/Safechuck vertreten hat.

      Judge: Quincy Jones cannot expand $10M suit against late Michael Jackson’s companies
      mynewsla.com/hollywood/2016/12…chael-jacksons-companies/

      Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 2 mal editiert, zuletzt von LenaLena ()

    • Der Richter sieht keinen Grund Jones Klage den MJ-Estate abzuweisen. Die entsprechenden Anträge des Estate hätten nichts Neues gebracht.Der Richter sagt es gibt fundamentale Unterschiede in den Meinungen und diese könnten nur von einer Jury im Prozess entschieden werden. Der Prozessstart ist für den 21- Februar angesetzt.
      mynewsla.com/hollywood/2017/01…-against-michael-jackson/
      Home » Hollywood » This Article


      Judge: No reason to dismiss Qunicy Jones lawsuit against Michael Jackson
      Posted by Debbie L. Sklar on January 18, 2017 in Hollywood | 446 Views | Leave a response

      A judge Wednesday denied a motion by lawyers for one of Michael Jackson’s companies to dismiss about half of a multimillion-dollar breach-of-contract lawsuit filed by producer Quincy Jones.Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Stern said there was nothing new in the motion by MJJ Productions Inc. that he had not seen in previous defense papers.
      “It really is deja vu all over again,” Stern said.
      The MJJ Productions motion asked for dismissal of portions of the breach of contract claims on grounds that there were no triable isues. But the judge said there is a “fundamental difference of opinion” over major issues that can only be resolved by a jury.
      The complaint, filed in October 2013, alleges two causes of action for breach of contract against MJJ productions and one cause of action for an accounting of royalties owed against Sony Music Entertainment.
      Among the allegations in the suit are that royalties from the film “This is It” were allegedly disguised as profits and diverted to three Jackson estate entities: the Michael Jackson Co., MJJ Ventures and Triumph International.
      “This is It” is a 2009 documentary that traces Jackson’s rehearsals and preparation for a series of London concerts that never happened. The singer died in Los Angeles on June 25, 2009 — 18 days prior to the tour’s start date – – of a drug overdose at age 50.
      Jones, now 83, also alleges that master recordings he worked on were wrongfully edited and remixed so as to deprive him of bonus profits. The 28- time Grammy winner also maintains he was denied credit for his work on the singer’s works released after his death.
      Jones made agreements with Jackson in 1978 and 1985 for work on the singer’s solo albums in which the producer claims he was given the first opportunity to re-edit or remix any of the master recordings. He also maintains that the coupling of master recordings with other recordings required his permission and that was to be given producer credit for each of the master recordings.
      Trial is scheduled Feb. 21.
      >> Want to read more stories like this? Get our Free Daily Newsletters Here!
    • Der Prozess wurde ja erneut verschoben. Nach einer Statuskonferenz gestern ist aber klar, dass der nun gesetzte Prozessbeginn am 10. Juli eingehalten wird.
      Nebenbei bekannte der Richter Stern, dass er wohl der einzige im Raum ist der keine Ahnung von Michaels Musik habe und Thriller nicht von Billie Jean nicht unterscheiden könne,


      Home » Hollywood » This Article


      ‘Thriller’ vs. ‘Billie Jean’: Judge admits he can’t tell one Michael Jackson song from the other as Quincy Jones sues an MJ company
      mynewsla.com/hollywood/2017/06…hriller-from-billie-jean/

      A judge said Wednesday that videos to be played during the upcoming trial of producer Quincy Jones’ multimillion-dollar breach-of-contract lawsuit against one of Michael Jackson’s companies will be his introduction to some of the late singer’s biggest hits.


      “It will be the first time I’ve heard most of the music,” Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Stern said. “I may be the only one in the room who can’t differentiate between `Thriller’ and …”


      Stern did not finish the sentence, but Jones’ lawyer, J. Michael Hennigan, stepped into the conversation and said, “Billie Jean.”


      “You’re right, I can’t,” Stern said during a status conference before trial of Jones’ lawsuit against MJJ Productions Inc.


      Jones produced “Thriller” and co-produced “Billie Jean” with Jackson.


      After another hearing on June 29, trial of the case will go forward as scheduled on July 10, Stern said.


      Among the allegations in Jones’ suit against MJJ Productions are that royalties from the film “This is It” were allegedly disguised as profits and diverted to three Jackson estate entities: the Michael Jackson Co., MJJ Ventures and Triumph International.


      “This is It” is a 2009 documentary that traces Jackson’s rehearsals and preparation for a series of London concerts that never happened. The singer had been rehearsing for the shows when he died in Los Angeles on June 25, 2009 – – 18 days prior to the tour’s start date — of a drug overdose at age 50. Sunday is the eighth anniversary of his death.



      Jones, now 84, also alleges that master recordings he worked on were wrongfully edited and remixed so as to deprive him of bonus profits. The 28-time Grammy winner also maintains he was denied credit for his work on the singer’s works released after his death.


      Jones made agreements with Jackson in 1978 and 1985 for work on the singer’s solo albums in which the producer claims he was given the first opportunity to re-edit or remix any of the master recordings. He also maintains that the coupling of master recordings with other recordings required his permission and that he was to be given producer credit for each of the master recordings.


      Jones filed the lawsuit in October 2013.


    • Morgen startet dann nach vielen Verschiebungen der Prozess. Zuletzt hatte Jones nochmals versucht seine Klage zu erweitern und wollte finanziellen Missbrauch einer älteren Person hinzufügen. Der Richter lehnte ab mit der Begründung für eine Erweiterung der Klage ist es zu spät. Betrug und Täuschung sei nicht Bestanteil der Klage. Wir wissen das Jones eine ältere Person ist, über 80 und jeder könne es sehen wenn er aussagen wird, das müsse nicht unterstrichen werden.
      Wenn Jones Anwälte nach der Beweisaufnahme ein anderes Argument bringen wollen würde er zuhören, so der Richter und sicher werde die Gegenseite Einspruch einlegen.


      Übrigens tritt Jones kommenden Sonntag 16. Juli bei den Jazz-Open in Stuttgart auf.


      Quincy Jones Can’t Claim Abuse In Jackson Royalty Row
      By Bonnie Eslinger


      Law360, Los Angeles (July 7, 2017, 6:39 PM EDT) -- Days before the trial over whether Michael Jackson’s production company shortchanged Quincy Jones on $10 million-plus in royalties, a California judge ruled Friday that the 84-year-old Grammy-winning music producer can't now raise allegations that he was also the victim of financial elder abuse.
      With the trial in the high-profile royalty row scheduled to start on Monday, defendant MJJ Productions Inc. sought a ruling from the court to exclude evidence and argument at trial from Jones of purported elder abuse and concealment, arguing the suit was only over causes of action for breach of contract. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael L. Stern told the parties in court on Friday that at this point in the proceedings to assert those claims would be inappropriate.


      “At the present time, there’s no cause of action for elder abuse, it shouldn’t be mentioned,” the judge said.


      Jones argued that the claims for financial elder abuse and concealment are based on the same evidence that will prove Jones’ breach of contract claims.


      “Every claim that we would make under elder abuse is a claim that we are making under the contract claim. There’s no evidence that would be additive or irrelevant,” Jones’ attorney, Michael Hennigan of McKool Smith PC, told the court. “The contract claims deal with the taking of Quincy Jones money, the secreting of it and other corporations, the refusal to account for it, etc. All of that is part of the contract claims.”


      In its filing to the court opposing MJJ Productions’ motion to exclude claims for financial elder abuse, Jones asserted that California allows a party to amend a complaint after trial if proof of a cause of action has been presented — an argument Judge Stern appeared to acknowledge on Friday.


      “It’s too late to amend the complaint at this juncture,” the judge told Jones’ counsel. “You can raise another argument later, after the evidence part ... I’ll listen. They’ll oppose undoubtedly ... For now, the motion is granted as presently presented.”


      A few minutes later, the judge added that when Jones appears in court, claims related to his age might not need to be underscored.


      “We’re aware that plaintiff is old, he’s over 80 years old,” the judge said. “That will be self evident on its face.”


      Another attorney for Jones, Mike McKool of McKool Smith PC, told the court evidence presented at trial would show that royalties due to the producer were concealed by MJJ Productions.


      The judge said fraud and concealment were not part of the case.


      Jones’ suit alleges that MJJ, which is controlled by Jackson's estate, and Sony cheated him out of royalties for the soundtrack to "This Is It" — the documentary about the King of Pop released just months after Jackson's 2009 death — and the Cirque du Soleil show featuring music from three Jackson albums Jones produced: "Off the Wall," "Thriller" and "Bad."


      Jones worked with Jackson from 1978 to the late '80s and the three albums at issue were among Jackson's most successful, according to the producer's suit.


      The 27-time Grammy winner said that with each project, he entered into a contract with MJJ for royalties on the use of the songs and to protect the songs from being edited or remixed without his express approval and supervision, according to the suit. After Jackson's death, the flurry of productions created to capitalize on the renewed interest in the King of Pop breached those contracts, Jones alleges.


      MJJ released soundtracks to support the Cirque du Soleil production created in Jackson's honor and for the "This Is It" film, which went on to become the highest-grossing music documentary of all time. But MJJ distributed the albums on its own label, not through Sony, to avoid paying royalties to the producer, Jones alleges.


      Additionally, the tracks were edited for the film, something Jones says is explicitly prohibited by his contract, which requires that any editing or remixing be done by Jones himself.


      Jones is seeking damages for breach of contract claims, for remixing fees he claims he would have been paid if he had been engaged to remix the masters in the various projects, the "value" of the resulting producer credit and unpaid royalties on the masters he claims were copied without his consent.


      Judge Stern ruled in November that Sony would be a nonparticipant in the trial on the two causes of action in Jones’ suit for breach of contract. Sony is not named as a defendant on those counts, but is named on a third count for an accounting of how much was made by MJJ, Sony and the other companies involved in distributing the soundtracks.


      Last month, an attorney for Sony, Jonathan M. Sperling of Covington & Burling LLP, argued against jury instructions proposed by Jones that he said wrongly implicate Sony.


      “We were more than a little bit surprised to see plaintiff's special instruction number one, which proposes to instruct the jury that they can make a finding as to whether plaintiff is a third-party beneficiary of the contracts between Michael Jackson and Sony,” Sperling said. “We don’t think that belongs.”


      Quincy Jones is represented by Mike McKool, J. Michael Hennigan, Robert E. Allen and Caroline M. Walters of McKool Smith PC and Henry Gradstein and Maryann R. Marzano of Gradstein & Marzano PC.


      MJJ Productions Inc is represented by Tami Kameda Sims and Zia F. Modabber of Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP and Howard Weitzman and Jonathan Steinsapir of Kinsella Weitzman Iser Kump & Aldisert LLP.


      The case is Quincy Jones et al. v. MJJ Productions Inc. et al., case number BC525803, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles.


      --Additional reporting by Vin Gurrieri, Kat Greene and Brandon Lowrey. Editing by Alyssa Miller.
    • Quincy Jones Faces Off With Michael Jackson's Company in Jury Trial
      hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/…ompany-jury-trial-1019585

      Chris Walter/WireImage
      Michael Jackson (left) and Quincy Jones at the 1994 Grammys
      The trial pits a dead music legend against a living one in what a potential juror described as "a tragedy."
      Der Prozess bringt eine tote Musiklegende gegen eine lebende was ein potenzieller Juror als eine "Tragödie" beschrieb. " Diese beiden Männer sind musikal. Genies" sagte ein potenzieller Juror. "Es tut mir so leid, dass dieser Prozess von statten geht. Dies ist eine Tragödie."
      "Both of these men are musical geniuses," said one potential juror of Michael Jackson and Quincy Jones. "I am so, so sorry this trial is going on. This is a tragedy."
      The retired University of Pennsylvania professor was thanked for her time and excused from an Los Angeles courtroom Tuesday morning. Also excused was a young woman whose father was an editor on the "Thriller" music video. Ultimately two men and 10 women were chosen — and they're tasked with evaluating how credit and money should be split for posthumous revenue as part of a royalty dispute between the legendary producer and the King of Pop's business.
      By way of background, this fight began in 2013 when Jones sued Sony Entertainment and MJJ Productions, a song company controlled by the King of Pop's estate, claiming master recordings he produced were wrongfully edited and remixed to deprive him of backend profit participation. He also says a 2009 joint venture between MJJ and Sony should have increased his royalties share, but didn't. The works at issue include songs from Off the Wall, Thriller and Bad and the This Is It film and soundtrack album, among others.

      Los Angeles Superior Court judge Michael A. Stern in January shut down MJJ's summary judgment motion, finding the complex issues in the case warranted more scrutiny. (Stern also denied a previous motion for summary judgment in February 2016.) The jury won't hear about Jones' elder abuse claims, which were barred following a pre-trial motion.
      Jones' attorney Mike McKool led off opening statements Tuesday by painting a picture of the producer's illustrious career — aided by actual photos projected onto a very large screen in the middle of the courtroom that largely blocked the view for attorneys and journalists in the audience. He noted Jones' EGOT status, coupled with 79 Grammy nominations, and walked through some of his work with A-list artists like Frank Sinatra, who gave Jones his nickname "Q."
      Aside from personal history, McKool focused on two producer agreements between the pair, one from 1978 and the other from 1985. He says those agreements specified that Jones' royalty would come from Jackson's share of profits from their works — and that any changes to the rate the performer received would be reflected in the producer's pay, too. McKool said the deals also ensured Jones would be given the first opportunity to remix any of the works he produced.
      Everything was going smoothly, McKool said, until the star died unexpectedly in 2009. "The death of a superstar artist creates huge interest in his music," he said, adding that the boost in demand from fans allowed Jackson's estate to negotiate a bigger share of Sony's profits. Jones' royalties remained consistent, and McKool argued they should have increased proportionally. All said, Jones says he's owed at least $30 million.

      Jones 'Anwalt Mike McKool führte seine Eröffnungsrede am Dienstag, indem er ein Bild von der illustren Karriere des Produzenten bildete - unterstützt von den tatsächlichen Fotos, die auf einen sehr großen Bildschirm in der Mitte des Gerichtssaals projiziert wurden, der weitgehend die Ansicht für Anwälte und Journalisten im Publikum blockierte. Er bemerkte den Status von Jones, der mit 79 Grammy-Nominierungen gekoppelt war, und ging durch einige seiner Arbeiten mit A-List-Künstlern wie Frank Sinatra, der Jones seinen Spitznamen "Q." gab.Abgesehen von der persönlichen Geschichte konzentrierte sich McKool auf zwei Produzentenvereinbarungen zwischen dem Paar, eine von 1978 und die andere von 1985. Er sagt, dass die Vereinbarungen darauf hindeuten, dass Jones 'Lizenzgebühr von Jacksons Anteil an Gewinnen aus ihren Werken kommen würde - und dass irgendwelche Änderungen an den Rate der erhaltenen Performer würde sich auch in der Bezahlung des Produzenten widerspiegeln. McKool sagte, dass die Verträge auch sicherstellten, dass Jones die erste Gelegenheit gegeben wurde, irgendwelche der Arbeiten, die er produzierte, zu remixieren.Alles verlief reibungslos, sagte McKool, bis der Star 2009 unerwartet gestorben ist. "Der Tod eines Superstar-Künstlers schafft großes Interesse an seiner Musik", sagte er und fügte hinzu, dass der Aufschwung der Fans Jacksons Nachlass Gelegenheit gab an einen größeren Anteil Sonys Profit auszuhandeln. Jones 'Lizenzgebühren blieben konsistent, und McKool argumentierte, dass sie proportional hätten steigen müssen.
      Dies gesagt. sagt Jones das ihm zumindest 30 Mio. zustehen.


      MJJ attorney Zia Modabber took the podium shortly before the lunch recess, and acknowledged that an audit did reveal Jones was shorted — but only a fraction of the amount he's asking for. He said Jones' contract doesn't entitle him to a share of the licensing fees, when his works are featured in movies, for example, but Jackson paid him one anyway and the estate continues that practice.
      As to the claims about the 2009 Sony joint venture, Modabber said Jones' contract specifies that his royalty pay is "calculated, prorated and reduced" in accordance with Jackson's — but the artist wasn't obligated to even tell the producer about royalty increases, let alone pass them on to the producer. He also said Jones was only guaranteed the first opportunity to remix a work if that remix was required by the studio.
      Sony has been administering the producer's pay from Jackson's works since the beginning and any money owed to Jones is due to run-of-the-mill mistakes that happen while calculating complex royalties, Modabber said — arguing the producer's claims rely on "distorted" readings of the contracts and conspiracy theories.
      "Sadly, and unfortunately for us, you will only be getting Mr. Jones' version," said Modabber, playing on a sentiment mentioned by several axed jurors that Jackson's death makes the testimony one-sided. "Mr. Jones is asking for millions he didn't earn and isn't entitled to. He just wants it and hopes you'll give it to him."
      MJJ Anwalt Moddaber nahm das Podium kurz vor dem Mittagessen und gab zur Kenntnis, dass eine Überprüfung ergeben haben, das Jones zu kurz kam, aber ihm nur ein Bruchteil der Summe zusteht, die er fordert. Er sagt, dass Jones Vertrag ihn nicht berechtigt für Lizenzgebühren, wenn seine Arbeit in Filmen wiedergegeben ist z.B. , aber Jackson zahlte ihm trotzdem und der Estate folgte dieser Praxis.
      Was die Behauptungen über das Sony-Joint-Venture 2009 angeht, so sagte Modabber, dass Jones 'Vertrag besagt, dass seine Lizenzgebühr nach Jacksons "berechnet ist, anteilig und reduziert" ist - aber der Künstler war nicht verpflichtet, dem Produzenten sogar über Lizenzgebührenerhöhungen zu erzählen, Geschweige denn diese an den Produzenten weiterzugeben. Er sagte auch, Jones sei nur die erste Gelegenheit gegeben worden ein Werk zu remixien, wenn dieser Remix vom Studio verlangt wurde.Sony hat den Produzenten-Lohn von Jacksons Werken seit Anfang verwaltet und jedes Geld, das Jones zusteht, ist auf Run-of-the-Mold-Fehler zurückzuführen, die bei der Berechnung komplexer Lizenzgebühren geschehe, sagte Modabber, der die Ansprüche des Produzenten auf "verzerrtes Lesen" der Verträge und Verschwörungstheorien zurückführt."Traurig und leider für uns werden wir nur Mr. Jones 'Version bekommen", sagte Modabber und spielte auf eine Stimmung, an, die von mehreren geächteten Juroren erwähnt wurde, dass Jacksons Tod das Zeugnis einseitig macht. "Mr. Jones fragt nach Millionen, die er nicht verdient hat und für die er nicht berechtigt ist. Er möchte sie und hofft Ihr werdet sie ihm geben.

      The trial is expected to last approximately three weeks. MJJ is represented by Kinsella Weitzman and Katten Muchin Rosenman. Jones is represented by Gradstein Marzano and McKool Smith. Sony is represented by Covington & Burling.
    • after lunch break

      Following the lunch break, Modabber concluded his opening argument by contending that Jones was properly paid, and is not owed additional money from Sony’s joint venture with Jackson.

      “He didn’t get paid any of the money Michael was going to get because he didn’t do any of the work,” Modabber said. “Mr. Jones is asking for tens and tens of millions of dollars. He just wants it and he hopes you will give it to him.”

      John Branca, Jackson’s longtime attorney and now the co-executor of his estate, was the first witness. Under questioning from Jones’ lawyer, Branca said the estate had offered Jones $2 million to $3 million to settle the case, which is what he believed Jones is owed.
      John Branca war erster Zeuge. Unter Befragung von Jones Anwalt sagte Branca, dass der Estate ihm 2 bis 3 Mio. bot um sich im Fall zu einigen und was sie denken, was Jones zusteht. Branca und Jones Anwalt gingen in der Definition von Videoshow in Jones Vertrag auseinander. Branca sagt dies bezieht sich auf Musikvideos und nicht auf Filme wie TII oder Live Performances wie die Cirque Show.

      Branca and Jones’ lawyer sparred over the definition of a “videoshow” in Jones’ contract, with Branca claiming it pertained to music videos and not to movies such as “This Is It” or life performances such as Cirque du Soleil.

      “It was never our practice to cheat … Mr. Jones,” Branca testified, as the debate became heated. “You’re creating a false impression.”
      "Es war niemals unsere Absicht Mr. Jones zu betrügen" sagte Branca aus als die Debatte hitzig wurde. "Sie kreieren einen falschen Eindruck"

      Branca acknowledged that the estate had erred by failing to give Jones a credit for “This Is It.”
      Branca stimmte zu, dass der Estate verfehlt ehat einen Credit in TII zu geben.

      The trial is expected to last about three weeks. Jones will likely testify next week.
      Es wird erwartet, dass der Prozess 3 Wochen geht.
    • Jones Anwalt-Team hat am Freitag Michael Fremer, editor of AnalogPlanet.com als Experten gebracht um darzulegen, dass einige der posthumen Jackson-Remixe, die ohne Jones Erlaubnis veröffentlicht wurden Jones Reputation beschädigt hätten. Der Pitbull-Remix auf Bad25 sei vollkommen gegen seinen Geist gewesen, er hat mit seiner Mittelmäßgikeit Jones Reputation geschadet. Richter Stern hat später nachdem er mit den Anwälten unter Ausschluss der Öffentlichkeit sprach die Aussage von Fremer als Zeugnis ausgeschlossen. Später wurde den Juroren Ausschnitte aus TII gezeigt wofür Jones Credit und Roxyalities verlangt. Die meisten Juroren schauten stoisch, aber einige zeigten Emotionen. Eine Jurorin schloss die Augen und genoss intensiv die Musik, eine andere lächelte als sie den Clip sah und auch Estate-Anwalt Weitzmann bewegte seinen Kopf zur Musik.
      Nach dem Prozesstag wurde die Jury instruiert am Montag zurückzukehren und mitgeteilt, dass der Prozess, der ursprünglich für 3 Wochen angesetzt war warhscheinlich nächste Woche zu Ende geht. Für Montag sind keine Zeugen angekündigt.

      In Quincy Jones Trial, Expert Critiques Pitbull's Version of Michael Jackson's 'Bad'

      •NEWS
      •LEGAL AND MANAGEMENT

      By Justino Aguilar | July 14, 2017 10:10 PM EDT

      Pitbull is no Michael Jackson.

      That was the gist of the expert testimony that highlighted the fourth day of the trial that pits legendary producer Quincy Jones against the Michael Jackson estate, with Jones claiming that the late King of Pop’s estate breached its contract with him and owes him millions of dollars in royalties from works that include songs from the albums Thriller, Off the Wall, This Is It and Bad.


      Jones had sued the Jackson estate and Sony Music Entertainment in 2013, alleging that songs such as "Billie Jean," ''Thriller" and "Don't Stop 'Til You Get Enough" were re-edited to cut him out of royalties and a producer's fee. The suit also claimed that Jones’ contracts gave him the first opportunity to re-edit or alter the songs, partly to protect his reputation.


      On Friday, Jones’ legal team called Michael Fremer, editor of AnalogPlanet.com, to the stand, in hopes of establishing that some of Jackson’s posthumously released remixes -- issued without Jones’ permission -- had diminished Jones' reputation due to their mediocrity.


      Read more: Quincy Jones Faces Off With Michael Jackson's Company in Jury Trial


      "I like club mixes," Fremer told the court, but Afrojack’s 2012 remix of Jackson’s "Bad," featuring Pitbull, is "inconsistent with his spirit and who he was."


      Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael L. Stern, though, later excluded Fremer's testimony from the case after conferring privately with both legal teams.


      After his testimony, Fremer told Billboard that he was “so against” the remix featuring Pitbull.


      “Whomever produced it [the Pitbull version] should have said, 'No.' Before the trial I did some research and the comments online were really negative about that song. People were outraged. It was just a mess and it should have never come out."


      Fremer testified that he never met Jackson and does not know Jones. The Afrojack-Pitbull rework of “Bad” peaked at No. 18 on Dance Club Songs and No. 45 on Dance/Electronic Digital Songs and sold 19,000 digital downloads in the U.S., according to Nielsen Music. The song also generated 2.2 million on-demand streams -- audio and video combined -- in the U.S.


      Read more: Michael Jackson Auction to Include Album With Nine Unreleased Songs


      During Friday's trial, which concluded by mid-afternoon, the jurors consisting of mostly women and two men also got to hear and watch a clip of the film This Is It, on which Jones is seeking credit and royalties. The clip showed Jackson in rehearsals for the "The Way You Make Me Feel."


      Jackson's distinctive vocals lit up the room. Jurors sat mostly stoic, but a few of them showed emotion including a male who was all smiles during the portion of the song, while another female juror closed her eyes and listened intently to the music and lyrics. Even attorney Howard Weitzman, representing Jackson’s MJJ Productions, was seen slightly bopping his head to the music.


      By the session's end on Friday, Stern instructed the jurors to return on Monday and informed them that the trial, which was expected to last 3 weeks, may conclude by the end of next week, one week earlier than originally anticipated.


      According to a court spokesperson, no witnesses are scheduled for Monday.


      http://www.billboard.com/biz/article...iques-pitbulls
    • Quincy Jones vs. MJ Estate / Sony
      17. Juli 2017

      Der Prozess um ausstehende Tantiemen von Quincy Jones geht in die zweite Woche. Der legendäre Produzent war für rund zwei Wochen in Montreux am Jazz Festival zu Gast und überliess die Gerichtsverhandlungen bisher seinen Anwälten. Es wird erwartet, dass Jones im Verlauf des Prozesses selbst aussagt.

      Derweil zeigte sich ein Experte schockiert über den Afrojack-Remix von „Bad“.

      Im Jahr 2013 hat Quincy Jones die Nachlassverwaltung von Michael Jackson verklagt, da diese ihm 10 Millionen US Dollar schulden, die ihm durch die Realisierung posthumer Projekte zustehen würden.
      Darunter der This Is It Film und Soundtrack, Bad 25 und die Cirque du Soleil Produktionen. Quincy Jones machte unter anderem geltend, dass Songs wie Billie Jean, Thriller und Don’t Stop ‚Til You Get Enough in neuer Form herausgegeben wurden, damit ihm vermeintlich keine Tantiemen und Produzenten-Gebühren mehr zustehen würden.

      Fast vier Jahre später wird der Fall vor dem Superior Court in Los Angeles verhandelt. Jones fordert jetzt 30 Millionen. Sein Anwalt Mike McKool argumentierte, dass der Produzent von Off The Wall, Thriller und Bad weder für die posthumen Veröffentlichungen ausreichend Lizenzgebühren erhalte, noch angemessene Tantiemen an Michael Jacksons hinterlassenem Katalog. Im Fall von This Is It hat Quincy Jones angeblich 455 000 Dollar erhalten und die Nachlassverwaltung 90 Millionen. Der Film spielte weltweit 500 Millionen ein.

      Anwalt Zia Modabber, der das MJ Estate vertritt, argumentierte im Eröffnungsplädoyer vergangene Woche, dass Quincy Jones korrekt bezahlt worden sei. Dies obwohl Zeugenaussagen offenbarten, dass die Nachlassverwaltung Quincy Jones zuvor zwischen 2 und 3 Millionen US-Dollar angeboten hatte, um den Fall aussergerichtlich zu regeln. Die Beweise würden zeigen, dass Quincy Jones nur ein Teil der geforderten Summe zustehen würde, so Modaber. Seit Michael Jacksons Tod am 25. Juni 2009 „wurde Mr. Jones über 18 Millionen ausbezahlt, und er wird weitere Millionen verdienen.

      “Quincy Jones gerechte Anteil der Tantiemen ist auch davon abhängig, wir die Geschworenenjury den Begriff „videoshow“ definiert, der im Vertrag zwischen dem Produzent und Michael Jackson festgehalten wurde, ebenso, ob Konzertfilme und die Cirque du Soleil Shows dazu geordnet werden können oder nicht.

      Experte kritisiert den Afrojack feat. Pitbull-Remix von „Bad“

      Am vierten Tag hatte die Anklage Michael Fremer aufgeboten, ein Redakteur von AnalogPlanet.com.Gemäss der Klage von Quincy Jones gegen die Nachlassverwaltung, steht dem Produzenten gemäss den ursprünglichen Vertragen die erste Gelegenheit zu, um Songs neu herauszugeben oder neu zu bearbeiten. Teilweise deshalb, um den Ruf der Songs zu wahren.

      Die posthum veröffentlichten Remixes seien jedoch ohne Zustimmung von Quincy Jones veröffentlicht worden. „Ich mag Clubmixe“, sagte Fremer im Gerichtsaal, aber der 2012 erschienene Afrojack-Remix von „Bad“ featuring Pitbull, sei inkonsistent mit dessen Spirit und habe nichts mehr mit dem originalen Song zu tun.Im Anschluss an den Gerichtstag sagte Fremer gegenüber Billboard: „Wer auch immer [die Pitbull Version] produziert hat, hätte ‚Nein‘ sagen müssen. Vor dem Prozess habe ich nachgeforscht und die online-Kommentare über den Song waren wirklich negativ. Die Leute waren schockiert. Es war nur eine Schlamperei und er hätte nie erscheinen dürfen.

      “Während der Verhandlung am Freitag wurde den Geschworenen ein Clip vom Film This Is It gezeigt, in dem Michael Jackson „The Way You Make Me Feel“ probte. Einige hätten Emotionen gezeigt, so habe ein Mann die ganze Vorführung über gelächelt, während ein weibliches Jurymitglied ihre Augen schloss um die Musik und Michaels Gesang intensiv erfassen zu können. Sogar der MJ Estate Anwahlt Howard Weitzmann, der in diesem Fall MJJ Productions vertritt, habe seinen Kopf leicht zum Takt des Songs bewegt, schreibt der Korrespondent von „Billboard“.

      Der Prozess dauert voraussichtlich zwei bis drei Wochen.

      Quelle: jackson.ch, billboard.com, rollingstone.com
      Weiterlesen unter jackson.ch/quincy-jones-vs-mj-estate-sony/
      Ich aber gelobte mir,
      mich niemals abstumpfen zu lassen
      und den Vorwurf der Sentimentalität
      niemals zu fürchten.

      Albert Schweitzer