Quincy Jones sues Michael Jackson’s estate over royalties

[soulmum]

Quincy Jones sues Michael Jackson’s estate over royalties - Getting closer to a trial now.

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

[soulmum]

http://mynewsla.com/hollywood/2016/1...ons-companies/

A judge ruled Monday that producer Quincy Jones cannot expand his $10 million breach-of-contract lawsuit against one of the late Michael Jackson’s companies regarding projects released after the singer died.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Stern said the case is more than three years old and that Jones’ attorneys could have brought their proposed new cause of action for financial elder abuse against MJJ Productions much sooner.

“This is a Johnny-come-lately to say the least,” Stern said.

The judge also said Jones’ lawyers cannot add four more parties into the case as defendants, including John Branca, a former Jackson attorney who currently serves as co-executor of the singer’s estate.

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.

Jones’ lawyers maintained that they could not bring the elder abuse allegation and the new parties into the case sooner because they only recently learned important new facts, including that royalties from the “This is It” film allegedly were disguised as profits and diverted to three Jackson estate entities: the Michael Jackson Co., MJJ Ventures and Triumph International. Those three entities were also proposed new defendants.

But Stern said he agreed with defense attorneys that revising the case at this stage would be prejudicial to their clients and force the lawyers to file a flurry of new motions. The judge also said he did not want to jeopardize the chance Jones’ case can go to trial ahead of other lawsuits because of the plaintiff’s age. Jones is 83.

“This is It” is a 2009 American documentary that traces Jackson’s rehearsals and preparation for his concert series of the same name that was originally scheduled to start on July 13, 2009, but was canceled due to his death 18 days prior of acute propofol intoxication at age 50.

Jones’ attorney, J. Michael Henningan, said after the hearing that despite the ruling, he believes his client can still seek punitive damages, but MJJ Productions attorney Jonathan Steinsapir said he thinks Jones is now barred from asking for such compensation.

Jones alleges that master recordings he worked on were wrongfully edited and remixed so as to deprive him of bonus profits. He 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.

[soulmum]

Law360, Los Angeles (April 11, 2017, 10:51 PM EDT) — A California judge on Tuesday rejected Quincy Jones’ request to disqualify an attorney expert designated by Sony and Michael Jackson’s production company in Jones’ $10 million royalty battle, saying there wasn’t a “factual basis” showing the attorney was privy to confidential information when his former firm represented Jones.

Jones’ suit alleges that MJJ Productions Inc., 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.”

In March, Jones moved to have the court disqualify one of the experts MJJ Productions planned to use, Eisner Jaffe attorney Owen Sloan, on the ground that his prior law firm, Mason & Sloan, previously represented Jones in connection with one of the producer agreements at issue in the litigation and other related matters.

On Tuesday, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Stern denied the request, after MJJ’s attorney argued that the other attorney in the two-partner firm handled Jones’ representation exclusively and there was no evidence that Sloan ever worked on the music producer’s matters.

“There’s just the lack of factual basis to show that he received or there was sharing of confidential information,” the judge said.

An attorney for Jones, Caroline M. Walters of McKool Smith Hennigan PC, argued that it was up to MJJP to prove that Sloan wasn’t exposed to Jones’ confidential information.

“The reality is it was a two-lawyer office,” Walters told the court. “Lawyers are likely to talk about their caseloads.”

Judge Stern asked Walters if she was citing facts or just “inferences and deductions.”

The attorney said there was no dispute of fact that Mason & Sloan represented Jones in connection with a 1978 agreement with The Jackson Five.

“For all we know they were sitting in the same office. They say they don’t recall talking to each other 40 years ago, that’s not sufficient,” Walters said. “It’s their burden to come forward with the evidence to establish that there was no reasonable likelihood at all that Mr. Sloan received confidential information.”

The suit, first filed in 2013, is scheduled to go to trial next month.

Jones worked with Jackson over the course of a decade, from 1978 to the late ’80s, on the three albums, which were among Jackson’s most successful.

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 coupled without his consent.

Last year, Judge Stern denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment, putting the case on the path for trial.

Quincy Jones is represented by Robert E. Allen and Caroline M. Walters of McKool Smith and Henry Gradstein of Gradstein & Marzano PC.

MJJ Productions Inc. and Sony Music Entertainment are 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.

SOURCE: Law360

[soulmum]

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

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.

[soulmum]

https://www.law360.com/media/articles/942382

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...
To view the full article, register now.

[soulmum]

full article

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.

[soulmum]

Thanks to Ivy from mjjcommunity for these updates.

Quincy Jones Claims He’s Owed $30 Million From Michael Jackson Recordings

Quincy Jones is owed about $30 million in unpaid royalties from Michael Jackson’s estate, the veteran producer’s attorney told a jury on Tuesday.

Attorney Mike McKool delivered his opening argument in the trial, which is now underway in Los Angeles Superior Court. McKool said that before Jackson’s death in 2009, Jones had received his customary royalties from producing three albums: “Off the Wall,” “Thriller,” and “Bad.”

But, McKool argued that that changed when Jackson died and the singer’s estate took control of his finances. Jackson’s death brought a surge of interest in his catalog, and the estate reaped an increased share of the royalties from his hit songs. But Jones was not allowed to share in the bounty, McKool contended, and indeed was not even informed of the increased royalties until after filing suit in 2013.

“He hasn’t been adjusted as Michael was adjusted,” McKool told the jury.

McKool also contends that Jones was shorted on his share of the profits from “This Is It,” the behind-the-scenes concert documentary released after Jackson’s death. McKool said the film made use of Jackson’s original recordings, but that Jones was not given an adequate share of the licensing fee. McKool said the film grossed more than $500 million, of which the estate took $90 million, but that Jones was paid only $455,000.

Zia Modabber, the attorney for Jackson’s estate, countered in his opening argument that Jones has been richly rewarded for his producing work even after Jackson’s death.

“We believe the evidence will show that Mr. Jones is not entitled to anything but a fraction of the money he’s after,” Modabber said. Since Jackson’s death, he said, “Mr. Jones has been paid over $18 million, and he will make millions more.”

Modabber showed the jury a 10-minute clip of “This Is It” before the trial broke for lunch.



Quincy Jones Faces Off With Michael Jackson's Company in Jury Trial
The trial pits a dead music legend against a living one in what a potential juror described as "a tragedy."

"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.

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."

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.

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.”

Branca acknowledged that the estate had erred by failing to give Jones a credit for “This Is It.”

The trial is expected to last about three weeks. Jones will likely testify next week.

[soulmum]

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

[soulmum]

Court Readies for Quincy Jones to Take the Stand in Suit Against the Michael Jackson Estate

Quincy Jones is expected to take the stand this week in his case against the Michael Jackson estate as the celebrated Grammy-award-winning 84-year-old producer seeks millions of dollars in royalties for his contributions to songs from albums such as Off the Wall, Thriller, Bad and This Is It.
The jury for the case was excused on Monday (July 17) but was told to return on Tuesday as attorneys for both Jones and the Jackson estate spent the morning with Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael L. Stern. The legal teams mostly reviewed organizational items as they inch closer to hearing Jones’ testimony, which will likely be Thursday, according to a legal representative for the producer.
During Monday’s session with legal teams from each side, Stern asked Jones’ attorney, J. Michael Hennigan, why the case had come this far considering that his star client has had some of the best representation in the business. The biggest issue, the attorney said, was not having access to “audit material” and the results of that data.


Opposing counsel addressed the concern and indicated that providing the jury with that kind of information was misleading as Jones and his representatives had access to audits from CBS Records, now part of Sony, suggesting that the producer has had the ability to see what his legal team is claiming was not available to him previously.
Last week, Stern informed the jury that the trial might conclude by the end of this week instead of a full three weeks as originally estimated. Stern asked the Jones legal team on Monday if the producer would be available a day earlier, but it was established that Jones is returning from a long trip and will need time to rest and prepare for his day in court.
Jones’ legal team has publicly stated that their client is owned at least $30 million, but in the end it will be up to a jury of mostly women to decide.


In recent days Jones attended the Montreux Jazz Festival in Switzerland and on his social media accounts he also highlighted his Quincy Jones & Friendsshowcase on July 16 at the Jazz Open Stuttgart in Germany through photos and videos, which includes extended standing ovations.
In 2003, Jones sued MJJ Productions and Sony Music Entertainment, asserting that songs such as “Thriller” and "Billie Jean,” among others, were wrongly edited and remixed to exclude the prolific producer from backend profits and a producer’s fee. The lawsuit alleged that Jones’ contracts gave him the first option to re-edit or alter the songs as a way to protect his name.
More witnesses are expected to take the stand on Tuesday in support of Jones, but it is Jones’ actual testimony that will give the case momentum as the jury determines if he is eligible for a substantial payout.

http://www.billboard.com/biz/article...st-the-michael

[soulmum]

Quincy Jones Earned $18 Million in Royalties Since Michael Jackson's Death
http://www.billboard.com/articles/bu...jacksons-death
7/18/2017 by Justino Aguila​

On Day 6 of trial over missing royalties, Sony exec's testimony reveals producer's payout Since the death of pop star Michael Jackson​ in 2009, Quincy Jones​ has received nearly $18 million in royalties for his work on some of the King of Pop’s most iconic music, according to court testimony given by a high-ranking music executive on the sixth day of the trial between Jones and the Jackson estate.

Though the 84-year-old Jones, who is likely to take the stand on Thursday, claims that the Jackson estate owes him at least $30 million due to a breached contract for his work on albums Bad, Thriller, Off the Wall and This Is It, Sony's vp of royalty audits David Moro took the stand Tuesday (July 18) and spoke at length about the substantial royalties that Jones has already received from the label through the years, emphasizing payments issued since Jackson’s death 8 years ago.

Jones sued the estate and Sony Music in 2003, claiming that songs such as “Billie Jean,” “Thriller” and “Don’t Stop ’Til You Get Enough” were remixed to block him from royalties and a producer’s fee.

The legendary producer, who has been nominated 79 times for a Grammy, alleges that his contracts gave him the first option to re-edit or alter the songs, and that not having had that opportunity has hurt his reputation.

After the Jackson estate's legal team called Moro to the stand, attorney Tami Sims led Moro through series of back-to-back questions that established how much Jones has received, from smaller amounts in the range of $30,000 to much larger sums in the millions.

Moro explained that Jones was chiefly paid record royalties, not funds through a license agreement. The executive also explained that a “joint venture” agreement precluded Jones from receiving other monies.

“Mr. Jones is not a party to those agreements,” Moro said during his testimony. “Mr. Jones has never been paid under those agreements.”

When asked if Jones has previously requested audits, Moro confirmed that there had been “about 6” audits from 1981 through 1989. Additionally, there was a settlement totaling between $200,000 and $300,000 in recent years.

The jury was shown royalty summaries pertaining to Jones with one line item illustrating that Jones received nearly $18 million between 2009 and 2016.

More witnesses are expected to take the stand in Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael L. Stern’s courtroom including Jones, who this week returned from work duties in Europe.

[soulmum]

Quincy Jones I Suffered Financial Elder Abuse ... Judge in MJ Case Rejects Claim http://www.tmz.com/2017/0...oductions/

Update


The judge denied Quincy's motion to add financial elder abuse to the lawsuit.

Quincy Jones says he's the victim of elder abuse in his legal war over Michael Jackson royalties.

According to new docs filed in the case -- which went to trial this week in L.A. -- Quincy says Sony Music and MJJ Productions took advantage of his advanced age. He's 84 now, and in the docs, says he was clearly over 65 at the time he sat down with the music execs to talk dough.

Quincy says Sony and MJJ pulled an accounting trick on him -- labeling a pot of money from MJ's music as profits, instead of royalties ... to which he would have been entitled a cut.

In short ... he's accusing them of bamboozling an old man.

Of course, Q produced MJ's 3 biggest albums -- "Off the Wall," "Thriller" and "Bad" -- and says the defendants have screwed him out of money earned off that amazing string of hits.

He's suing for at least $10 million, and is expected to testify in court this week

[soulmum]

Atty Blasts Quincy Jones' ‘Outrageous’ Royalty Bid At Trial

By Bonnie Eslinger
Law360, Los Angeles (July 18, 2017, 11:06 PM EDT) -- An entertainment attorney testifying Tuesday in Quincy Jones’ suit against a Michael Jackson company over $30 million in royalties for work on “Thriller” and other albums called it “outrageous” for the producer to expect ticket revenue from a posthumous movie and live shows featuring video of Jackson.
During the second week of the Los Angeles trial, defendants MJJ Productions Inc. called to the witness stand Owen J. Sloane of Eisner Jaffe, a contract attorney who told jurors he has represented such musical luminaries as Elton John, Chris Daughtry, Matchbox Twenty, Stevie Nicks and Kenny Rogers over the course of his 47-year career. Acting as MJJ Productions Inc.’s expert witness on music industry contracts, Sloane rejected many of Jones’ contract claims for compensation as atypical of industry practice.

That included telling the court that it would be “outrageous” and “absurd” for a producer like Jones to seek a share of box office receipts on top of royalties for “snippets” of music used in a film or live performance.

During cross examination, an attorney for Jones, Scott Cole of McKool Smith PC, noted that Sloane was there to testify about music industry custom and asked the defense expert “if he would agree” that Michael Jackson and Quincy Jones were “anything other than a standard, run of the mill” artist and producer. Sloane agreed.

He later asked Sloane about a provision in Jones' 1985 agreement with MJJ Productions for compensation when one of the master recordings he produced was used in "any audio visual presentation embodying” Jackson’s performance.

Cole asked Sloane to confirm that a documentary about Jackson’s life, "This Is It,” would qualify, since it incorporates hit songs from the albums produced by Jones and videos of the pop star before he died.

Sloane disagreed, maintaining that the phrase was meant to indicate music videos, not movies or live shows.

“To take that language and manipulate it to support your position is outrageous,” Sloane added.

Two live Cirque du Soleil shows that feature music from the three albums Jones produced and videos of Jackson also wouldn’t qualify, Sloane said.

Sloane also told jurors that even the master recording use fees given to Jones were not written into the producer’s contract — that according to the language, he was only to be paid based on record sales.

MJJ Productions attorney Zia Modabber of Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP asked Sloane why he thought Jackson nonetheless gave that money to Jones.

“He thought it was fair,” Sloane said.

But Jones got greedy, Sloane insinuated, seeking more revenue, including a share of profits Jackson received by entering into a joint venture with Sony Music Entertainment.

Modabber asked Sloane what he thought, based on industry custom and practice, about a producer seeking a royalty increase when one is given to the musical artist.

Sloan said it would inappropriately allow the producer to “ride the coattails of the artist," adding that record companies expect artists to contribute something extra for an incremental increase in royalties.

During cross examination, Jones’ attorney asked Sloane if he knew of any situation in which there was a joint venture between a company and an artist that shares future project profits but also “subsumes all prior royalty rights.”

Sloane said he couldn’t think of any examples off the top of his head.

Cole also asked Sloane about his earlier representation that artists would need to “give to get” something additional from a record company. He asked the expert why he thought Jackson then gave Jones the allegedly undeserved master recording use fees.

Sloane said Jackson wasn’t a “big corporate giant,” and the agreement between the two men was about “two human beings dealing with one another.”

The trial kicked off July 11, with Jones' attorney Mike McKool of McKool Smith telling the 12-juror panel that under a deal worked out with Jackson, Jones received a portion of royalties that would be raised or lowered to the same degree as what Jackson received.

That changed after Jackson’s 2009 death, which sparked posthumous interest in the King of Pop’s music and increased sales, according to the attorney. Jackson’s estate negotiated a new deal with record label Sony Music Entertainment that provided a higher percentage of revenue to MJJ Productions from the albums and songs, but the increase wasn’t reflected in audit records provided to Jones, nor did the producer see a boost in his royalties, McKool said.

On Thursday, Modabber took his turn at questioning Jones’ damages expert, the producer’s accountant Gary Cohen, to ask why Jones hadn’t previously sought a share of profits from Jackson’s joint venture with Sony Music Entertainment, remixing opportunities and revenue from a posthumous documentary and two Cirque du Soleil shows featuring Jackson’s music.

“Your job is to pursue every dollar, correct?” Modabber asked.

The attorney also took aim at Jones’ claim that his contracts gave him “first right” to do any editing or remixing, saying that up until 2005, Michael Jackson’s production company had hired other people to do such work on the master recordings without any protest from Jones — who was now claiming about $4.7 million in damages for remixing.

Jones, a 27-time Grammy winner who worked with Michael Jackson over the course of a decade from 1978 to the late 80s, is seeking damages for breach of contract claims.

https://www.law360.com/media/article...y-bid-at-trial




Quincy Jones Testifies Against Michael Jackson Estate: ‘I Was Cheated Out of a Lot of Money’


Gene Maddaus

Senior Media Writer@GeneMaddaus



Quincy Jones took the witness stand on Thursday, telling jurors he was “cheated out of a lot of money” by Michael Jackson’s estate.
Jones’ lawyers have alleged that the veteran producer is owed $30 million in revenues that have flowed to Jackson’s estate since the singer’s death in 2009. Jones, 84, has been touring in Europe for most of the trial, which has been underway in Los Angles Superior Court for two weeks. He entered the courtroom Thursday in a wheelchair.
At issue is the interpretation of two contracts for the albums “Off the Wall,” “Thriller,” and “Bad.” Jones testified that he left such details to lawyers and never read the actual agreements.
Instead, in often rambling testimony, Jones articulated a basic principle that he deserves to be paid for any use of songs from the albums.

“If we made the record, we deserve to get paid,” he said. “It’s that simple.”
An attorney for Jackson’s estate, Howard Weitzman, tried to get Jones to concede that he is entitled to a share of album sales but not to licensing revenues for the Jackson recordings.
“That’s a joke,” Jones answered.
As Weitzman pressed him, Jones added, “I don’t care what the agreement says. If I put my heart and love into making a record, I want to get paid. I don’t care what the paper says.”
At another point, Jones asked the lawyer: “You ever made a No. 1 record?”
“No,” Weitzman said.
“I know that,” Jones replied.
Jones’ lawyers contend that his contracts entitle him to significant proceeds from “This Is It,” the backstage concert film released after Jackson’s death, as well as those from two Cirque du Soleil shows. The attorneys also contend that Jones is owed a larger share from a Sony contract that was renegotiated after Jackson’s death.
Under questioning from his own lawyer, Mike McKool, Jones gave extensive reminiscences about his music career and his collaboration with Jackson. He testified that his relationship with Jackson was founded on “love, respect, and trust,” and that financial considerations rarely surfaced.
“That never in my life crossed my mind — money and fame,” he said. “If that happens, God walks out of the room. If you try to sell Ciroc vodka, forget it.”
Under cross-examination, Weitzman played Jackson’s demo versions of “Workin’ Day and Night,” “Don’t Stop ‘Til You Get Enough,” and “Beat It,” as well as the finished album versions of each song. Jones nodded his head in rhythm, and at one point raised his arm as if conducting musicians.
Weitzman’s point was that Jackson himself made major contributions to the sound of each song, which rankled Jones, who testified that producers often take the blame for failures while artists get credit for hits.
“I believed in Michael like my own son,” he testified. “I spent more time with him than his family. They weren’t in the studio.”
Weitzman repeatedly noted that he is representing Jackson’s three children, who are the beneficiaries of the estate, and asked if Jones would sue Jackson if he were still alive.
“I’m not suing Michael, I’m suing y’all,” Jones said, noting that the estate’s lawyers have been handsomely paid. Another attorney for the estate testified earlier that the executors have received about $50 million in fees since Jackson’s death.
When Weitzman raised the children again, Jones rebutted, “I got children, too.”


http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/qui...it-1202501533/

[soulmum]

July 24, 2017 3:51pm PT by Ashley Cullins

Jury Begins Deliberations in Quincy Jones-Michael Jackson Estate Royalties Dispute
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr...ispute-1023965
Jones says he's owed $30 million, while Jackson's estate puts it closer to $400,000.

Jones says he's owed $30 million, while Jackson's estate puts it closer to $400,000.

Talk of "word games" dominated closing arguments in the royalties trial between Quincy Jones and a company owned by Michael Jackson's estate — and a jury of 10 women and two men will soon have to define terms like "record" and "videoshow" to determine how much money, if any, the producer is owed.

Jones sued MJJ Productions in 2013, claiming that after the King of Pop's death Jones was shorted tens of millions in royalties and wrongfully denied the opportunity to remix works he created with the artist. The estate says some run of the mill accounting errors did cause Jones to be shorted, but he's owed about $392,000 — not the $30 million he's asking for.

Closing arguments ended just before lunch Monday in a crowded downtown courtroom. So crowded, in fact, the legal teams used "seat fillers" to make sure all of their people had a seat — leaving several members of the press hunkered near the entrance, pressed up against a wall to avoid the judge's line of sight. The courtroom assistant warned that if the judge saw them peeking around the corner, he'd kick them out.

Jones attorney Scott Cole led off closings by telling the jury the case was about two men and "the landmark music they created." He described MJJ's defense as nothing more than "word games and loopholes" and emphasized that this is the first time in a seven-decade career that Jones has ever filed a lawsuit.

Because the dispute centers on two contracts, the 1978 and 1985 producer agreements between Jones and Jackson, the precise definitions of words are key. Under the deals, Jones is entitled to a share of record royalties from Off the Wall, Thriller and Bad. The parties dispute whether Jones should share in the profits from Jackson's 1991 joint venture with Sony, and whether he should share in net profits from movies instead of licensing fees from the songs used in them.

Jones argues that the This is It documentary counts as a "videoshow" under his contract, and he's entitled to a share of net receipts. Meanwhile, MJJ says the term is used for things like music videos and isn't relevant here.

The jury will also have to decide what it means to "remix" a song. Jones says his contract gives him right of first refusal to remix any of the works he produced for Jackson, while MJJ says that right was limited to remixes ordered by Sony (then Epic) at the time the albums were being produced.

MJJ attorneys Zia Modabber and Howard Weitzman split closing arguments for the defense.

Modabber reiterated that the Sony joint venture was announced in the early '90s, and Jones didn't complain about his stake until two decades later. He also notes that Jackson's death has been lucrative for the producer. In the two years prior to his June 25, 2009, passing, Jones made $3 million from his share of their works. In the two years after Jackson's death, Jones made $8 million.

While reminding the jury that Jackson isn't here to defend himself, Modabber imagined the artist would say to Jones, "You didn't make me."

When Weitzman took over, he turned the focus to the words Jones used during his testimony. Specifically, he questioned Jones' claim that he doesn't care about the contract and isn't bringing this case because of money. He also said that allowing Jones to claim a share of net receipts on the documentary would be like telling the theater audience that, when they bought their tickets, they really bought a record.

Weitzman also reminded the jury that Jones has cashed $18 million in checks since Jackson's death and continues to be paid per MJJ's interpretation of their deal. He then asked the jury to send Jones a message: "You don't deserve a raise. You can't have any more of Michael Jackson's money."

Jones attorney Mike McKool picked back up for his team, and pointed out that Jackson's estate has made about half a billion in profits since the artist died. "This is a lot of money," he told the jury. "We all know that."

Both sides point to a jury instruction about how to interpret the terms in a contract, and, interestingly, both say it is an asset to their respective arguments. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Stern read it as part of jury instructions just after the lunch recess. In short, he told jurors that in order to interpret what the words in a contract mean, they can consider the actions of the parties from the time that it was signed until the moment the dispute began. So how the jurors feel Jones, Jackson and MJJ treated the business relationship from 1985 until 2013 will likely be a key factor in their decision.

Stern also reminded the jurors that they only need to decide whether an allegation is "more likely to be true than untrue" and nine jurors out of 12 must agree on each question on the verdict form before moving on to the next. Deliberations began at approximately 2:30 p.m.





Colossal coin for ‘Q’? Quincy Jones demands $30M for Michael Jackson hits
https://www.google.de/search?site=&s....0.xj2l5dVjIjQ

Posted by Christina Kelley on July 24, 2017 in Hollywood | 32 Views | Leave a response

Photo via Pixabay

Quincy Jones is entitled to more than $30 million in royalties for the use of any Michael Jackson songs he helped produce and which were later used in the film “This is It” and other projects, an attorney for the Grammy Award-winning music producer told a jury Monday, but a lawyer for a company created by the late singer says Jones is entitled to just under $400,000.

The lawyers made their pitches to a Los Angeles Superior Court jury hearing final arguments in trial of Jones’ lawsuit against MJJ Productions Inc., which is now part of the singer’s estate.

“This case is about two men, Michael Jackson and Quincy Jones, and the music they created 30 years ago, some of the most loved and popular music ever,” said one of Jones’ attorneys, Scott Cole.

MJJ lawyers concede Jones, 84, was not fully compensated for his work, Cole said.

“They’re only saying they don’t want to pay the full amount,” Cole said.

Attorney Howard Weitzman, on behalf of MJJ Productions, countered that Jones had already been paid millions of dollars and will continue to receive money.

“But you don’t deserve a raise, man,” Weitzman said, looking toward Jones, who shook his head in disagreement as he listed to the lawyer’s argument.

Weitzman said Jones testified he did not care about the language of the contracts that he signed.


Jones’ suit alleges he is entitled to box office profits from “This is It” and two Cirque du Soleil shows about Jackson.

“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 preparing 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.

Jones alleges that master recordings he worked on were wrongfully edited and remixed so as to deprive him of bonus profits. He also says a 2009 joint venture between MJJ and Sony should have increased his royalties share and that 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.

“He had a right to protect his works and they didn’t even ask him about it,” Cole argued.

But Zia Modabber, who also argued on behalf of MJJ Productions, said Jones never owned Jackson’s master recordings.

“These are Michael Jackson’s masters, he owns them,” Moddaber said. “This is a grab for money that Mr. Jones isn’t entitled to.”

Weitzman said the hundreds of millions of dollars the Jackson estate executors have accumulated since the singer’s death have benefited the entertainer’s three children; his mother, Katherine Jackson; and various charities.

Jones filed the lawsuit in October 2013 in Los Angeles Superior Court.

–City News Service

[soulmum]

Quincy Jones Awarded $9.42 Million in Music Royalties Dispute With Michael Jackson Estate

http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/qui...on-1202506100/
Quincy Jones Verdict
Cook/Variety/REX/Shutterstock

July 26, 2017 | 04:58PM PT


Veteran music producer Quincy Jones prevailed on Wednesday in his dispute over unpaid royalties with the estate of Michael Jackson.

A Los Angeles jury awarded Jones $9.42 ($9,423,695) million in damages, finding that he had been underpaid in royalties for music used in the “This Is It” documentary and two Cirque du Soleil shows.

Jones first sued in 2013, alleging that he was unfairly cut out of posthumous deals by Jackson’s estate to feature his music in the 2009 film and the Cirque shows. He said he was owed $30 million.

During the two-week trial, attorneys for both sides quibbled over how to interpret contract language that governed how Jones’ royalties were calculated.


Jones took the witness stand last week — entering the courtroom in a wheelchair — to explain his views on how he was “cheated out of a lot of money” by the Jackson estate. At issue was the interpretation of two contracts for the albums “Off the Wall,” “Thriller,” and “Bad.” Jones’ lawyers contended that his contracts entitle him to significant proceeds from “This Is It,” the backstage concert film released after Jackson’s death, as well as those from two Cirque du Soleil sho


In handing down their verdict, the jury did not redefine what a “record” is. On the question of whether the Cirque shows or “This Is It” were considered “records,” the jury said no. As to what comprises a “video show” — “This Is It” is applicable, but not the Cirque performances.

Representing the Jackson estate, Howard Weitzman argued that Jackson himself made major contributions to the sound of each song, which rankled Jones, who testified that producers often take the blame for failures while artists get credit for hits.

Currently, the court is polling the jury on how they each answered the 28-question verdict form.

Following the verdict, Jones released the following statement:

“As an artist, maintaining the vision and integrity of one’s creation is of paramount importance. I, along with the team I assembled with Michael, took great care and purpose in creating these albums, and it has always given me a great sense of pride and comfort that three decades after they were originally recorded, these songs are still being played in every corner of the world. This lawsuit was never about Michael, it was about protecting the integrity of the work we all did in the recording studio and the legacy of what we created. Although this judgement is not the full amount that I was seeking, I am very grateful that the jury decided in our favor in this matter. I view it not only as a victory for myself personally, but for artists’ rights overall.”

[soulmum]

From Time - http://time.com/4875908/michael-jack...jones-dispute/

Jury foreman Duy Nguyen, 28, said the contracts were the strongest pieces of evidence the jury considered, and said hearing Jones' testimony was also helpful.
He said he and many members of the jury are Jackson fans, but that didn't factor into the deliberations. He said the verdict amount was a compromise figure based on an expert's testimony.

From Variety - http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/qui...on-1202506100/

In handing down their verdict, the jury did not redefine what a “record” is. On the question of whether the Cirque shows or “This Is It” were considered “records,” the jury said no. As to what comprises a “video show” — “This Is It” is applicable, but not the Cirque performances.

From Billboard - http://www.billboard.com/articles/ne...tate-9-million

Following the verdict, Howard Weitzman and Zia Modabber, attorneys for the estate of Michael Jackson, said Jones should not have received the sum. "While the jury denied Quincy Jones $21 million – or more than two-thirds of what he demanded -- from The Estate of Michael Jackson, we still believe that giving him millions of dollars that he has no right to receive under his contracts is wrong," the pair said in a statement issued to Billboard.

The statement continues, "This would reinterpret the legal language in, and effectively rewrite, contracts that Mr. Jones lived under for more than three decades, admitted he never read, referred to as 'contract, montract,' and told the jurors he didn't 'give a damn' about. Any amount above and beyond what is called for in his contracts is too much and unfair to Michael’s heirs. Although Mr. Jones is portraying this is a victory for artists’ rights, the real artist is Michael Jackson and it is his money Mr. Jones is seeking."





Quincy Jones Wins Huge Cut of MJ's Hits ... Nearly $10 Million!! http://www.tmz.com/2017/0...oductions/

Quincy Jones suddenly has 9.4 million reasons to go off the wall ... after scoring a huge victory over MJJ Productions and Sony.

The jury handed down its thriller of a decision Wednesday in Quincy's legal battle for unpaid royalties on Michael Jackson's three mega hit albums. Quincy argued accountants for the defendants screwed him out of dough he was owed for producing those records.

He was asking for around $30 million, so he didn't get exactly what he wanted -- but still a nice payday.

You can say this about Q -- he really didn't stop until he got enough.

8:10 PM PT -- MJ's estate says the judgement is "too much" and "unfair to Michael Jackson's heirs."

Attorneys Howard Weitzman and Zia Modabber tell TMZ, "While the jury denied Quincy Jones $21 million – or more than two-thirds of what he demanded -- we still believe that giving him millions of dollars that he has no right to receive under his contracts is wrong."

This would reinterpret the legal language in, and effectively rewrite, contracts that Mr. Jones lived under for more than three decades, admitted he never read, referred to as 'contract, montract,' and told the jurors he didn't 'give a damn' about."

"Any amount above and beyond what is called for in his contracts is too much and unfair to Michael’s heirs. Although Mr. Jones is portraying this is a victory for artists’ rights, the real artist is Michael Jackson and it is his money Mr. Jones is seeking."

[soulmum]

Michael Jackson’s estate wants to appeal Quincy Jones ruling


A Los Angeles jury awarded Michael Jackson’s estate to pay Quincy Jones $9.4 million last week — but the legendary music producer better not spend it.

Howard Weitzman, who represented Jackson's heirs during the three-week trial, told On the Money he has plenty of “post-trial options to overturn the verdict.”

He also plans to pursue them, up to and including an appeal.

“We probably wouldn’t challenge an award up to $2.5 million,” Weitzman said.

Jones received the award for songs he produced for Jackson decades ago that were used in a movie and two Cirque du Soleil shows after the pop star’s death.

What seems to rankle Weitzman most is Jones portraying the legal win as a victory for artists’ rights.

“The jury’s verdict was wrong,” he said. “The real artist is Michael Jackson, and it is his money.”

Michael Jackson’s estate wants to appeal Quincy Jones ruling —

http://nypost.com/2017/07/29/michael...-jones-ruling/




Quincy Jones’ Lawyer on the Crux of the Case Against Michael Jackson Estate, What Happens Next

For Mike McKool, lead counsel for Quincy Jones in the veteran producer’s lawsuit against the Michael Jackson estate, the crux of the case came down to a definition of one word: royalty.

On July 26, a Los Angeles jury awarded Jones $9.42 million in damages (he sought $30 million), finding that the producer had been underpaid in royalties for music used in the “This Is It” documentary and two Cirque du Soleil — both successful projects that came after Michael Jackson’s 2009 death.

McKool argued, and the jury seemed to agree, that while the estate entered into a lucrative rearrangement of its deal with Sony Music — a joint venture in late 2009 — Jones was left out. And while the estate contended that the terms of the deal no longer dealt with sales and tangible recorded assets agreed upon with the original contracts Quincy signed — he produced three albums with Jackson: “Off the Wall,” “Thriller,” and “Bad,” between 1979 and 1987 — McKool says, “You can’t just change what you call it, or change the way you’re paid, and deprive the royalty holder.”


Following the decision, Howard Weitzman and Zia Modabber, attorneys for Jackson’s estate, commented: “While the jury denied Quincy Jones $21 million – or more than two-thirds of what he demanded — from the estate of Michael Jackson, we still believe that giving him millions of dollars that he has no right to receive under his contracts is wrong. … Any amount above and beyond what is called for in his contracts is too much and unfair to Michael’s heirs. Although Mr. Jones is portraying this is a victory for artists’ rights, the real artist is Michael Jackson and it is his money Mr. Jones is seeking.”

McKool, who is chairman of the firm McKool Smith, spoke with Variety the day after the verdict about the significance of the case’s outcome and what comes next.

Quincy Jones is receiving a third of the $30 million he asked for. Would you consider that a win?
The jury went our way on almost all of the liability findings. So we were super pleased with that. But to us, the main value in this verdict is that it legitimized the view that a royalty holder in the entertainment business cannot be deprived of royalties because the parties who owe that obligation decide to rearrange their relationship and [the way] money is flowing. The jury found that the joint venture funds were subject to Quincy’ss royalties — and that is important for him as a future income stream, as long as those immensely popular songs continue to be exploited.

How is it that Jones is entitled to royalties from remixes he didn’t do?
Because they didn’t give him the opportunity. Both contracts said that Michael Jackson will not allow anyone to do any remixes until [Jones is] given the opportunity. No one called, wrote, or gave him that opportunity — and Quincy has been doing remixes in the very recent past, up until 2016. So if you have an obligation like that, and you don’t fulfill it, you can’t get around it because he didn’t do [the remixes]. It was a complete failure by the estate — they were his productions of 29 songs and Michael would not have wanted someone else to be tampering with them.

Who is responsible for policing such payouts?
It’s the artist’s or the producer’s responsibility. They have audit rights. When somebody else is handling all the money, and making all the decisions, the only way to police it is to have auditors [who] take a period of time that’s as much as ten years and make claims.. Quincy’s had the same auditor for about 30 years.

Michael Jackson’s death in 2009 spurred a huge spike in his music sales. What did that mean for Quincy?
One of the obvious signs that all was not well was the change in the way Quincy was treated after Michael died. Our claims really went to that period. Upon the death of a superstar artist — like Prince or David Bowie or George Michael, and certainly the King of Pop — record sales, streaming and other license revenue went through the roof. The estate was able to use that, because Sony’s contract giving [the company the] right to distribute was about to expire — and negotiate a huge increase of the percentage of the funds that was going to the estate. That was the whole crux of our case: however Michael Jackson’s royalty was adjusted, Quincy’s royalty should be adjusted. The estate took the position, that since they didn’t get royalties anymore, that they got this enormous amount of JV profits that he was not entitled to share, he was only entitled to share under his original formula. That violated the requirement that, as the artist’s royalties are adjusted, the producer’s has to be adjusted. The jury clearly they found that this JV profit was just an increase in royalty called by a different name.

Do you think this will impact how recording contracts entered into decades ago are interpreted?
I think this decision will protect all royalty holders.

What happens next?
The defendants made eight motions for a mistrial, which is the most I’ve ever seen, so I would anticipate a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. In other words, ignore the jury’s verdict and motion for a new trial. That would be par of the course for a case like this.

[soulmum]

Quincy Jones reflects on his career and relationship with Michael Jackson http://www.latimes.com/entertainment...905-story.html

Quincy Jones turned 84 in March, but said he feels like he’s 18.

“I stopped drinking two years ago. I feel like I’m just starting, man — it’s unbelievable. I come up with Ray Charles and Sinatra, so you know I knew how to do it,” he said, laughing, in a recent phone interview.

On Wednesday Jones’ early jazz albums will be celebrated at the Hollywood Bowl. “Quincy Jones: The A&M Years” will find an all-star lineup jamming through songs from “Walking in Space” (1969), “Gula Matari” (1970) and “Smackwater Jack” (1971).

Original session musicians Hubert Laws and Valerie Simpson will be joined by Dave Grusin, Lee Ritenour, Lewis Nash and others under the direction of Christian McBride and conductor John Clayton.

Part faithful homage, part improvised reinterpretation, the show was originally conceived by Tim Jackson, artistic director of the Monterey Jazz Festival where it premiered last September.

The albums were a concentrated burst of creativity for Jones, then newly signed to A&M Records, who had just spent the previous decade scoring around 20 films including “In the Heat of the Night” and “In Cold Blood.”

“It was some amazing years, because I said, ‘Man, I don’t want to know about synchronization for a year. I just want to get in there and roll with my favorite musicians,’” Jones said. “I just want to play with my brothers.”

The winner of 27 Grammys from a whopping 79 nominations, Jones has crafted his legend as much from assembling the best musicians in the same room as he has being a performer and arranger. The A&M albums feature some of his best-known compositions (themes for the TV series “Ironside” and “The Bill Cosby Show”) and arrangements (“Bridge Over Troubled Water,” “Killer Joe”), but they also demonstrate his knack for playing host to premium musical dinner parties.

“Ray Brown and Grady Tate had never played together until Quincy Jones brought them together for that recording,” said composer/conductor Clayton. “But also, combining people like Freddie Hubbard with Roland Kirk and Hubert Laws — those combinations didn’t happen very often, if at all. You [can] understand the flavor of why musicians are so excited about those records.”

The eclectic lineup also included Toots Thielemans on harmonica — “Toots was the same level as Charlie Parker, man,” Jones said — and Paul Beaver on synthesizer. Jones was an early adopter of synths, and wrote his “Ironside” theme (which appeared on “Smackwater Jack”) for the nascent Moog.

“Robert Moog said to me, ‘Quincy, why don’t the brothers use my instrument?’” he recalled. “I said, “’Cause, man, number one: we sculpt an electronic signal into a sine wave that’s smooth, or a sawtooth, which is rough. The problem with it, though, is it doesn’t bend. And if it doesn’t bend, it can’t get funky. And if it can’t get funky, brother, you don’t touch it.’ So he came up with a pitch-bender and a portamento on it ... and I got it, real quick.”

Jones is a musical Zelig, starting out in the big band era before time-traveling through bebop, jazz, funk, hip-hop and rap. That means, with some exceptions, he doesn’t have an instantly identifiable “sound” — but according to Clayton, that’s also his strength.

“I always think [of Jones as an] artistic sponge who delivers,” said Clayton. “Not only does he soak in anything of interest — whether it’s jazz, blues, latin music, pop music, funk ... you name it — if he’s interested, he’s going to put his hand in it and learn it.”

Jones met his most successful protege around the time he recorded these albums, a 12-year-old Michael Jackson. A few years later, he produced Jackson’s first solo album, “Off the Wall,” and then the highest-selling album of all time: “Thriller.” They fell out after releasing “Bad” in 1989 because — Jones lamented — Jackson felt the producer was old and out-of-touch.

In July, Jones won a lawsuit against Jackson’s estate for $9.4 million in damages for unpaid royalties, largely from the concert film “This Is It,” which was released in 2009 after Jackson died. In a statement, Jones said the suit “was never about Michael,” and in the interview for this article he reiterated that and further clarified that it wasn’t about the family either.

“The family wants to do business with me,” he said. “Jermaine [Jackson, Michael’s brother] called me right after we announced the lawsuit and said, ‘The family is 100% behind you.’”

Jones placed the blame squarely on the lawyers for Jackson’s estate.

“After Michael died, Frank [DiLeo, Jackson’s late manager] took over totally, and on ‘This Is It’ he did not even give me credit for producing Michael’s songs on that, man. I produced Michael’s biggest hits ... and they made $500 million on ‘This Is It.’ The family got $90 million. He got $50 million and tried to talk me into $450,000. I said, ‘No, baby, you got that wrong.’ ... Because we work our [butts] off to make records, man.”

Howard Weitzman, who represents the estate of Michael Jackson and who has been quoted as saying he plans to appeal the $9.4-million decision, sent a strongly worded rebuttal to Jones’ comments.

“Mr. Jones wasn’t cheated out of any money because he was paid what he was contractually owed for producing the songs recorded by Michael 25 to 30 years ago that were used in the documentary ‘This Is It,’ which he had nothing to do with,” Weitzman wrote.

“The allegation that Frank DiLeo got $50 million dollars in royalties from ‘This Is It’ is … false. He was not paid any royalties from the film — period. As for the beneficiaries of Michael’s will, they were not supportive of Mr. Jones’ lawsuit against the Estate.”

Jones said he and Jackson were in a good place before the singer died at age 50.

“He wanted us to get back together,” said Jones. “But we were close, man. Always close. You can’t do those kind of records without love, trust and respect. You can’t do it.”

Jones will attend Wednesday night’s concert — and even though his name isn’t on the lineup, Clayton said “Q” may even jump in.

“He probably will want to be on the sidelines, or even sitting on the stage, just because he loves to be so close to the actual music-making,” said Clayton, whom Jones affectionately calls “Dirty Drawers” in the old bebop tradition. “But I also know that the band is going to be so smoking that he’ll probably want to have a taste of it. He’ll probably want to come up and conduct one of his pieces — which would be great.”

The opening act will be two artists Jones has recently taken under his wing: Cameroon bassist Richard Bona and Swedish keyboardist Jonah Nilsson (of Dirty Loops). In addition to fostering new musical talents, the producer said he has 10 films, six albums and four Broadway shows in the works.

Asked whether he still gets the same rush from new music, his answer was immediate.

“Hell yeah,” Jones said. “More.”

[soulmum]

Judge OKs Quincy Jones millions for ‘This is It,’ Michael Jackson projects

A judge Friday upheld a jury’s award of $9.4 million to Quincy Jones in his lawsuit against a company created by Michael Jackson before his death

In its July 26 verdict, the panel found that the Grammy Award-winning music producer was entitled to royalties for the use of the singer’s recordings that the plaintiff helped produce and which were later used in the film “This is It” and other projects.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Michael Stern found that the jury’s conclusions were reasonable based on the evidence.

However, the judge denied Jones’ request for an additional $3.3 million in prejudgment interest, noting that there was a significant disparity between the $30 million Jones sought and what was awarded.

Jones, 84, sued MJJ Productions Inc., now part of Jackson’s estate, in October 2013.

In deciding that the defense was not entitled to judgment despite the verdict, Stern wrote in a one-page ruling that the jury took into account a four-decade relationship between Jones and Jackson and found that the plaintiff was entitled to joint venture profits, remix damages and other claims.

“The jury reviewed the contracts presented and provided its interpretation of the language therein,” Stern wrote.

“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 preparing for the shows when he died in Los Angeles on June 25, 2009 of a drug overdose at age 50 — 18 days prior to the tour’s start date.



Jones said master recordings he worked on were wrongfully edited and remixed so as to deprive him of bonus profits. He also maintained that a 2009 joint venture between MJJ and Sony should have increased his royalties share and that he was denied credit for his contribution 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 to be given first opportunity to re-edit or remix any of the master recordings.

He also said 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.

Lawyers for Jones argued that their client was entitled to $30 million, but defense attorneys said he should be paid no more than $392,000.

Lawyer Zia Modabber, who argued on behalf of MJJ Productions, said Jones never owned Jackson’s master recordings. He said after Friday’s hearing that although he was disappointed with Stern’s decision not to grant judgment in favor of the defense, he understands that judges do not like to disturb jury verdicts.

Lawyer Howard Weitzman, also representing MJJ Productions, said previously that the hundreds of millions of dollars the Jackson estate executors have accumulated since the singer’s death have benefited the entertainer’s three children; his mother, Katherine Jackson; and various charities.

[soulmum]

WOW

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-e ... rt-1293352

MAY 05, 2020 10:21am PT by Eriq Gardner

Quincy Jones' $9.4M Win in Michael Jackson Royalty Suit Wiped Out by Appeals Court


A trial judge was in error by letting a jury decide whether the superstar producer was entitled to work on remixes plus licensing income from 'This Is It.'
A California appeals court has ruled that a trial judge overseeing Quincy Jones' fight for more royalties for his work producing Michael Jackson records didn't adequately interpret contracts. As a result, the superstar producer's $9.4 million win three years ago has been reversed.

Jones originally sought $30 million for projects made after Michael Jackson's death including remixes of hit songs as well as the licensing of masters for This Is It. After a trial in 2017, the jury returned a verdict that Jones was entitled to nearly $1.6 million because he didn't get a right to participate in those remixes, an additional $5.3 million in joint venture profits, nearly $2 million more for This Is It and $180,000 for foreign public performance income.

But should the case have even gone to jury?

The appeals court rules that Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Judge Michael L. Stern should have looked at extrinsic evidence about the contract to make a preliminary determination about the meaning of Jones' producer contracts. Only when the contracts were reasonably susceptible to at least two interpretations and there was enough conflict in the evidence should the contractual interpretation be put to a jury.

"The trial court did not perform these judicial functions; instead, it allowed the jury to act in a judicial capacity," states the opinion.

As for the correct interpretation of the contracts, the appeals court proceeds to take its own look at the extrinsic evidence and comes to the conclusion that nothing Jones' side has put forward negates how Jones was due anymore than a 10 percent royalty rate on record sales. The appeals court finds that this rate was fixed, there wasn't music experts testifying otherwise, and so forth. On the issue of joint venture profits, the opinion states, "The award of $5,315,787 must be reversed because it was based on the jury’s improper conclusion that: (1) the Producer Agreements entitled Jones to a share of net receipts for Master use licenses; and (2) the Producer Agreements entitled Jones to more than 10 percent of record sales if Sony increased Jackson’s basic royalty rate over time in the Recording Agreements."

The appeals court also concludes the producers agreements did not entitle Jones to fees for remixing masters and, alternatively, the remix damages were too speculative.

The case has been remanded to the trial judge who will now need to sharply slash the award based on Tuesday's decision.

Finally, the appeals court rejects a cross-appeal from Jones over the trial judge's refusal to allow him to move forward on a claim of financial elder abuse. It's ruled that the judge didn't abuse discretion by disallowing a belated attempt to assert this claim.

MJJ Productions was represented by a team at Kinsella Weitzman.

[soulmum]

From the Estate of Michael Jackson

We wanted to share some good news with you today. The Estate has won its appeal in the lawsuit against Quincy Jones. The judge ruled that the jury erred when it awarded Quincy $9.4 million and completely agreed with the Estate’s position on all of the claims the Estate raised in its appeal and completely rejected Quincy’s appeal claims. This is a huge victory for Michael’s Estate. You can read more about the ruling here:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/…/qui ... 94m-win-mi…

We hope everyone is safe and healthy.

[soulmum]

[soulmum]

Music legend Quincy Jones is stripped of £5million in royalties for some of Michael Jackson’s biggest hits
Jury awarded Quincy Jones around £7.5million in 2017 in royalties and fees
Claim stemmed from use of songs Jones produced that appear in film This Is It
Appeals court stripped the renowned producer of £5.5million of original sum
By LUKE MAY FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 00:59, 7 May 2020

Legendary music producer Quincy Jones has had £5million taken away from him after a decision to grant him £7.5million ($9.4million) in royalties and fees from Michael Jackson's estate went to a Californian appeal court.

Jones, who has more than 60 Grammy nominations to his name, was awarded around £7.5million in 2017 for use of songs produced by Jones that were used in Jackson's concert film This Is It and two Cirque du Soleil shows.

California's 2nd District Court of Appeal this week ruled that the jury misinterpreted a contract that was the judge's job to interpret anyway.

It took away around £5.5million ($6.9million) that jurors had said MJJ Productions owed Jones for his work on Billie Jean, Thriller, and more of Jackson's biggest hits.



The appeals court found that the jury wrongly granted Jones money from licensing fees, wrongly went beyond the 10% royalty rate Jones was owed for record sales, and incorrectly granted Jones money for remixes of Jackson's master recordings.

The court kept intact around £2million ($2.5 million) of the award, which Jones said he was owed for the use of his masters in This Is It and other fees.

The court also rejected a counter-appeal from the 87-year-old Jones arguing that the trial court should have allowed him to make a claim of financial elder abuse.

'While we disagree with portions of the Court's decision and are evaluating our options going forward, we are pleased that the Court affirmed the jury's determination that MJJP failed to pay Quincy Jones more than $2.5m that it owed him,' Jones' attorney J. Michael Hennigan said in a statement.

Jones, who was already a music business giant when he produced the classic Jackson albums Off the Wall, Thriller and Bad, had sought $30 million from the estate when he first filed the lawsuit in 2013.

'Quincy Jones was the last person we thought would try to take advantage of Michael Jackson by filing a lawsuit three years after he died asking for tens of millions of dollars he wasn't entitled to,' Jackson attorney Howard Weitzman said in a statement.

'We knew the verdict was wrong when we heard it, and the court of appeal has completely vindicated us.'

On the stand during the trial, Jones was asked by Weitzman whether he realised he was essentially suing Jackson himself

Jones angrily disagreed.

'I'm not suing Michael,' he said. 'I'm suing you all.'



The trial centered on the definitions of terms in the two contracts Jackson and Jones signed in 1978 and 1985.

Under the deals, for example, Jones is entitled to a share of net receipts from a 'videoshow' of the songs. The Jackson attorneys argued that the term was meant to apply to music videos and not feature films like This Is It.

The film was created from rehearsal footage for a comeback tour that Jackson was working toward when he died in 2009 at age 50.

'So many people have tried to take advantage of Michael and mischaracterise him since his death,' Jackson estate co-executor John Branca said in a statement Tuesday.

'It's gratifying that in this case the court in an overwhelmingly favourable and just decision, recognises that Michael Jackson was both an enormous talent and an extremely fair business executive.'
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... -hits.html