Napster

Rachael Hughes - Michael Jackson is SEXY!!

unread,

Apr 14, 2001, 1:12:49 PM4/14/01

to

arrrr always does that, i said:
" This might have already been mentioned, but has Mike taken his songs of
napster? i cant beleive hed do that, what happens if all our cd's explode
and we cant buy anymore, how are we supposed to get the required songs to
get ourselfs into the mj mood for his new album, what happens if we forget
his magical music, and go off him? hed no longer have fans.
everytime i type his name into the artist bit it always says "no matching
files found" i cant believe him, i mean, hasnt he got enough money? (sorry
if i sound a cow, im just pissed off) i thought he of all people would leave
the songs on! i mean, he is supposed to love the god damn fans.
huff"

--
** Buy the elephant mans bones? What would i do with a bag of bones?, and
they call ME weird, where do they come up with this stuff!!!!?? - MJ**
Rachael Hughes - Michael Jackson is SEXY!! <Rac...@thughes.fsnet.co.uk>
wrote in message news:9ba01n$gtt$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.244 / Virus Database: 119 - Release Date: 02/04/01
>
>

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.244 / Virus Database: 119 - Release Date: 02/04/01

John Smith

unread,

Apr 14, 2001, 3:08:29 PM4/14/01

to

Sony loves money too.

"Rachael Hughes - Michael Jackson is SEXY!!" <Rac...@thughes.fsnet.co.uk>

wrote in message news:9ba0e0$h5k$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...

John

unread,

Apr 14, 2001, 4:22:33 PM4/14/01

to

I think if anybody is to blame its probably not MJ.
As the people with the song rights (distribution) are the record companies
(I think - anybody know for sure here). ie in this case for MJ - its Sony.
But hey, they have to make money somehow.
But I can see the POV from the companies and also the fans.

"Rachael Hughes - Michael Jackson is SEXY!!" <Rac...@thughes.fsnet.co.uk>

wrote in message news:9ba0e0$h5k$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...

John Smith

unread,

Apr 14, 2001, 7:58:08 PM4/14/01

to

And not to mention the royaltees that have to be given to backup vocalists,
instrumental sessionists, Bruce Swedien types, the producers of each track,
the lyricists etc. I would imagine that if at least one person in the
credits votes against a song going on Napster than it would override
everyone else.

"John" <johnst...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9babgk$me$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com...

Sonuvfunk

unread,

Apr 15, 2001, 10:39:59 AM4/15/01

to

>" This might have already been mentioned, but has Mike taken his songs of
>napster? i cant beleive hed do that, what happens if all our cd's explode
>and we cant buy anymore, how are we supposed to get the required songs to
>get ourselfs into the mj mood for his new album, what happens if we forget
>his magical music, and go off him? hed no longer have fans.
>everytime i type his name into the artist bit it always says "no matching
>files found" i cant believe him, i mean, hasnt he got enough money? (sorry
>if i sound a cow, im just pissed off) i thought he of all people would leave
>the songs on! i mean, he is supposed to love the god damn fans.

do you know actually KNOW anything about the Napster situation? It's the record
companies that want it shut down, and it looks like they have succeeded to a
certain degree. The majority of artists seem to support Napster...again to a
certain degree.