What is so astonishing about a drummer who drummed on records winning performance royalties?
It doesn't matter. The judge decided. Moz appealed. And failed again. You either buy into justice or you don't.
Look at Sonny Jim talking justice. If that's what you call that farce of a trial.
It doesn't matter. Verdict. Appeal. Verdict. Case over. How do you plan appealing that?
I thought Marr said that they probably deserved more, in his book?
' justice' ?! [/QUOTE
Why are you laughing, you live in the country that acquitted OJ Simpson??
from an interview with Marr from the Guardian Oct 29/16...
'Was Joyce justified in bringing the court case? “Mike had a right to do it. I don’t think he should have done because we had an agreement. Looking back, I would have done things differently. I’d make sure you don’t move a muscle without a contract – for everybody’s benefit. Young people aren’t good at doing that kind of thing, and we had to pay the price for it.” Would he still regard the 10% Joyce and Rourke were paid as a fair deal? “I would be more generous,” he says. “But it wasn’t a band of equals. Thirty-odd years later I think anyone can see that.” What would be a fair percentage? He laughs. “You know what? I’d wind up in court if I answered that.”
So he accepts they should have recieved more?
So he accepts they should have recieved more?
' Why are you laughing, you live in the country that acquitted OJ Simpson??' -Surface
EXACTLY ! So just goes to show.... the law can be wrong.
no, read again read again, He says... 'I would be more generous' which means a little more than 10 percent but not 25. And he goes on to say.... '“ it wasn’t a band of equals. Thirty-odd years later I think anyone can see that.”
I would have been more generous means they should have received more. And just to be clear I don't think Andy and Mike should have been on 25% but 10% is a piss as take.