This is just Roger Friedman a bitter old queen that has been proven to have received money to blast Madonna before. Who knows maybe he is getting money again to blast her, but from a different singer than the one before.
Anyway who cares?
As I said there is no backlash, 80% of Madonna fans are rejoicing that she is fighting back (She should have done it since the 'incident' but Madonna is so smart she waited to fight back until it could make her some money. Why waste energy before if she wasn't promoting anything? )
And 90% of the press that have written on the matter are loving it!
Some even dare to say that Gaga has brought upon herself.
So relax and watch while the pressed seethe.
Oooooh — I seeeeeee!
The Little Monster in the originɑl post didn't post thɑt — It ɑll mɑkes sense now.
In thɑt cɑse, this threɑd is pretty much moot & I tɑke bɑck everything I sɑid.
This would make sense -- but do we have actual proof (NOT what someone is saying on an online forum) about any of the royalty business that goes along with this? I want proof that Madonna didn't need permission from Gaga nor does Gaga get any money from the performances.
This isn't a "you're just a person online" situation. You can google up copyright laws. She doesn't have to pay anything.
For example, copyright registration entitles a musical composer to performance royalties whenever the musician's composition is performed publicly, i.e., over radio, television, or in restaurants, bars or other public places.
Very interesting, thank you! So isn't Gaga the musical composer of Born This Way? And isn't it being performed publicly? So wouldn't that mean Gaga actually does get performance royalties? That's what it looks like to me...
For example, copyright registration entitles a musical composer to performance royalites whenever the musician's composition is performed publicly, i.e., over radio, television, or in restaurants, bars or other public places.
Gaga will never have one biography that doesn't include Madonna's name multiple times, starting from the 1st Chapter.
It's easy to take a lane that has already been paved for you
Way to deviate from my point.
Where is the delusion if Gaga ignores her, while 7 times out of 10 when Madonna has made the press this era it had a direct correlation to Gaga?
I wasn't even serious with that comment in that thread. Is it your period this month? I don't appreciate the bitch comments tbh.
Anyway, Roger stated the obvious. Yes, this is publicity. But not in the sense to get any extra folk to come to this concert, since that's already covered.
I like you a lot, but you've been going in on Gaga more than usual lately.
This is about copyright registration - a completely different thing.
Are you sure? Isn't the song registered under copyright laws? I don't think "copyright registration" denotes the act of material being copyrighted as much as it does the material already having been copyrighted.
This is the same pressed as **** journalist who lies about her record-breaking tour grosses.
Madonna had made 250m on ticket sales before the tour had even started without this BTW mash up being known, so any Monsters who want to claim it has anything to do with her success can go to the LEFT.
Roger Friedman is known for unethical reporting that first became known in 2004 when he made up a very negative story about Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ.
But let the mods be biased and keep this trash open
Are you sure? Isn't the song registered under copyright laws? I don't think "copyright registration" denotes the act of material being copyrighted as much as it does the material already having been copyrighted.
You know... Madonna stans could just as easily argue that Born This Way is technically Madonna's intellectual property...
Way to deviate from my point.
Where is the delusion if Gaga ignores her, while 7 times out of 10 when Madonna has made the press this era it had a direct correlation to Gaga?
I think taking elements from somebody's work speaks more than talking about someone to the press, but maybe that's just me