| |
Discussion: Rebecca responds To Gaga
Banned
Member Since: 3/3/2012
Posts: 13,073
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Gedamara
+1
It is not nice of Gaga to sue that poor person for that amount of money. Where is she supposed to get it? 
On the other hand Gaga has millions so she doesn't need that money anyway.
Monsters thinking she deserves to get ruined financially for "wasting Gaga's time " |
She had the money to sue her, I'm sure she has money to pay back her failure and she did waste not only Gaga's time but everyone's time.
If this was your fave getting sued for ghost writting or something like that, you all would be saying the exact same thing
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 7/12/2009
Posts: 15,281
|
Darklord ur at it again. Good girl
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 2/4/2014
Posts: 2,860
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Su-Barbie-A
She had the money to sue her, I'm sure she has money to pay back her failure and she did waste not only Gaga's time but everyone's time.
If this was your fave getting sued for ghost writing or something like that, you all would be saying the exact same thing |
/endthread
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 2/6/2014
Posts: 4,224
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Versace
How can you then say you don't agree with everything she says, only the part where she says she shouldn't pay Gaga anything when she is clearly lying and providing false information and accusing Gaga of not writing her songs which can possibly damage her public personality?
|
Well she's not clearly lying.
It's her version of events. I'm sure she truly believes it. I don't know and you don't know what really transpired, we don't know what involvement DJWS had despite what we're told. We as fans don't have access to that side of the story.
I don't agree with most of what Rebecca says, I think she's a little bitter about losing.
Though, I can certainly feel empathy for her. Her ex through some chanel or another has links to gaga and a song comes out - You explained your side but even if she's wrong I can certainly see why she might think her work was used.
I just think as gaga says she is all about the art and artists and cares about the music she should't be going for the throat of another artist. - I don't think that's unreasonable.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 3,043
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Peep
Darklord ur at it again. Good girl
|
He tried though  The obsession is scary tbh 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/11/2012
Posts: 14,498
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dark_Lorde
Well she's not clearly lying.
It's her version of events. I'm sure she truly believes it. I don't know and you don't know what really transpired, we don't know what involvement DJWS had despite what we're told. We as fans don't have access to that side of the story.
I don't agree with most of what Rebecca says, I think she's a little bitter about losing.
Though, I can certainly feel empathy for her. Her ex through some chanel or another has links to gaga and a song comes out - You explained your side but even if she's wrong I can certainly see why she might think her work was used.
I just think as gaga says she is all about the art and artists and cares about the music she should't be going for the throat of another artist. - I don't think that's unreasonable.
|
I'm sure Gaga didn't talk about artist taking advantage of other artists for money. She is obviously very careful about her art when she is willing to make someone bankrupt when that person told everybody Gaga is not writing her own lyrics. Now that's a woman of her word.
Your feeling of empathy is beyond me. She CLEARLY needed to sue her ex-boyfriend when you said yourself HE is the one who took her song and through some channel gave it to Gaga (if that is the truth of course). But what reason could she have that she went against Gaga? Hm, I wonder.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/6/2011
Posts: 4,948
|
It is abundantly clear that the OP is attempting to appear unbiased while completely oblivious to the fact that he/she is failing miserably. The OP has taken Rebecca's words as truth and is constantly defending her throughout this thread only to backpedal and deflect after being exposed more times than he/she can even keep up with.
The bottom line here, and what the OP fails to comprehend or accept, is that Gaga won, Gaga has the right to sue for her legal bills, and it is completely irrelevant how rich or poor Rebecca is or how long the trial went on for. Whatever Rebecca's intentions were, I'm sure they were just as innocent and unbiased as the OP's.
Quote:
Originally posted by that G.U.Y.
The passive-aggressive opportunist TRIED to make her millions leeching off of Gaga's success. Now she needs to PAY UP for being a fool. Sorry, hunni, if you don't have lots of money you should not be trying to sue millionaires; they will COME for you.
#EndRebeccaFrancescatti
|
It was unclear whether you were talking about Rebecca or the OP here 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/1/2013
Posts: 18,989
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dark_Lorde
I just think as gaga says she is all about the art and artists and cares about the music she should't be going for the throat of another artist. - I don't think that's unreasonable.
|
But Gaga didn't sue her first. It's not like Gaga decided one morning that she wants to make that woman bankrupt.
She had a lawsuit, it took over a year, she had to pay bills and just wants that money back. Simple as that. After all it's Gaga's money. We don't know yet how much she will have to pay to Gaga and maybe if she asks the judge to reduce the fee then Gaga's layers may agree.
This woman on the other hand is going for Gaga's throat claiming she's fake and doesn't write her own music and lyrics.
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 8/26/2011
Posts: 27,690
|
Gaga still SNATCHED her YENS, PESOS, DOLLARS and COINz LMFAOOOOOOOOOOO
poor thing
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/4/2014
Posts: 4,690
|
Quote:
Originally posted by longjohn9898
It is abundantly clear that the OP is attempting to appear unbiased while completely oblivious to the fact that he/she is failing miserably. The OP has taken Rebecca's words as truth and is constantly defending her throughout this thread only to backpedal and deflect after being exposed more times than he/she can even keep up with.
The bottom line here, and what the OP fails to comprehend or accept, is that Gaga won, Gaga has the right to sue for her legal bills, and it is completely irrelevant how rich or poor Rebecca is or how long the trial went on for. Whatever Rebecca's intentions were, I'm sure they were just as innocent and unbiased as the OP's.
|
Dark_Lorde's style is always to delusionally think he's being more clever than he is. It's just not even interesting at this point, it's like an addiction to writing mean things about one celebrity.
As for Gaga suing this person, I mean it's not like she's on the case sitting down talking with lawyers all day. At some point her legal time, probably Interscope's, would have informed her of this and what they should do and would have advised her to sue, and so she took that advice and off they go. It's not as if she's maliciously sitting there cackling thinking of how she'll make this girl "pay for what she's done". It's probably just lawyers doing what lawyers do, aka. scalping coins.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 16,371
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dark_Lorde
Well she's not clearly lying.
I don't agree with most of what Rebecca says, I think she's a little bitter about losing.
Though, I can certainly feel empathy for her. Her ex through some chanel or another has links to gaga and a song comes out - You explained your side but even if she's wrong I can certainly see why she might think her work was used.
I just think as gaga says she is all about the art and artists and cares about the music she should't be going for the throat of another artist. - I don't think that's unreasonable.
|
She seems a lot bitter about losing, to the point where she makes out Gaga to be an artist who doesn't write her songs or have creative input (we all know she was a writer before getting her break) and likens herself to Einstein and Edison 
Gaga isn't going for anyone's throat, she's recouping the $1.4M it cost to swat away this bitter mess. It's important artists ensure losers like this one pay for their lawyer fees otherwise you end up with a Michael Jackson situation where you're a target for frivolous lawsuits almost weekly for the sake of attention. It's unreasonable to think Gaga should give away $1.4M for some artistic or female solidarity to a person who considers her the biggest fake this side if Milli Vanilli.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 7,974
|
Quote:
|
our verses are both percussive and monotone in style (roughly 44% of each song)
|
How curious she lost when this was her grounds for 'plagarism' 
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 23,374
|
The dedication Dark_Lorde 
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 9/12/2011
Posts: 9,897
|
For someone who tries to come off as smart I'm sure you do realize it's not just Gaga suing her. In fact Gaga probably has the least to do with it.  Interscope finally took it to themselves to end this brand latching. Good for them. Serve as a lesson Rebecca. Truly a martyr. When will our fave.
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/1/2013
Posts: 1,048
|
Her song sounds NOTHING like Gaga's. 
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 2/6/2012
Posts: 18,398
|
Couldn't some of what she said here be counted as slander/libel?
|
|
|
|
Member Since: 11/17/2011
Posts: 12,413
|
So if her song sounds like Judas does that mean she copied Bad romance because....
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 8/31/2013
Posts: 20,327
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dark_Lorde
I just think as gaga says she is all about the art and artists and cares about the music she should't be going for the throat of another artist. - I don't think that's unreasonable.
|
Gaga should defend herself from people attempting to harm her, attempting to rob her, attempting to discredit her, or anything else just like everybody else. Just because she believes in being nice doesn't mean she has to allow her career and life to be destroyed by random people with questionable mental status coming after her.
No sympathy. She'll pay up or maybe someone on Gaga's legal team will take pity and lessen the charge.
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 8/31/2013
Posts: 20,327
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Dark_Lorde
There's no doubting that she may have made mistakes.
I don't represent rebecca. If you want to go through it and disprove everything and anything she says be my guest.
|
No mistakes were made. It's an obvious, conscious lie. She's bitter and greedy; now even more so because she lost and Gaga's team is ruthlessly coming for her. And now Rebecca is throwing everything including the kitchen sink at Gaga hoping anything will stick. But here you are defending this obvious liar while pretending to be unbiased - we all know why you're always Team Not-Gaga. The trolling is boring.
|
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 8/31/2013
Posts: 20,327
|
Quote:
Originally posted by j0el88
Dark_Lorde, be proud that after casually browsing this site for a couple of years you're the first person who's made me feel inclined to post something.
I think that the intention by people posting "get that $1.4M!" is that Gaga has a right, just like Rebecca F did, to utilise the legal system to attempt to get back something that she believes is hers (being the money she had to spend to defend herself). Rebecca F believed that the song was plagiarised, so sued and lost. She should have known, or at the least her legal representation should have told her, the potential consequences of a lost case.
I'm from Australia and our court system works in the way that the losing party almost always pays the legal fees of the winning party. Hence, my opinion on this matter as posted in the OP is that Gaga has every right to try and reclaim the money spent on her lawyers. But as this is the USA, I found that the Copyright Act of the US states "In any civil action under this title, the court in its discretion may allow the recovery of full costs by or against any party other than the United States or an officer thereof. Except as otherwise provided by this title, the court may also award a reasonable attorney’s fee to the prevailing party as part of the costs" ( http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/505)
So it is now up to the discretion of the court in the counter-claim made by Gaga, who has every right to defend her name and her fortune and set a deterrent for future cases that may be frivolously made against her, or other musicians. You've made your point quite clearly that you don't believe Rebecca F should be made financially ruined. You're merely using carefully written statements and quoting particular sections of people's posts to get a rise out of them due to your not so subtle dislike for Gaga. Give it a rest. |
Every word of this.
Queen of Pop Lady Gaga.
|
|
|
|
|
|
