Paul Mccartney On Michael Jackson Acquiring Beatles Catalogue

[Blanked22]

Michael is the smartest Buisness Man in Music Industrie

[limitlesslovee1]

Well..I guess it doesn't matter now that MJ is dead. Paul can afford to buy some of MJ's catalogue, since his estate has so much debt. Now, don't get mad at Paul if he decides to do that...remember it's all business. ;) Right is right & wrong is wrong..& karma is a b&@*$

[cdubmeyer]

@navlac It is backstabbing when you have worked your ass off and those songs are yours. What dumb people don't understand about this is that the beatles didn't sell their songs for anyone to grab and buy, they were owned by the record company instead of by the Beatles and the Beatles wanted to own them but didn't have enough money at the time to buy and own them. How do you think MJ would have felt if he got screwd and his songs were being auctioned and his best friend came and bought'em

[Rakanmasoud]

uh now i get the whole deal there's no backstabing in this i mean it was up for sale and michael bought it so what he didn't steal it or anything he payed 48 million so i think that gives the right to own them and paul felt bad because him and mj were friend's and that mj bought them so no need for hating

[navlac]

LOLOLOLOLOLOL MJ told him, "I'm gonna buy your songs". Paul stopped laughing .

No backstabbing involved here. Keep it moving people. Nothing to see here but the truth.

[cdubmeyer]

@navlac It is backstabbing when you have worked your ass off and those songs are yours. What dumb people don't understand about this is that the beatles didn't sell their songs for anyone to grab and buy, they were owned by the record company instead of by the Beatles and the Beatles wanted to own them but didn't have enough money at the time to buy and own them. How do you think MJ would have felt if he got screwd and his songs were being auctioned and his best friend came and bought'em

[DominiqueCherry]

Paul didn't want to buy it. If Michael didn't buy the rights it would be still in some big record company. So what backstabing?

[MetrazolElectricity]

Macy had Come Together... ugh, fuck that. fuck michael. The Beatles Forever.

[neekanikki13]

I do think mj kinda tricked pm but pm was stupid enough to fall for it

[orchid7000]

Why Paul didn't buy it ? There's no friends in business....... Wake up guys

[chilko5]

I know the business is business,despite I think the buying of 250 Beatles songs was unfair to Paul,because Paul seemed to be Michael's friend.After that Paul felt humiliated.But I am wondering,I don't understand...Paul did not have enough money?After a time,when Michael felt that his life is in danger he wanted to give rights back free to Paul.That was the proof,that he felt remorse.There is no doubt,Michael was a perfect businessman except in his last few years:(

[darkstar1345a]

i think the problem was not the fact that someone else owned his songs , it was the fact he wasnt allowed to play the songs that he either wrote or co wrote .

[matchbox555]

well why didnt paul buy them when they were up for sale ?

doesnt make any sense

[1952Telecaster]

@matchbox555 because the company that owned the Beatles songs wouldn't sell them to Paul McCartney, but they would sell them to Michael Jackson and did

[Cheyenne605]

and those that insist that MJ would hurt a child needs to read further than the front page of the tabloids. A little research into the truth, which isn't hard to do with the Internet, will find that MJ was falsely accused.

[Cheyenne605]

Interesting comments. MJ didn't stab anyone in the back and he didn't steal anyone's songs. The company was up for sale and he bought it. Yoko Ono actually said she was glad that MJ was the one who got it. Paul had his chance and passed. MJ thought they were worth the money when Paul wouldn't cough up the money to match the bid. MJ did better business. Paul is making lots of money so I don't feel sorry for him.

[louchobbema]

wacko pedo sicko jacko was a sick motherfucker, no sorry, I take that back. He was a sick childfucker and Beelzebub is roasting him on an eternal fire as we speak.

[MRJACKSON19581]

BTW I saw Paul concert here at Comerca park .He put on a fantastic show.. Never thought I would say it.. It was one of the best LIVE shows I've seen in my adult life.. Hes really come a long way.. His voice was tops He sung one song after another nearly 3 hours of great music He relied heavely on Beatles tunes.But it was all great.During the LIVE AND LET DIE song the colorful laser special effectsand loud explosions and sizzleing fireworks was dy-no-mite!

[calixa]

Through all the EPIC, and i mean, EPIC bickering about this video, how in the world has it remained 27 likes and ZERO dislikes??

[meloveicecream24]

i dont get what the big deal about MJ is...

[MRJACKSON19581]

@meloveicecream24 pay noattentionto them fales chold molestationallegatins..

Now Do a check back history of Mj from his days with the Jackson 5 all the way to his last day here on earth You'll see MJ was superior in the music busines compared to every other artist. He may not have hat it over some as instrumental talent gos.But when it comes to being that STAR that could do all the best of the best things i nthe music biz That's the BIG DEAL about MJ Mj was a mega star

[meloveicecream24]

@meloveicecream24 you have your opinion and i have mine.

[vangoghmatisse1]

THE KING OF POP OWNS THE BEATLES!!!!!

[flakbac]

why didnt youbuy it you cheap bastard

[v1234567ish]

@unocname MJ made better music and did not just pop he did r&b,rock, hip hop, and many more

[CruxisFire]

Fuck bent-ass, corrupt ass Jackson. Any TRUE fan of music would know not to mess with someones edge, or the image they wish to give. Commercializing the Beatles was a slap in the face to Paul, and to music lovers.

[Mircose]

@CruxisFire I see Paul McCartney's point of view and I agree in a way... however Michael Jackson is the celebrity who has donated the most money to charity in the whole world (you can check it on the Guinness book of the records).. over $ 300 million dollars

I don't believe Paul McCartney has donated 1% of this to charity... so.. his contribution towards society is tiny compared to MJ's

[FlameClaw2]

@Mircose Nothign against what you said about Jackson, although McCartney has been known to make generous charity contributions - he just doesn't make a big deal about having done so in public.

[Mircose]

@FlameClaw2 MJ don't make a big deal of donating, he obviously ALWAYS tried to raise awareness to people about the environment(way before it became a trend), he ALWAYS tried to talk with public leaders and the most people he could about the importance of helping people (children in general).. on his days off he disguised himself go to hospitals to take presents and spend time with children suffering of cancer.. action speak louder than words and money itself

[FlameClaw2]

@Mircose I didn't say otherwise? Although I don't know much about Jackson he seems like the kind of guy who would be charitable so I don't doubt what you've said at all?

[Mircose]

@FlameClaw2 ow.. sorry.. I thought you said that yes he is charitable but he made a big deal out of it.

[MRJACKSON19581]

@CruxisFire If Paul had bought the Jacksons and MJ solo catalogs would you Beatle fans be upset about it?

[Ileana105]

@MRJACKSON19581 - Most people like myself are a fan of both but MJ knew how Paul felt about it (after all he was the one who spoke to him about it) so MJ should've backed off & let Paul acquire it back or sold it back to him. Friendship should come before business. I'm sure MJ would feel the same about his music but his dad who took care of that part of business. Poor Beatles they were too young back than to know that part of the business. Awful of MJ to stab his friend in the back like that.

[MRJACKSON19581]

@Ileana105 If the presdent of CBS hadnt gotten the Beatles tunes for MJ there was a good chance Mj and Paul would have lost out on getting hem..Paul owns tons other recording artist nusic these day .Its about doing business not friendship when such gem is at stake of being in someoneselses hands Mj wasnt the only one interested in the Beatles music when that bidding went into effect. Good thing Mj dd get them.. cause Paulwas snozzing on this

[Ileana105]

@MRJACKSON19581 - I don't think Paul was snozzing, according to what understood he was 2nd in the running but was trying to get them to lower the price but MJ out bid him. I think he should've at the very least sold Paul the tunes he wrote like Yesterday or Hey Jude and kept some of the ones that maybe John wrote which maybe were of less interests to Paul. Now who owns them, his children? They probably aren't even Beatles fans.....gone to waste.

[MRJACKSON19581]

@Ileana105 MJ mom owns half the Beatles songs Sony the rest and Randy Jackson Mj baby brother is helping MJ family lawyers with lot of things related to MJ estate Randy was the one helping MJ get things back on track whe nMJ was putting his life back on track after the Trial .to be honest Paul doesnt need them songs Let Mj kids and his mom have them.. Paul got enough music he makes millions and millions off of people music he owns . I hope the songs go to good use

[heathbradford]

@CruxisFire very true. and paul will have the last laugh in 6 years when the rights start returning to him. john got his rights already.

[meloveicecream24]

paul was rich. he should've bought his own freakin' songs! goddamit paul!

[Mircose]

@meloveicecream24 yeah.. if he only believed so much on his own words he could have bought the freakin songs... but I guess keeping the money to himself was more important than his "ideology"

[MyDreamside]

he keeps hitting and hitting the journalist! He want to hit him back but he cant

[ridewave444]

Jackson was pretty fucked up. Pretty shitty how he commercialized everything. Showed he was a sell out and didn't respect the Beatles. Selfish.

[Mircose]

@ridewave444 shut up idiot.. one of the 7 times of which is listed on the Guinness book of records is for giving the most money to charity.. over $ 300 million ..

dumb ass...

you are fucked up... society in general is fucked up.

[Xxqtpie192xX]

MJ was a great businessman :)

Paul could have easily bought the catalog but he thought it was too much to pay on his own, he wanted Yoko Ono to make a joint bid with him but she didn't want to. Well done Michael Jackson! It makes me laugh when people say he was completely broke, when the catalog was worth like $2 billion!

[zerosum318]

@Xxqtpie192xX You believe that screwing over someone makes you a 'great businessman'. That is the problem with the vulture culture. And if you wanna know why MJ had a live-in cardiologist feeding him propofol, valium, ativan, and midazolam, they wanted him dead. At MJ's death, the catalog was worth $1B. There were rumors Jackson to give the rights back to McCartney in 2009. Bankers destroyed Northern Songs in the '60s to steal the rights. They took out life insurance on Lennon/McCartney.

[v1234567ish]

It is obvious that Michael was alot richer than paul cause Paul can't afford to buy his own music which is a shame.Having the biggest selling album ,breaking more records,and having the biggest music tours made Michael made more money in 2 years than the beatles made in they whole 7 year as a group

[v1234567ish]

@stonegrooved without the Beatles there will be no Michael Jackson?Since win Michael was influence by the beatles?Michael had his own talent and still be the successful artist that he is.Michael Jackson made the transformation on music ,dance, performing,and singing like no other.When it come to the biggest selling album is in the top 3 while the beatles albums are not in the top 5.He beat the beatles when it come to the thetop biggest music tours.Michael haves 4 while the beatles have none.

[v1234567ish]

Michael Jackson is better than the beatles

[unocname]

@v1234567ish you can't even say that, better singer, yes. but the beatles made better music, more diverse, while MJ just sang pop

[Mactwee]

@unocname Michael did alot of Soul and R&B and some Rock as well. Thriller and everything he did before that, both solo and with his brothers was actually soul. Invincible was also a mostly R&B album. I know Pop is seen as a genre, but in essence it is actually a category of popular songs and artistes. The label "Pop" really doesn't have to mean they didn't cover specific genres. Now, today's "artistes", Selena Gomez, Justin B and KeSha on the other hand.. Are a slightly different story. :S

[unocname]

@Mactwee ya i guess i could feel that.. but the beatles were still more experimental in a way.. not to take anything away from MJ.. i love him and he made lots of good music.. but i still think that the comment i responded to was complete bs.. you cant make a statement like that and not back it up with anything

[Mactwee]

@unocname I understand. About the comment you were responding to initially.. I'm with you, you really "can't make a statement like that and not back it up with anything." Agreed. I love Michael and The Beatles, I think they made contributions to music that were out of this world and they will be eternally loved and revered. They will never be equaled. I don't think it's fair to say one is better than the other either. :)

[thekingofcinema1]

@stonegrooved The Beatles are a band, Michael is a solo artist and entertainer, both have out of this world talent and impact in this world and music, but to say michael wasn't an innovator, MIchael made MTV, his innovation in music video are amazing and that album thriller change the way music was heard/seen promoted, the business aspect of music was changed. the way everything had to be big he did a lot dude, but i already know your not gonna hear it, but whatever. u have ur opinions of course

[shanus11]

no beatles no MJ? errm if u didnt know the jackon 5 were playing b4 MJ joined, he started singing at like 5 so thats 1963! it was black music!ppl forget how much they had to struggle becaus rthey were a black band with so much racism going on.its normal now beacause HE was the one to push blacks into the limelight n made it acceptable for everone to love black music n ppl. FACT!dont fucking forget it!also Paul siad hwere he did the same with business,the songs could be owned by far worse!

[OriahLivingston]

@shanus11 Umm Stevie Wonder's first number one was in 1962, Fingertips, he was 12, before Michael sang, Michael didn't get anybody in the spotlight except himself. The Crystals too had He's A Rebel in 1962 which was number one and they were black. Just a couple examples. Unless you are a sponsor for Pepsi, quit giving him more credit than he deserves.

[shineyapple]

@ais312 Everyone please simply ignore stonegroove's comments.

There's barely one video on youtube with the name Michael Jackson in it that he hasn't been commenting on since Michael passed away. He doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about, so it's best to ignore him.

[gauss1855]

Michael did a very smart purchase with Beatles's catalogue, but that gamble chased him the rest of his life with negative results.

[jasonaldeanqueen24]

I pisses me off that Michael didn't put the songs on itunes when he had complete control and I understand why Paul's not happy 'cause I wouldn't be either. I guess it's all fair game in music.

[monitchka]

@stonegrooved nobody hates Rolling Stone magazine and nobody cares about any of this or what you have to say. Get a life.

[monitchka]

@stonegrooved who cares what Rolling Stone magazine thinks.also,consider the fact that it's a rock n roll magazine.of course they are going to favor the Beatles,but the fact that they listed MJ means a lot.what really counts is the fact that MJ still holds the record today for the biggest selling album of all time,beating the Beatles.  MJ is far bigger than the Beatles in terms of popularity around the world. Although,they really can't be compared,for their contributions to music are both huge.

[monitchka]

@stonegrooved thank you for being so obsessed with MJ..it makes us so happy.  we love it. We love that you are commenting on every video. it's very nice to know how much you secretly love MJ. anyone who obsesses, is in love. you are in love. you don't need to hide it anymore. nobody cares to read your ridiculous comments, so why don't you go find a new hobby and keep adding more MJ posters to your wall. don't be ashamed! be proud! it doesn't need to be secret anymore that you love MJ!

[ABCHealTheWorld]

@stonegrooved Oh my gosh stoney .. we meet again !! Hahaha .. why does it NOT surprise me that you are hanging on THIS video ALSO !! Why .. my my my .. aren't you OBSESSED with Michael. Why .. I truly think you have the HOTS for mj .. you just won't ADMIT it !! haha. This is the funniest thing I've seen in a LONG time .. other than you hanging on MJ vs Elvis videos !! hahahaha .. my goodness stoned, what's with you ?!!

[rihannarox11]

all the beatles songs ive seen on ads ive been put off by thanks alot MJ, ruin there songs, not cool, not cool.

[59718surfrdude]

Maybe if Paul had been nicer to Yoko Ono, Yoko would have gone in 50/50 with Paul. Yoko Ono cheered for Michael to buy the songs, because of how rude Paul had been to Yoko Ono.

[TheBeatleManiac101]

Bahahahaha, Paul's impression of Michael is priceless (:

[badtown88]

Jesus was Bernie Goldberg ever young looking?

[shineyapple]

@stonegrooved you really need to get lost. i see your comments on every other MJ-related video on youtube.

you can quit now because no matter how hard you try, you will NEVER destroy Michael Jackson's legacy

[thekingofcinema1]

@shineyapple dont worry this guy stonegrooved is just a crazy REALLY crazy john lennon freak who goes to every mj related video because hes bitter than mj owns all the beatles songs and swears to god that hes evil and that he betrayed paul, when i told him the truth saying that paul had his chance twice because it was to much $ and declined and as soon as mike made his bid all of a sudden paul wanted the songs even more and failed, and this guy stonefag was like nah, bs. what ever hes delusional

[shineyapple]

I dont understand what the big deal is about MJ buying the beatles songs. its called a transaction. something goes for sale and you buy it. end of story.

[badtown88]

@shineyapple

Well obviously.  No one is arguing it wasn't a good business decision. The argument is that he and Paul were friends and doing that to a friend is a dick move.

[MagicalMysteryVideos]

@shineyapple The big deal at the time was the MJ licensed the songs for commercials, which Paul wasn't happy about.

[OriahLivingston]

@shineyapple It's about morality, is money/business worth more than friendship? He seemed to think so. Would you be upset if Paul bought Michael's catalogue, considering his wealth he might get revenge someday and buy his songs. I don't want you to be saying anything if he does.

[AuraAudio93]

@shineyapple and the fact that Paul has to pay for every Beatles song he plays live. UNETHICAL!

[RobertMProductions]

@shineyapple How would you like it if you made a lot of amazing songs and then your friend went and bought the rights for them?

[XxleandraXX01]

i love mj and paul! legends

[Kingsherry]

@stonegrooved Oh Please===the media dont know their facts either.

[AllofMichaelJackson]

@stonegrooved The anti-media - is possibly the media as a whole excluding some. These people paint Michael like a monster when in actuality he was a good person. All I've experienced is anti-Michaelers making millions from ignorant people like yourself.

[r4d4101]

what does he say "I won't actually be turning to the camera and say ???" can't make it out @ 2:25-2:39 ish. Ty.***

[Sandy2J]

@stonegrooved - Oh gosh! He is a saint!!! And leave Michael Jackson alone.

BTW, you can enjoy his Beatles too.

[JBmiddleOFnoWHERE]

1:13 - he sound just like he did when he was just starting out!!!!! I love it!!!

[Sandy2J]

@stonegrooved -Answer the question Stoney, what to hear your "expertise" on MJ's catalog.

[Kingsherry]

Stonegrooved, I'm done with you and all your dilusions. You cant even read a simple document, and you constantly make up information.

[Kingsherry]

Don't call him Jacko its Jackson. And you have not proved your case - and you never will because Michael was innocent so continue following Diane Demon and other media leeches who built there career because of Michael Jackson.

[Kingsherry]

@stonegrooved You are completely ignoring the links I showed you from McCartney himself. Michael did not steal it from McCartney someone else had owned it before Michael. McCartney was worth 2 to 3 times more than Michael in that era-- and could have easily purchased it. Like I stated before, your hatred of Michael Jackson is hindering your ability to reason and your comments are very childish with no rationality.

[Kingsherry]

@stonegrooved I got something better. Why dont I give you the document that was approved in a court of law that states that Michaels insurance company paid the Chandlers against his wishes therefore cannot be hel against him. Also, BY LAW, Michael couldnt talk about the case or what was paid- let alone who paid it.

[keetonplace]

@MrsRhythmNation Could you please tell me of the documentation of MJ's charity gifts? To whom and how much? Approximate.

[MrsRhythmNation]

@stonegrooved I'm stating fact where as you sound off your head. I don't wish to converse with you any further.

[MrsRhythmNation]

@stonegrooved Ever heard the quote Beatles bigger than jesus? Look, I like The Beatles and MJ and have no interest in convincing you otherwise of your opinion. Michael Jackson was very misunderstood. You wouldn't judge John Lennon on what you read in the tabloids so why MJ. He was proven innocent of all his charges. He enjoyed the company of children, he possibly had asperger's syndrome look into it. Very interesting actually.

[SephyVince84]

You just can't mix friendship and business. This is a reminder for people out there to be smart. MJ was a shrewd businessman, he grab the chance when he sees one. I've been there and done that. Can't say I blame MJ for this.

[MrsRhythmNation]

Get the story straight, people. The catalogue (which by the way isn't JUST Beatles) was bought by a business man who offered them to MJ. MJ never tried to outbid Paul, he wasn't even at the auction. I like the way Paul spoke about MJ after his death, it's a shame others here can't just "let it be".

Michael was a good soul and most importantly a humanitarian. He made some mistakes in his life, predominantly financial ones, but Paul is no angel and is at peace with it.

[marygbonham]

@stonegrooved ...Still peddling your nonsense I see....can't get anybody to listen you....STILL!

[LEAHCIM829]

@stonegrooved Mj didn't die from a drug addiction, he was MURDERED, stupid!!

[lesliefan79]

haha, Paul can't say he wasn't warned, lol, Michael told him twice he was intending to buy the catalogue, Paul just didn't listen, lol.

[DWANESWIFE]

@stonegrooved Hey Sony is making millions off Michael right now there going to be releasing unreleased songs of MJ for the next 10 years...and MJ is not even alive to give the ok... Theres a lot more going on with the music business... and artist have to be very careful.. so who really knows what went on with the beatles songs.. its all bout business, nothing personal...

[musicbabylove1]

lol @ him calling Michael Jackson a young entertainer in 1989! Paul, he had been performing for 26 years at this point! How patronising !

[delaroxursox]

I am glad that MJ allowed the Beetles music to be used in commercials. If he had not then I would not even know any of their songs. Also Does MJ get paid off the beatles video games?

[kaisariani]

why paul didnt buy it if he want the he had the money

[MrUnderdog1970]

@kaisariani No shit!

[andysort]

@kaisariani the old goat (mcCartney) had the chance to buy the catalogue. he was cheap, though. it was a sale competition: they bided against eachother until paul decided the price is to high, so Michael won. period. Yoko Lennon was in it also. 

[kaisariani]

@andysort thanks for the info

[DWANESWIFE]

@andysort two thumbs up for saying that.. that was probably it..nothing personal.. Mj had money at the time..and Beatles were pretty big..so why not buy it?...

I dont see what the big deal was with Paul.. and his fans..

[pengugirlpants]

LMAO I LOVE PAUL.

[musemom2]

Anyone with the capital could have bought Northern Songs, including Paul McCartney. It seems a bit of a snipe to be angry with Michael Jackson for doing so. By Paul's own admission, Michael announced his intentions at least twice. He could have voiced his opinion right then and there.

[ZebrasFirst]

calixa, Insidious?!!! Read my comment to msradx. You MJ attackers are being unfair and misinformed toward MJ's purchase of the Beatles catalog.

It's like this: You and I are friends and you made an awesome painting that the world fell in love with. A company bought your painting and displayed in a museum.

Later, you encouraged me to get into painting purchasing. Then, the company that bought your painting earlier put it up for sale. You or anybody else could bid for it.

[msradx]

Michael Jackson may have been up with the best performers ever.

But NOBODY can get away with stabbing the legendary Paul McCartney in the back.

MJ was an arse.

[ZebrasFirst]

msradx, Don't you think "stabbing in the back" is a bit too harsh? Especially when Paul put the idea into Michael's head in the first place! Paul could have easily outbid Michael if he so desired, but he didn't. Why is MJ an "arse" for having great business sense?

[msradx]

When Paul said "go buy some songs", he didn't mean his own! His babies! He didn't want Jackson to buy those songs, and Jackson knew that very well. When Paul asked for a well-deserved payrise, he didn't get one. This being a "friend" of his. I know I would never have the stomach or backbone to behave the way Jackson did.

And clearly Paul felt betrayed also, or they wouldn't have fallen out over it, would they?

[ZebrasFirst]

msradx, I read about this incident in a MJ bio around 1994 or so. Paul was quoted as saying, "A fish who opens his mouth gets caught."

I still think it's unfair to attack MJ for making a good business decision when, again, Paul is the very one who put the idea in MJ's head in the first place. Paul could have easily outbid MJ for "his babies". Paul seems to have gotten over it already (watch his Letterman visit).

[LEAHCIM829]

@msradx They didn't fall out. They drifted apart!!!

[puce2001able]

@ZebrasFirst I'm very right with you!!!

[LEAHCIM829]

@msradx MJ didn't stab McCartney in the back. McCartney, by his own admission said MJ said "I'm going to buy your catalog" and McCartney assumed he was joking. MJ is not an arse, he's the KING:)

[ritter89]

@LEAHCIM829 The man sold music to multimillion-dollar shoe and cookie companies to support their ad campaigns, which shows a complete disregard for artistic integrity of the music and the songwriter. Since MJ rarely wrote his own music, perhaps he had little respect for songwriters. After Thriller, he was dead as a artist, which is he why he slowly transformed into a caricature of himself, both psychically and artistically. He did the same to his career as he did with the Beatles catalog

[LEAHCIM829]

@ritter89 MJ is a songwriter and has written most of his songs and the most popular and important songs that changed pop music for the better . MJ was dead after Thriller? I beg to differ. MJ went on to continuously sell number one albums w/ critical acclaim. Granted he's never came close to Thriller, but neither has anyone else. Paul McCartney never came close to Sgt Pepper!Now, McCartney after the Beatles was dead. Nothing he's done is regarded as great. He's known as being an ex-beatles.

[cutiefrogskermit]

@ritter89 Wtheck are you talking about? michael jackson wrote almost all his songs after Thriller album, in fact just look at the Bad, Dangerous and HIStory albums, almost all of the songs list him as the sole writer, and he was still making hits. And also in"dangerous deposition" the judge asks who the writers listed on the document for the song Dangerous were, and he says himself and two other guys names, when in reality the other two men did not write any part of the song.

[AHHMEHOT]

@msradx it wasn't like that! !plus,how many ppl stabbed mj in the back? Tey just drifted apart after that.i swear u ppl always want to make a fight!

[msradx]

@AHHMEHOT Well, I don't wanna argue or fight about it, it's pointless and I can't be bothered. I'm just saying i don't like what Jackson did to Paul. And Paul doesn't like what Jackson did to Paul. And when Jackson makes public apologies, and then makes a public statement where he LIES and says he's "left the songs to Paul in his will", I think we might be seeing a bit of a guilty conscious there as well.

[AHHMEHOT]

@msradx I'm not gonna fight about this cuz paul and mj put this behind them so why bring it back up?