I am curious if any company will go to the effort to answer any question posed to them by someone they are doing business with.
If I were them I would point the person to their licensure page which lists a lot of licenses they possess.
Is it unreasonable for me (Joe Celebrity) to assume getting all those licenses means the company comports with a whole slew of regulations and requirements and is running a legitimate business? Am I really expected to conduct my own investigation and expect the company to comply with my investigation?
Note: I am not absolving FTX here. But I think it is a bit much to conduct the kind of due diligence you seem to be suggesting.
Reviving this few-month old thread with some new news of celebs getting in hot water for assisting in selling crypto. Now the SEC is on these folks’ asses.
Taylor Swift managed to avoid signing a $100 million sponsorship deal with FTX because she was reportedly the only celebrity to question the crypto exchange, according to the lawyer handling a class-action lawsuit against several FTX promoters.
The singer – whose father used to work for Merrill Lynch – began discussing the $100 million tour sponsorship with FTX in the fall of 2021, per the Financial Times.
It reported the terms included selling tickets as NFTs, although FTX marketing staff told the newspaper “no one really liked the deal” and they thought it was “too expensive from the beginning.”
“In our discovery, Taylor Swift actually asked them: ‘Can you tell me that these are not unregistered securities?’” Moskowitz added.
She does not get enough credit for her intelligence and her career and business savvy. Her songs aren’t for me, and that’s perfectly fine, but that doesn’t mean I don’t respect her as a professional. This is another big entry in the W column.
She certainly seems on top of keeping her business empire working smoothly. Whether that is her being savvy or she knows to hire good people to advise her and she listens to them I cannot say. Either way she has made smart moves (my favorite is when she was refused trying to buy the rights to her early song catalog back she just went in a studio and re-recorded her early songs which she now has complete rights too…the guy who owns the copyrights to her old catalog now has a mostly worthless asset).
A few years ago I heard that Def Leppard did something similar and I was also impressed - not only by their business acumen but also their dedication. Their aim was to make recordings that sounded exactly like the original recordings, and NPR played a sample of the Def Leppard product and I, indeed, could not tell the difference between it and the original recordings. I’m sure it took a long time with the band fiddling in the studio to get the exact sound down, since I wonder how much digital magic the producers can do to ensure that it sounds like the original before the copyright courts would just go “look, their takes clearly sound nothing like the final product, so you obviously just took a half-assed take and manipulated it until it sounded like the original.”
I don’t understand how that “digital magic” would matter. Modern music is the output of a multi-stage process where the singing, drumming, strumming, etc., is merely stage 1. At each stage the workers, be they musicians or sound board operators or producers, are trying to achieve a particular target sound.
Unless I misunderstood and you’re suggesting they actually took old tapes of unreleased takes that now belong to somebody else, applied modern digital magic to them, and tried to pass them off as new work. That level of skullduggery I could see a court objecting to.
Steve Wilson (of Porcupine Tree) produces a lot of albums, and is known for his remixes of a huge number of older albums - particularly in the prog rock genre from the 70’s. Now these end up being very high quality versions based on the original tracking tapes. But what is interesting is the manner in which he reproduces the sound of the production of those original albums. He has a huge amount of sonic understanding in his head and an uncanny ability to hear a final mix, with all its processing - with vintage processing gear - and know how to reproduce those sounds in a new mixdown. (He claims not to understand the technical questions, but has had so much practice that he knows what virtual knobs to turn to reproduce the sound he hears.)
That is the sort of ability that would allow artists to create brand new recordings that sound exactly like the original (but probably of better technical quality) starting from new recordings.
Where is will fall down is where a range of session players were used on the original tracks. It isn’t uncommon for those session musicians to be of a vastly higher calibre than the bands themselves.That makes it hard to get exactly the same feel in the clone recording.
I defer absolutely to your expertise in this area. But a question if I may. …
What’s the obstacle to the current band hiring current skilled session musicians in the service of producing a current new rendition of the old work in the old style? My vastly limited knowledge of this stuff suggests session musicians were expert mostly at sounding innocuous and interchangeable. Which takes great skill, but seems to offer little obstacle for a different session musician to duplicate / emulate today.
For classical or backing musicians perhaps. In popular music, the top session players may be asked to provide solos and musical improvisation - to a point where they are really adding to the composition. Sometimes they have a very clear style and feel. A really good player will be able to copy them. But it is a wider problem than just wheeling them and putting the music in front of them. Indeed the written music may not exist. The abilities and the pressure cooker environment top level session musician work under is remarkable. Some of the most memorable solos in popular music have been created in minutes by session players who are expected to deliver on the spot. And they rarely get writing credit.
I recall seeing something about Steely Dan being so meticulous about the sound they wanted that they would have different session players for each song on an album and would often try numerous players to find one that had the sound they wanted on each particular song. Apparently Steely Dan was hyper-meticulous about this (and, I am told, a reason why audiophiles use them as a benchmark to test a sound system).
That said, I’d be surprised if any of these session players couldn’t manage to emulate the guitar or drums or bass or keyboards from a Taylor Swift song. I am not knocking Swift’s music (maybe a little) but I do not think her music called for any improvisation. Play what’s on the sheet music.
Yes. I worked with American Greetings several years ago. Taylor had an endorsement deal with them, specifically Papyrus…she actually wrote cards for them for a while. Her father negotiated for her to receive stock in the company as a part of her compensation, as he wanted her to understand the value of equity investments and for her to be a part of the management of her financial portfolio. This was before she was 18.