allkpop

@Futuristic:

The Michael Jackson rebut is not relevant because... well we are discussing an agency that is contractually justified in profiting from DBSK...whereas Berry Gordy's contract with the Jackson 5 and Michael is no longer in existence...It's not so much about whether or not SM deserves all this money from DBSK, but that there is a contract saying they are entitled...

Those boys looks, talent and voices would not have been there though. That's the point I was making. These boys are no longer boys. They are a product of a conglomerate. They were created. They would not have looked the same, sounded the same, or been as talented without SM.

Sure another company could have scooped up these boys, but the odds of them becoming a group like DBSK slim and none. Chances of them having the same success now...no one can say for sure but i'm willing to guess just as slim.

I dunno if you read my other post or not (don't blame you if you didn't), but in order to really know the way SM 's contract (financial aspects) works you'd have to know the budget for DBSK's albums/promotion/tours.
Nobody on here can say anything about SM and the money until that information is made available. SM has more money than all those other companies...they invest more in their artists, especially an act like DBSK.

Futuristic - Nov 02, 2009 11:57pm

In this paragraph, You could replace SM with YG, JYP, Jive, Arista, Def Jam, SonyJapan, AVEX, & so on and still would be accurate. They did nothing that any other label wouldn't have done for with someone they thought could profit them, yet they take 30-40% more than what the others to. What makes them so special or so much more deserving of their artist's money than any other label?

Whether SM 'deserves' that amount of profit is based on personal judgment. What you can not deny and take a difference stance to... is "entitlement".
SM is entitled to "30-40% more than what others".

Do not get the two mixed up and use them interchangeably.

Alan03 - Nov 02, 2009 07:35pm

Rachie_TVXQ - Nov 02, 2009 01:16pm

Firstly dont try to throw back my own line it doesnt make you sound cool ;)

Bitch please. you just got owned from that one line that applies to yourself. Hypocrite.

Childish much? Can you not handle a proper discussion without throwing around cusses? All through this thread you've been calling their fans stupid and whatever but im the one who's trying to look smart? LOL... uh ok then ;D

Alan03 - Nov 02, 2009 07:35pm

I purposely used the term "implied"

Yup i'm very serious :). For someone that just accused me of skipping facts you just pretty much done the same thing. All i was doing was showing that slaves aren't just about money. The word slave can also give the "implied" meaning that the person wears rags and works on a plantation but that doesnt mean it's relevant does it? I gave you a dictionary definition cos it seemed like you weren't really understanding.. thought it would help :)

iluvkyuhyun - Nov 02, 2009 08:44pm

Rachie_TVXQ - Nov 02, 2009 01:33pm

SM didnt make them who they are today.

ok now this is just not right
if SM didn't make them who they are today then who did?
without SM you won't have DBSK
face the facts SM created DBSK so whatever DBSK has SM should get the most of it
SM is the reason that DBSK is as successful as they are

and i have 1 more thing to say
if all 5 members were in the lawsuit or in the controversal then i wouldn't say anything but only 3 are..so there has to be a reason that the other 2 does not agree with the 3 that are against SM

Um... If you want to quote me on something please read everything i said properly. dont pick and choose bits to make it seem stupid...


It is NOT my opinion that SM didn't HELP them get to where they are but can SM just get any 5 boys, train them then suddenly they become stars throughout asia? A lot of it is down to their own work ethos and personality. I know people in both Korea and Japan that have WORKED WITH THEM so i know im justified in my views since they all said the same thing. Right now it seems like everyone it trying to pick sides but NEITHER DBS NOR SM could have done this on their own. It's the combination of the two that works the best.

It seems like a lot of fans are siding with JaeChunSu and then people like you... (are you an anti? or just one of those people that thinks your doing the world justice by calling fans stupid?) that side with SM are both overlooking a lot of important facts and formulating kinda wacky ideas... What they really need is some kind of compromise, both sides are going to have to give a little to make this work.

^ so tiring - explaining to a fangirl like you. blahh, whatever.


we are NOT trying to pick sides. we are just saying that sm helps dbsk to be who they are right now. sure dbsk won't succeed without their sacrifices, talents, hardworks, but without marketing strategies i doubt dbsk will be as big as now. but as you say, the combination of sm & dbsk works the best.

and people who are siding to the trio only are pure shit fans. we don't have a freaking clue which party is telling the truth. yeah, sure you can support the trio, but srsly? these fans don't even consider to analyze sm's statement.

^

I dont get what's soo tiring... Aren't we both agreeing on the same thing then?
The only thing i disagreed with was what the other guy said about this lawsuit only being about money.

You are generalising me with your idea of 'shit fans'. Who says i havent looked at it from SM's point of view aswell?

I think people forget the word "fan" is short for "fanatic" lol it's not their jobs to be rational. HOwever i'm not just a fan of them but i respect them a lot as performers and entertainers which is why i'm trying to look at this from a wider point of view.

I was only speaking about JaeChunSu's side cos that seems to be the bit where a lot was overlooked. I think a lot of their contract is unfair but then i do understand that obviously a lot of their profits will go towards concerts/staff/promo's etc.

Like i said before i dont think the contract needs to be ended but perhaps some parts should be revised. The contract basically says DBSK have to shut up, do what they are told and not complain which in this day and age i dont think it's right. If they are put on a more equal level as SM where they can communicate fairly and share their ideas then where is the problem?


As a fan i am just on the side of DBSK not sm not HoMin not JaeChunSu but all 5 of them together as one. Like you said we cant tell who is telling the truth just by staring at our screens but I just dont like peoples 'lets point the finger of blame' attitude.

If the HoMin statement is true then everyone will really have to start listening to the other sides case with a bit more of an open mind. Clearly there are concerns on each side and things that will take a while to fix but if everyone stubbornly clings to their own view then nothing will get done.

Rachie_TVXQ - Nov 03, 2009 08:17am

Alan03 - Nov 02, 2009 07:35pm

Rachie_TVXQ - Nov 02, 2009 01:16pm

Firstly dont try to throw back my own line it doesnt make you sound cool ;)

Bitch please. you just got owned from that one line that applies to yourself. Hypocrite.

Childish much? Can you not handle a proper discussion without throwing around cusses? All through this thread you've been calling their fans stupid and whatever but im the one who's trying to look smart? LOL... uh ok then ;D

Alan03 - Nov 02, 2009 07:35pm

I purposely used the term "implied"

Yup i'm very serious :). For someone that just accused me of skipping facts you just pretty much done the same thing. All i was doing was showing that slaves aren't just about money. The word slave can also give the "implied" meaning that the person wears rags and works on a plantation but that doesnt mean it's relevant does it? I gave you a dictionary definition cos it seemed like you weren't really understanding.. thought it would help :)

iluvkyuhyun - Nov 02, 2009 08:44pm

Rachie_TVXQ - Nov 02, 2009 01:33pm

SM didnt make them who they are today.

ok now this is just not right
if SM didn't make them who they are today then who did?
without SM you won't have DBSK
face the facts SM created DBSK so whatever DBSK has SM should get the most of it
SM is the reason that DBSK is as successful as they are

and i have 1 more thing to say
if all 5 members were in the lawsuit or in the controversal then i wouldn't say anything but only 3 are..so there has to be a reason that the other 2 does not agree with the 3 that are against SM

Um... If you want to quote me on something please read everything i said properly. dont pick and choose bits to make it seem stupid...


It is NOT my opinion that SM didn't HELP them get to where they are but can SM just get any 5 boys, train them then suddenly they become stars throughout asia? A lot of it is down to their own work ethos and personality. I know people in both Korea and Japan that have WORKED WITH THEM so i know im justified in my views since they all said the same thing. Right now it seems like everyone it trying to pick sides but NEITHER DBS NOR SM could have done this on their own. It's the combination of the two that works the best.

It seems like a lot of fans are siding with JaeChunSu and then people like you... (are you an anti? or just one of those people that thinks your doing the world justice by calling fans stupid?) that side with SM are both overlooking a lot of important facts and formulating kinda wacky ideas... What they really need is some kind of compromise, both sides are going to have to give a little to make this work.

srsly.
you think we like it to call you stupid?
it's not only SME fault
honestly, i'm a big DBSK fan, and SME and cassiopia(wth, how do you spell it?!)
has done alot for dbsk
Jaejoong had said it himself, without that audition , he'd be still halfhomeless and wandering on the streets of seoul.

^
Again, it's not like they were FORCED to sign the contract.

I doubt SME threatened them into signing it. DBSK were the ones who either didn't read it over themselves or didn't have someone reading it over for them. Not a good decision to make when it involves your career.

As for it being about money, if it weren't about money, then the money issue would have never been brought up.

Edit: WHY does everyone get in the way of my posts? WHY?

^ no i highly doubt they were forced
i mean, they can fucking read can they?

YunieUmma - Nov 03, 2009 12:30pm

^ no i highly doubt they were forced
i mean, they can fucking read can they?

I would assume so.

My post actually wasn't directed towards you, but you got in the way. You pulled a Diego on me (seems like everybody is, lately). Uncool XP

theoretically - Nov 03, 2009 12:31pm

YunieUmma - Nov 03, 2009 12:30pm

^ no i highly doubt they were forced
i mean, they can fucking read can they?

I would assume so.

My post actually wasn't directed towards you, but you got in the way. You pulled a Diego on me (seems like everybody is, lately). Uncool XP

yeah i know rofl
i found out like 30 seconds ago
oh well.

KalexiS - Nov 03, 2009 12:18am

@Futuristic:

The Michael Jackson rebut is not relevant because... well we are discussing an agency that is contractually justified in profiting from DBSK...whereas Berry Gordy's contract with the Jackson 5 and Michael is no longer in existence...It's not so much about whether or not SM deserves all this money from DBSK, but that there is a contract saying they are entitled...

people are making the argument that SM is "entitled" to most of DBSK's profits b/c they created them. Motown helped create Michael Jackson. That fact doesn't change just b/c a contract ends. so by that argument, motown should still have some claim in MJ's fortune.

but OK, Beyonce's been signed to Columbia/Sony her entire career. I think she made $87 million last year. How much of that does sony deserve? They did "create" her.

Those boys looks, talent and voices would not have been there though. That's the point I was making. These boys are no longer boys. They are a product of a conglomerate. They were created. They would not have looked the same, sounded the same, or been as talented without SM.

but then we go back to, if it were all about what SM supplied them with, then why aren't all SM artists successes? Regardless how you look at it. there is something special about these guys that make them stand out so prominently. Shit, i can admit that and i'm not even a fan.LOL some peopele are just attracted to certain people. I have a brother like that(TMI?LOL).

Sure another company could have scooped up these boys, but the odds of them becoming a group like DBSK slim and none. Chances of them having the same success now...no one can say for sure but i'm willing to guess just as slim.

But since we don't know for sure, we can't say it wouldn't happen. in bizzarro world, they could be the hottest 15 man dancing ensemble buttf*ck ent. has ever created.LOL

I dunno if you read my other post or not (don't blame you if you didn't), but in order to really know the way SM 's contract (financial aspects) works you'd have to know the budget for DBSK's albums/promotion/tours.
Nobody on here can say anything about SM and the money until that information is made available. SM has more money than all those other companies...they invest more in their artists, especially an act like DBSK.

My biggest issue isn't even about the recording costs(though that percentage is ridiculous). it's a given most artist anywhere don't make a lot from sales, but to take almost 100 percent of everything they do outside of singing too? They have it so that these guys make a decent living.

Alan03 - Nov 03, 2009 01:46am

Futuristic - Nov 02, 2009 11:57pm

In this paragraph, You could replace SM with YG, JYP, Jive, Arista, Def Jam, SonyJapan, AVEX, & so on and still would be accurate. They did nothing that any other label wouldn't have done for with someone they thought could profit them, yet they take 30-40% more than what the others to. What makes them so special or so much more deserving of their artist's money than any other label?

Whether SM 'deserves' that amount of profit is based on personal judgment. What you can not deny and take a difference stance to... is "entitlement".
***SM is entitled to "30-40% more than what others".***

Do not get the two mixed up and use them interchangeably.

Weeell....actually it's not.LOL They have laws in place for the entertainment industry for a reason. There's also a reason why SM always ends up losing every one of these cases brought against them. The fact is, their contracts are unlawful.

Now, the underlined is a matter of personal judgement.LOL I wouldn't agree, but eh....

OK, it didn't underline so i put stars next to it.lol

PS. why am i just figuring out we can curse on this board?!?!? i've been censoring myself for nothing!! :(

@Futuristic

Ok well to lay to rest the Michael Jackson argument... the argument that
SM is entitled for creation is barely relevant, whoever is using that as solid argument is mistaken. SM is entitled because they are entitled...by law...under contract...cut and dry.

American artists are able to have outside management/representation. They have people looking over their contracts, and negotiating for them who are not directly tied to a the particular label. Beyonce would never sign a contract that entitled Columbia/Sony to large chunks of her money. Also, it is a guarantee that Beyonce will release an album and sell millions of copies, therefore her % royalties as a solo artists, songwriter, and producer are huge... When TVXQ goes platinum in America and Britain (or just in general) they too could probably expect a % increase.

SM still groomed DBSK into something people liked. Sure their talent is probably one thing that attracts fans, or it's their personality, or it's their looks, or it's their music/vocals...but all of those things were nurtured by SM. Who knows why not all acts can be famous...fickle consumer, good/bad timing, marketing, there are lots of catalysts. Still no denying that whatever they have, their "it factor" as it's called in the industry, is probably a result of SM.

Again, you can't say whether or not the percentage is ridiculous. None of us have adequate information to decide that. In terms of endorsments, by law, and contract (here's that word again lol) they are entitled to that chunk of money.
You won't find a contract in America, under a major label, after 2007 were the label isn't entitled to pretty large percentage of anything their artist touches. Even if it has nothing to do with the music or the label.

I said this earlier and Alan did as well, this is legal matters. SM isn't "taking", SM is entitled to.

What's up with all the flaming and bashing over this? This Rachie chick you're all calling stupid is ACTUALLY MAKING SOME GOOD POINTS. And most of you can't call her out for being a "following blindly fangirl", because I see some of your posts in threads of your favorite artists. Especially the sunny and SNSD threads.

The three members obvously have some grounds to sue on if the courts are taking so long over this issue and have ruled partly in their favor.

LOLZ I EDITED THIS POST JUST TO ADD ONE LETTER.

^
Dis shiet is getting too srs.

For some reason, I have a desire to completely PWN this thread with macros and SNSD gifs...

...

brb.

SONEDiego - Nov 03, 2009 02:40pm

^
Dis shiet is getting too srs.

For some reason, I have a desire to completely PWN this thread with macros and SNSD gifs...

...

brb.

I don't know what Theo and Craver are smoking. You're awesome.

Bob DaBuilda?! - Nov 03, 2009 02:43pm

SONEDiego - Nov 03, 2009 02:40pm

^
Dis shiet is getting too srs.

For some reason, I have a desire to completely PWN this thread with macros and SNSD gifs...

...

brb.

I don't know what Theo and Craver are smoking. You're awesome.

RLY BOB? :D.

Well...



<3.

Bob DaBuilda?! - Nov 03, 2009 02:43pm

SONEDiego - Nov 03, 2009 02:40pm

^
Dis shiet is getting too srs.

For some reason, I have a desire to completely PWN this thread with macros and SNSD gifs...

...

brb.

I don't know what Theo and Craver are smoking. You're awesome.

My only problem with him is that he interrupts my important conversations and keeps hating on Hyo XP

Stop the hate, Diego. You know you love Hyoyeon.

I just think he's a punk ass cheerleader.

...

THAT ALSO ENCOURAGES THE HYO!HATE AND THEREFORE HE MUST BE DESTROYED?

...

<3.

...

</3!

Really though. Hyo!Love makes the world go 'round. It's been researched and proven.

theoretically - Nov 03, 2009 12:28pm

^
Again, it's not like they were FORCED to sign the contract.

I doubt SME threatened them into signing it. DBSK were the ones who either didn't read it over themselves or didn't have someone reading it over for them. Not a good decision to make when it involves your career.

As for it being about money, if it weren't about money, then the money issue would have never been brought up.

Just because they signed it doesn't mean there is anything wrong with them wanting to change it now. The court has even AGREED that a lot of the contract is unlawful.

Like i said a few times already money is only ONE factor of this case. Not like SM is trying to make it out to be. There are other issues like their rights as performers, contract length etc which they are fighting for.