Who knows, it might end up as content in Al or Bruce's autobiography.

Fans who post here, should not be put continuously on the defensive if they see all of the Beach Boys where ever they play. It is what has led many posters to leave this forum, which is pretty sad.  JMHO        

You're right, they shouldn't. But if a poster gets to see Mike n Bruce wherever they play because travel and concert ticket costs are being covered by someone involved in the group, then maybe it deserves to be brought up.

Seriously, I'm not the hugest Mike Love fan in the world, but if I were offered an opportunity to see their band quite a bit without having to spend hardly any money, I'd jump at that chance too. But I'd also admit it.

What business is it of any of us?

I'm kind of curious how, as a result of Mike not signing the sale agreement, Mike's name could have been taken *off* of the songs he was already credited for. Presumably they were registered already through ASCAP or BMI or whatever, his name had already appeared on record labels, etc.

Is he implying he was told they would illegally take his name off the songs in retribution for souring the deal?

Seems like that would have been a potentially easy case to prove back then if they all of a sudden took his name off of EIGHTY songs *immediately* after he refused to sign a sale agreement.

I guess you'd have to ask those lawyers.

Did this thread merge with another or something, or did I have a stroke?

Yes, I merged it after Marty requested I did.

Doesn't Craig want his credit in the "Started by" box?

What is that supposed to mean?!

He started one of the combined threads but he doesn't get credit for it.

He's not the only mod here. We both work together.

I don't understand.  What does that have to do with getting co-credit for a combined thread?

Who cares about getting credit for a thread?

Not Craig I guess.

If I remember right this was after Mike was promised a settlement to help Brian wins his case against Almo, which he never recieved, and after offering to settle for $750,000, which was declined.

I heard the latter, but not the former. What was the source?

LA Times, as I remember.

http://articles.latimes.com/1994-12-13/business/fi-8511_1_beach-boys-lead-singer

Did this thread merge with another or something, or did I have a stroke?

Yes, I merged it after Marty requested I did.

Doesn't Craig want his credit in the "Started by" box?

What is that supposed to mean?!

He started one of the combined threads but he doesn't get credit for it.

He's not the only mod here. We both work together.

I don't understand.  What does that have to do with getting co-credit for a combined thread?

Did this thread merge with another or something, or did I have a stroke?

Yes, I merged it after Marty requested I did.

Doesn't Craig want his credit in the "Started by" box?

What is that supposed to mean?!

He started one of the combined threads but he doesn't get credit for it.

If Mike wasn't interested in the money, why did he propose Brian give him $5M and they would call it even? Why didn't Mike just ask Brian to give him written credit for the songs(or a certain amount of songs they both agreed upon)?

If I remember right this was after Mike was promised a settlement to help Brian win his case against Almo, which he never recieved, and after that offering to settle for $750,000, which was declined.

At least that's what I think I wrote for Mike's autobiography.  

Did this thread merge with another or something, or did I have a stroke?

Yes, I merged it after Marty requested I did.

Doesn't Craig want his credit in the "Started by" box?

Did this thread merge with another or something, or did I have a stroke?

[For the deal to go through, the agreement had to be signed by Brian, Dennis, Carl, Al, and me. I complained to the lawyers that songs like California Girls, I Get Around and Surfin’ USA, while co-written by me, had never been credited. If I signed, I’d lose the chance to claim them. But if I didn’t, he said, I might lose credit for Good Vibrations, Surfin’ Safari and The Warmth Of The Sun, which did bear my name.What could I do? I had to sign the agreement to retain what I had. Everyone else signed too, and we lost all we had created.]

No spoilers, just a reference to a passage being discussed and challenged in another active thread.

David Anderle's son Jonathan posted a comment and rebuttal to a section of the book that appeared to link David Anderle to the "scam" of selling Sea Of Tunes to Irving/Almo/A&M, and mentioned how David ended up being enriched by the scam.

So that passage in the book does indeed make a very clear connection and charge against David Anderle, and what Jonathan Anderle reacted so strongly to is in fact pretty easy to pick out in that chapter.

But also in that chapter is what could be seen as the NY Times' reviewers notion of cherry picking the facts. This in regards to the 1969 Sea Of Tunes sale. Taking only what is in that chapter, its specific paragraphs relative to what's written about the sale itself, and David Anderle's association with A&M:

The book specifically says that on July 21 (1969), "Murry and Brian" signed the papers to liquidate Sea Of Tunes, and by August 20, it was liquidated.

Someone unfamiliar may read that passage alone and think Murry and Brian were the only ones who signed.

For one, Mike himself signed papers regarding that sale of SOT. He testified to it in Superior Court in October 1994, as reported by the LA Times:

Metropolitan Digest / LOS ANGELES COUNTY NEWS IN BRIEF
LOS ANGELES : Beach Boys' Singer Testifies in Suit Against Brian Wilson
October 29, 1994

Beach Boys lead singer Mike Love testified Friday that he was told he would not get proper credit for the songs he co-wrote if he failed to sign a 1969 agreement to sell the group's 140-song catalogue.

"I signed it under duress, " Love testified in Los Angeles Superior Court. Both the group's manager and its attorney, Abraham Somer, told him to sign the agreement, Love said at the end of the fourth week of testimony in his suit.

The controversy began with the sale of the band's songs, known as Sea of Tunes, to Irving Music, a division of A & M Records. The late Murry Wilson, father of co-founder Brian Wilson and owner of the publishing rights, got $700,000 for the songs. The sale was negated in a 1992 settlement that netted Brian Wilson $10 million. Love, 53, sued his cousin, Brian Wilson, to obtain a share of royalties he claims he is owed for songs including "California Girls," "Dance, Dance, Dance" and "Help Me Rhonda."


The testimony in 1994 was that Mike also signed paperwork agreeing to the sale, but that he signed "under duress". So it wasn't a case of "Murry and Brian" alone signing those papers, because Mike signed them too, whether under duress or not.

That makes the definitive statement in that section of the book not entirely accurate. If the statement is made in the context it was in that chapter about the sale in 1969, it should have been noted too that Mike signed under duress, but that he too signed an agreement. If you leave that chapter, you get the impression Murry and Brian signed it. That isn't entirely accurate, if the October 1994 testimony is factored in.

Beyond that, prior to October 1994, Mike had already received over a million dollar settlement from Irving/Almo over the nature of the sale, and how it was found to be deceptive, negligent, etc etc.

And even more striking is that the reason why Mike was in court in October 1994 hinged on the court decision made in Brian's favor that declared the original sale was invalid, and that Brian was owed back royalties and compensation for the money lost due to what Brian's legal team had proven to the court was a sale that was deceptive, fraudulent, and in some cases had accusations of signatures being forged, papers being given to Brian to sign without full knowledge of what was being signed, and a partnership contract between Brian and Murry that wasn't valid under California contract law when it was agreed by both parties because Brian was underage at the time of the agreement.

So is it "cherry picking" to not say in the chapter where it was written that "Murry and Brian" signed the papers to unload Sea Of Tunes that Mike also signed papers agreeing to the sale, that he later testified he signed but signed under duress, and that the entire sale was found by a court to have been deceptive and fraudulent enough for that court to award Brian back royalties and payments for the income lost due to that sale?

That's one issue that also stood out, made even more glaring by what Jonathan Anderle wrote a few days ago. There could have been more info given related to the details of that sale, if it was a topic in that particular chapter, so people reading would have all the facts and not just a statement that "Murry and Brian" signed away Sea Of Tunes in summer 1969.

Isn't this in the book, Daily Mail quoted it as from the book I thought:

"And in 1969, we learned that our entire catalogue of songs – 140 to 150 of them, including about 80 I had co-written, though I had received credit on only a fraction of them – was to be sold. A&M agreed to pay $700,000 for the entire catalogue. And the payment was going, not to the band, but to Uncle Murry. In cash.
I drove to Brian’s house in Bel Air to see if he knew what was going on. At the time, Brian was not in good shape. He was using cocaine and living in the chauffeur’s quarters of his home while his wife Marilyn slept in the bedroom.
I reached his house, stormed into his room and asked what happened with our songs.
‘My dad f***ed us,’ he said.
‘Yeah, no s***.’
For the deal to go through, the agreement had to be signed by Brian, Dennis, Carl, Al, and me. I complained to the lawyers that songs like California Girls, I Get Around and Surfin’ USA, while co-written by me, had never been credited. If I signed, I’d lose the chance to claim them. But if I didn’t, he said, I might lose credit for Good Vibrations, Surfin’ Safari and The Warmth Of The Sun, which did bear my name.
What could I do? I had to sign the agreement to retain what I had. Everyone else signed too, and we lost all we had created.
It wasn’t until 1994, as I faced Brian in a courtroom, that jurors ruled that I deserved credit on 35 Beach Boys songs that had been solely credited to Brian for decades, leaving him facing potential damages of between $58m and $342m.
I had no interest in crushing my cousin, and it wasn’t about the money anyway. It was about getting credit for my songs. I proposed that he give me $5m and we move on. Brian agreed."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/event/article-3761744/One-Charles-Manson-s-murderers-gang-babysat-two-children-says-Beach-Boys-star-Mike-Love.html

That's all the context it gave.

Could you go ahead and post the claim about David Anderle with its context?  Feel free to post anything of mine you suspect.   Thanks.

Well Filleplage and cam only post here anymore when there is a Mike controversial statement or topic to derail the thread.

That is hilarious. We could plug in your handle and it would be true of you.

Will you be filing suit against your leader if indeed he has used your words without your consent? Or would you just consider it an honor?

I'll have to see some/any evidence first, but IF it were true I'd be honored; just as i would be honored if it were Brian, Al, Bruce, David "quoting" me.

Well Filleplage and cam only post here anymore when there is a Mike controversial statement or topic to derail the thread.

That is hilarious. We could plug in your handle and it would be true of you.

My observations were how some of the passages reminded me of things I have seen posted on this board, and in Cam's case, points and debates going back to the Smile Shop, "Sunshine Pop", and even forums prior to those.

So far I have accused no one of plagarism, or anything of the sort.

The Smile chapter was something of a letdown, because I was hoping to read some new firsthand insights from Mike regarding Smile that we've not heard before especially related to personal interactions during this period, but instead a lot of the chapter was Mike voicing what felt like his opinions and defenses of various issues or incidents. So to my eyes it read as if I had already read very similar "opinions" over a decade or more of reading Cam Mott's posts. From the drugs to the apparent degradation of having the band lie on the floor to cut vocals and make animal noises, to the notion that the Beach Boys were doing the heavy lifting on the road spreading the gospel while Brian stayed home in LA acting silly, it has all been offered previously. And in a few specific cases, it really did feel like I've read the same defenses offered by Cam Mott, and others.

Then this is solved because, besides Mike actually living it, all of my information in those regards came from publicly available sources, which I suppose a co-author would also find.  Usually my sources are cited so feel free to post them so we can see the sources.  I haven't read the book so I can't comment on it but if these suspect bits were to be posted it wouldn't be a spoiler because it has already happened.

Anything else?

Well, here we go.  (popcorn ready)

Craig (and Billie?), I'm not clear on what is going on here. Are you accusing me of something?

Do you mean someone has had it right along or someone is a spy?

So you meant that while death threats are never justifiable, you are curious if Mike might have any perspective that might justify why fans might have been that upset to justify death threats.

I wonder why anyone would give any consideration to any of the thoughts of anyone who would threaten death over anything, let alone Pop concerts.

Death threats are never justifiable but how would he justify fans threatening his death?

I think I told you I had tracked down the then-current owner (in January 1999) and talked to her on the phone (I forget her name).  I think I was asking to get a photo of the view from the windows but she said something about changes to the house and landscaping and remodeling and brought up that they had saved a chunk of inscribed concrete from around the pool.  I couldn't do anything about and I think I suggested she might contact the RRHOF or BRI but didn't really have any good ideas. I had a feeling at the time it was probably going to be hauled off to the dump and I was glad to hear it wasn't.  Not happy about your back though.

Worth a retelling of the story of its acquisition?

Brace for impact!

Haven't read the book.

Maybe these are the Summer Favorites by the Beach Boys of the GenXer(s) who put the CD together for PBS?

Just on face value the CD is called "The Beach Boys: Summer Favorites".  What says it is anything other than that? The Beach Boys' "Summer favorites" selected by Mike, Brian, and Al (maybe Bruce and David?).

The interview as-is is good; without all the usual spin, second guessing, words being put in mouth, holding accountable to other's words, knee jerking, false comparisons, and presumption that fans know Mike's experience better than he does, that is.

Would you not say in this article that Mike is presuming to know Brian's experience better than Brian does?

I would not, I wouldn't presume to know what Mike knows of Brian's experience. Do you know?