"Madonna Flagrantly Plagiarizes Song and Web Site"
The "Material Girl" or The Material Thief!
December 27th, 2004
Section One: Overview
UPDATES: 2/19/05 @5:06Pm - British band BBMak accused Madonna and her director husband of plagiarizing their video. See #19 in section 3. 1/21/05 @12:21 PM See #18 of Section Two regarding the new Versace Ads and their origin. Please also see #18 in Section Three featuring a lawsuit that alleged Madonna stole the idea for the music video "Ray Of Light" from a director who submitted it to her. 1/3/05 @5:55 PM I've updated this article with the song she ripped off to write "Vogue." The track is called "Deep In Vogue" by Malcolm McLaren, which was released a year before her rip off. Both songs have similar lyrics, melodies and a similar sounding beat. Please see section three, item #3 for more details.
"I NO LONGER HAVE TIME TO BE CREATIVE," whined the Queen of Pap, Madonna, in a recent People Magazine interview. Boy is that the understatement of the century. But they were fitting words uttered by a woman who has been accused of and sued for plagiarizing many people's work. I guess plagiarism is very tiring. My question is, was she ever creative? There is a mountain of evidence that speaks to the contrary.
Is she the "Material Girl" or the material thief, as in stealing other singers' material.
Over the last year and a half, Madonna has engaged in a willful pattern of plagiarism and copyright infringement by flagrantly stealing music, lyrics, catch phrases and ideas unique to my music and web site, then passed them off as her own, for her ill advised, poorly received "American Life" album and other projects. My web site has been online since 2001, with over 4 million hits and during that time she has been a frequent visitor…and plagiarizer.
She's had a 20-year career, yet had no qualms about ripping off someone else’s debut in a vain attempt to sustain a perverse career that was built on debauchery and filth. To try to take someone else’s debut after you’ve had a 20-year career is the height of selfishness. She has no conscience and is completely incorrigible.
Throughout her career Madonna has exhibited a total disregard for copyright law and the intellectual property rights of others, evidenced by the sheer number of times she’s been sued for and or accused of plagiarism and copyright infringement - more than any other artist on record, pardon the pun (see detailed listings below). She has made a complete mockery of copyright law.
What is the sense of indie artists such as myself authoring work and copyrighting it only for major label degenerates like Madonna to rip it off and in such a lascivious, lazy, sloppy manner. Artists like her devalue copyrights and undermine what the government tried to set up to protect people's work.
The offensiveness of my work being stolen is compounded by the fact that she cannot sing and sounds like one of the Chipmunks on crack (for further reference, see Chipmunk-like vocal work on songs like, "Like A Virgin" - have you actually listened to the singing on that song). There was a movie about her that alleged she slept with an industry DJ in order for him to help her get a record deal. Listening to her voice, I'm inclined to believe that story.
She willfully and intentionally stole substantial amounts of my work that took years to author, showing complete indifference to my rights as a copyright holder.
My father is a respected DJ and musicologist, who has been in the industry for over 40 years. He has a vast knowledge of music, as do I. He has done many interviews in different countries with organizations like the Associated Press and the BBC. He’s also helped to decide legal cases and other industry disputes based on his years of experience and expertise.
In all that he has taught me about music and the industry since I was a child, having been raised in that atmosphere, I can safely say without fear of contradiction, this is by far the most flagrant and perverse case of copyright infringement in music. There is no case on record like it. Sometimes when I think about what she has been doing, I shake my head in disbelief that someone could be so self-serving and repugnant.
Her actions have greatly upset me and my family, who’ve watched me develop this project and others for years. I've worked 12-18 hour days, six days a week, for years completing these projects. Therefore, she has been stealing my life's work.
She has made millions off pornographic music and can afford to hire people to do various projects for her, but has opted to unethically and lasciviously steal from an indie musician who works, on average, 80 hours a week.
I was minding my own business, doing my work, when she decided to steal it and at such a disgraceful rate it would make the most unscrupulous thief blush.
She’s tried to steal everything that wasn’t nailed down.
In stealing from my web site in the gross manner she has, it has interfered with my work, because the minute an idea or song goes on my site, that parasite either steals portions of the music and lyrics or says and does the same thing/idea I wrote about doing, thereby ripping off the music and ideas.
Her disgraceful, self-serving, overly ambitious, corrupt conduct is only surpassed by her profound lack of talent and the lengths to which she will go to convince people otherwise, even if it means stealing other people’s work. She is not a writer. She is not a musician. She is not even a singer. She is a porn star.
Her behavior exemplifies everything that is wrong with the entertainment industry - vile ambition and theft combined with lack of talent and an absence of decency.
There is a difference between controversial and characterless...unique and unethical, and she falls into the latter in each category.
I am not the first person she has blatantly stolen from. In researching other cases of copyright infringement concerning her, I discovered she's had a career long history of stealing other people’s music and ideas.
As I mentioned above, she has been sued several times for plagiarism/copyright infringement, twice in the last 18 months alone. There are over a dozen credible allegations of plagiarism, copyright infringement and lawsuits against her in this regard. It is clear it is a habit she’s had since the inception of her substance-less career.
Being raised in the industry, I know that people sometimes make up stories about celebrities for financial gain, but there are a lot of people out there accusing her of plagiarism and credibly so. These people also had work that was copyrighted prior to her ripping it off.
I’ve experienced this firsthand regarding her, so I’m inclined to believe them, as everybody seems to be telling the same story, both famous and non-famous, of her illegally using their work or taking credit for their work and ideas. However, what she relies on is people not suing because it generally takes an estimated $250,000 - $750,000 to try these cases. She obviously feels there is a safety net in hiding behind a big corporation like Warner Bros, the label she records for, which many attorneys are apprehensive about suing due to their vast financial and legal resources.
In seeking legal representation, the first attorney I contacted, unbeknownst to me, had represented Warner Bros. Records, therefore it made him ineligible to be my attorney, as there would be a conflict of interest (there aren't many copyright lawyers in Miami equipped to handle a case like this). He told me he wanted to check something and would call me back. He called me back, which showed up on my caller ID, the next day after I posted something on this web site regarding the plagiarism that was taking place (but without naming Madonna, only alluding to what was happening). During the conversation, he dropped not so subtle hints at the legal action they would take if I went public with it, naming Madonna and or tried to sue for her stealing my work.
He had the gall to tell me they would put an injunction on my album when I release it, a record that was copyrighted years before her work was ever written, recorded or copyrighted, in an attempt to try to scare me out of suing. The sheer arrogance of it all was astounding.
By the way, the only thing I'm scared of is her singing.
I told him to my knowledge no judge would grant such an injunction on an album that was written and copyrighted years before the plagiarizer's version. It stands to reason that such an injunction would make no sense and be a liability. He told me not to be "cocky" as Warner is a big company with connections (Never mind I'm thinking, if their connections are so great, why do they keep losing these plagiarism suits filed against her). I told him I had more faith in the legal system than that.
He then asked if I had money to sue her (considering there was a conflict of interest, this question was totally out of place and came across as someone fishing for information to see where his employer stood). I told him I could sell my house (a little sooner than I planned) to pay for the lawsuit. And that was basically the conversation.
You may wonder why I'm writing about all of this. Well, two reasons.
1. I think she's an absolute scumbag for continually stealing my work.
2. I am trying to prevent my latest work from being ripped off again and in writing about it and finally naming her publicly as the main person plagiarizing my music and web site, people will be watching her behavior. Therefore, it's to call her dubious credentials and lack of character into question, as she seems to care more about the public thinking she is some songwriting talent, when so many facts and lawsuits say otherwise. That's why she rips off other people's songs isn't it (myself, Ingrid Chavez and others). To have people believe she is some Diane Warren in a pointy bra.
Regardless, I question the sanity and stability of a woman who wore her underwear on the outside of her garments.
Also, I am of the belief that when a singer's intelligence level and speech does not match their lyrics, they are not doing the job as they claim. As I've written on this web site before, you can't speak like Barney, yet write like Shakespeare.
Section Two: Music,
Articles and Ideas Madonna Stole from this web site
The first thing she plagiarized was my debut single titled “Contemporary Girl,” for use in her song “American Life.” You know, the song with the video where she throws a grenade at the President, but ironically the video ended up blowing up in her face when people panned it.
It takes a real degenerate to make a video during a war that features her dancing, prancing and posing in fatigues – fatigues that soldiers wear while defending her and everyone else’s freedoms and way of life in this country. And she wondered why people called it a publicity stunt. It was totally reprehensible and inappropriate.
“American Life” is a terrible song. She was completely out of her league in trying to do all that in one song, as she is vocally untalented. Not only can she not sing, she can’t rap either. She is even worse at rapping than she is at singing. Her rapping on the song was cringingly awful. Not to mention, rap has been around for over 20 years and so has Madonna, yet now all of a sudden she is trying to sing and rap, as I did on my single that’s been on the internet for over 3 years – and she managed to unethically use some of my music and lyrics in the process as well.
She had never performed anything like that before, which many critics commented on. It was such a drastic departure from what she is known for, and a horribly executed one as well, that she was bashed by critics and audiences for it.
An artist in her genre and age group rapping was so rare that one reviewer in the Miami Herald wrote, “Someone please draft legislation to keep middle-aged, mega-star white women from rapping." Yes, it was that horrid and not because she is white, but because she has no musical talent.
Trying to rap because someone else did, in itself is not illegal, but when you start stealing people’s lyrics and music, it is.
“Contemporary Girl,” and “American Life” have mutual lyrics, melodies, grooves, the exact same structure and are about the exact same thing. Only I wrote and copyrighted mine years prior to her version being written and copyrighted.
"Contemporary Girl" was written in 1998 and copyrighted in February 2001, with the copyright registration date bearing April 16th, 2001 (The package was mailed to the copyright office certified mail in February). Her rip off “American Life” was written and copyrighted in 2003, two years after I copyrighted my song she infringed and over five years after I wrote it. It also stemmed from a song I wrote at age fifteen.
My web site is continuously updated with each addition being copyrighted. I own many copyrights, several of which she has willfully violated. In addition, weekly and bi-weekly time stamped compact discs are burned to indelibly record all site changes and internet postings on the Diary and Sound Off pages, which are the most frequently updated. I can completely prove that I authored the work and authored it first.
My web site went online in 2001 and contained my bio, site interviews, "Contemporary Girl," "Contemporary Girl (Rap Remix)", info page and other items. All of this can be proven via hosting records, hosting receipts, photo web site snapshots bearing dates, burned CDs with time stamps showing updates, web site authoring software showing all changes as the site progressed, people linking to the site and saved internet search engine listings and caches from companies like Google and Yahoo.
The site became very popular and during that time Madonna willfully and continually stole items from the site. Friends and web site patrons who noticed similarities in her work to mine first alerted me to the problem, but I shrugged it off, as I couldn’t believe she would be wretched enough to steal someone’s debut. It wasn't until other similarities started popping up shortly after that I realized what was happening.
From reading her lyrics to the song "American Life," it is obvious she did what other copyright infringers have done. She went over the song ("Contemporary Girl") and tried to rewrite it, taking away portions, but changing what she assumed would be enough to not get caught, while retaining the concept and some of the lyrics of the song, thereby keeping the basic idea and theme intact. Many copyright infringement cases bear this pattern.
1. Both songs contain similar lyrics. In each chorus, my song "Contemporary Girl" contains the lines "Modern Society" at the beginning of the refrain. In her rip off version "American Life" the lyrics contain the words "Modern Life" in the beginning of the refrain. The phrase “Modern Society” can be used interchangeably with the term she put in "American Life," “Modern Life” as both phrases can be used to mean the same thing.
In "Contemporary Girl" the lyric in each chorus goes: “In a modern society, that gave you the right to be in control.”
In American Life the lyric in each chorus goes “This type of modern life - Is it for me?”
2. During the rap on "Contemporary Girl," I rap about the things contemporary women have. During the rap on "American Life," she rapped about the things she has. Both songs list similar things, in the same manner and both raps contain a “jet” as one of the items owned.
In "Contemporary Girl" the lyric goes: “a private jet for you to fly out.”
In "American Life" the lyric goes: “Three nannies, an assistant and a driver and a jet”
3. In "Contemporary Girl" the lyric goes" “You can’t be the man, when you’re a girl.”
In "American Life" the lyric goes: “I tried to be a boy. I tried to be a girl”
It's the same pun about feminists, but once again, she stole the lyric and rewrote it in such as way as to supposedly not get caught.
4. In "Contemporary Girl" the lyric goes: “No matter what your friends say”
In "American Life" the lyric goes: “I tried to find a friend”
5. In "Contemporary Girl," I write about eating in the rap, the lyric goes “business brunch, the power lunch.”
In "American Life" she writes about eating in the rap, the lyric is “I'm drinking a Soy latte. I get a double shot”
6. As I wrote above, in "Contemporary Girl," I list all the things contemporary women have during the rap section:
In "American Life" she raps about all the things she has during the rap section:
I got a
lawyer and a manager
7. In "Contemporary Girl" I make references to God, as I am a Christian. I’ve written about Christianity on my web site many times. In the song "American Life" she makes references to Christianity and Judaism, and is now busy writing and speaking about the Kabballah religious cult she belongs to. She hadn’t written about or spoken of it before, as she has now. All of a sudden she is pushing religion via a cult, which is absolutely appalling. Even worse, she’s been accused of trying to teach her religious cult’s beliefs to kids via her poorly written children’s books.
8. Both songs have very similar melodies and grooves/beats. Listen to the electronic groove/beat in "American Life" and you will see they got it from my track "Contemporary Girl," as it’s the same melodic pattern and rhythm as my beat with the accent on the last note of the musical phrase. Madonna, Mirwais and Missy Elliot did the song, which took my drum beat and made it into a synth pattern that runs throughout the song "American Life."
Now listen to both beats together in the proceeding clip and you will see they match. They have the same amount of beats in the musical refrain/melody and follow the same rhythmic pattern. They stole my drum beat and made it into a synthesizer pattern/techno beat.
"Contemporary Girl" and "American Life" combined: click here to hear both beats combined
As the combined songs show, both have the same rhythm, breaks, time and melodic pattern, only my drumbeat was made into a synth sample - which is why when played together both the "Contemporary Girl" drum beat and "American Life" synth are in complete sync. It's the musical equivalent of a tenor and soprano singing the same line at the same time - different ranges, but they are singing the same thing.
Another test, for all you home studio producers, if you run the "Contemporary Girl" beat listed above through efx processors, synth simulators or certain vocoders, you will come up with the "American Life" techno synth that's heard in her rip off.
When you put the beat for "Contemporary Girl" and "American Life" in a music recording program, as I did to render the comparative mix listed above, the wave files even look the same to the point that you think it's the same song or a copy and paste (in the recording software).
In more universal terms, that's like a sample fingerprint found at a crime scene and a fingerprint on file in a police database matching when you run it through the computer.
I have since changed the beat for the new version of "Contemporary Girl," but will retain the original beat for something else.
9. I noticed other similarities when I started reading items in publications about her releasing a single called "American Life" with a "rap remix," as one journalist wrote when they were trying to garner buzz for her then forthcoming release. I was the first female artist that had performed an album version and a rap remix version of the same track on the same single. Therefore, reading that about her new song sent up a red flag immediately.
10. Both songs have the exact same structure, which is a very uncommon one. I decided to experiment with the structure when I wrote the song. It was my debut and I wanted to do something different. It is not a common song structure in pop or R&B, especially when performed by the same artist. Another giveaway that she stole the song. The song structure is verse, chorus, verse, chorus, rap, chorus. She duplicated the song structure as I wrote it.
11. Both songs used the same type of studio vocal processing to give it a futuristic sound (a mild vocoding type effect) - only she used it throughout the song, combined with Autotune, which I don't use, that her producer and fellow plagiarizer Mirwais, applied very generously to her vocals.
12. Both songs are about the exact same thing – modern life in America for women and all the conveniences we have and realizing without love it doesn’t mean as much. Read the lyrics to both songs and you will see that.
Therefore, in the face of all these overwhelming similarities also known as rip offs, would the 3 M's - Madonna, Mirwais and Missy care to explain how all of this happened. I mean, what an extraordinary coincidence - 12 blatant similarities that rip off everything from lyrics to beats to songs structure to song topic/theme to melodies. I mean, how do you explain that (that's a rhetorical question, because you can't).
Madonna: Stop stealing people's work, you half-wit hack wannabe.
Mirwais: Why does all your music sound like it's been electrocuted? How do you manage to take a soulful beat, run it through a studio processor and turn it into that electronic crud. You are a rhythmically and idea challenged lackey.
Missy: I never took to your music due to the lyrical content, but you claim you are a Christian, so I gave you the respect that was due to your statements. However, you claim you are a Christian, yet you help them rip off my song. The other two one would expect to behave like degenerates due to their past dealings, but for someone who says she is a Christian, that's pretty disgraceful. Then again, you've been compromising your values for a long time, as anyone who would rap about public hairs and make an accompanying video vulgarly showing the camera public hair in her hands, has pretty much thrown morals out the window. One day, I hope you remember God and what He truly stands for, because what you are doing falls far below it.
Items Madonna Quoted From This Web Site And Attributed To Herself:
The law requires that you prove access in copyright infringement cases. Access is how the infringer got a hold of your work to steal it.
The mere fact that she kept quoting items from this web site (listed below) and attributing them to herself in interviews proves access. She cannot deny that she was a frequent visitor to the web site, as she quoted so many things from this site in very public interviews, all after I wrote and copyrighted them. Not just common items either. She quoted original items and catch phrases that I'd authored for my articles on the Sound Off page and things I’d written on the Diary and Interview pages as well.
She probably assumed I got them from somewhere else so it was safe to say them in her interviews as though it was coming from her, when it truly was not, as they were original items I penned that is only on this web site...and, now ironically, in her interviews as well. How do you explain that, Madonna?
The likelihood of two people saying the exact same things over and over again is very remote…especially when one had the copyrights prior to the other one falsely attributing the items to herself each time, which was another giveaway that she had been plagiarizing the site. It started happening like clockwork. I’d write something and publish it to the web site, then shortly after like clockwork, she’d attribute it to herself in interviews, which I found very pathetic. She practically turned me into a speechwriter, but without my consent.
I have a timeline of her articles and interviews that I’ve put together of each time I wrote things on this web site and when she repeated what I wrote or announced AFTER in press releases and interviews that she’s doing the same thing that I wrote about doing.
While doing the same things as someone else is technically not copyright infringement, though it is stealing ideas which is illegal - it is creepy. It becomes willful copyright infringement when you start taking from copyrighted materials like she did, which proves access and inextricably links her to this web site.
I found many articles on the internet, in newspapers, magazines and on television where she would quote items from my site and attribute it to herself. As the months went by it got increasingly worse and more brazen as the following timeline will show. She did this on many occasions, not realizing what it meant. Here are several examples:
1. I wrote in my web site Diary and in my bio (copyright 2001) that I play the guitar, have since I was 15 years old (I got my first guitar right before my 16th birthday as a gift from my dad, for which I still have the receipt).
In 2003 Madonna puts out a press release saying she’s learning to play the guitar. Also see 2003 David Letterman appearance where she spoke about not being very good at the guitar, as she is just learning to play it.
2. I wrote on my web site’s Diary page on March 5, 2002 and December 5th, 2002 that I’ve been writing a book.
March 5, 2002
Even though I've had the studio for about a year now, I still haven't gotten used to the convenience of being able to do that. It really is something that I'm very grateful for. I've also been writing a book that's turning out really well.
December 5, 2003
This week I spent a few hours working on my book again. I started writing it last June, but I've only written in it 4 times. So far I have 100 pages and it should be about 400 pages when it's completed. It's something I work on when I have extra time or feel inspired to write it. Since I started writing it last year, I've spent about 10 hours on it so far. I'm not in a rush to finish it because God willing, I want to release it after a few other projects. I want the book to help people...
I'm also going to include the diary and sound off sections of this web site in the book. Though it has been view by thousands of people who visit this site (thank you for visiting, I really appreciate it) I feel the diary and sound off sections that I have written so far on this site should be reprinted and published as a small part of the book.
A year after I first wrote about writing a book, on March 6, 2003, Madonna does an interview and puts out a press release saying that she’s writing a book, which you now know as The English Roses (and the other Kaballah teaching ones in the series).
She has made a mockery of children's' books and is trying to teach children her cultist version of the Kaballah, which is essentially mind control, through these questionable books. Thankfully, it is mostly her fans buying these books as souvenirs, and not children actually reading them, based on an article I read.
I come from a family of authors. It is something I grew up with. I’ve been writing poetry, music and stories since I was four, as I was raised in that environment. Both my aunts are in the literary field (Lorna Goodison, an international award winning poet and author of over 10 books. Her work was recently included in a compilation of works by a handful of poets, which included Maya Angelou. Barbra Gloudon, an award winning playwright and journalist. One of my cousins also writes for a respected newspaper and the other is an associate producer for a weekly, major network investigative news program.
3. In my bio (copyright 2001) I wrote that I write screenplays and have since I was 15. I also wrote about working on different screenplays at various times on the Diary page (diary entries starting in 2002 were about different ones I was working on at the time).
Several months after I wrote that on this site, on September 21, 2003, Madonna announced in an interview with SFGate.com (San Francisco Chronicle) that she is working on a screenplay. Yea, sure she is. I know what her idea of writing is. Someone else writes 95% of the work, she changes a line, then takes credit for it, which she has been sued for before and lost. This is written about further in this article.
4. I wrote on the Diary page of my web site on several occasions beginning on June 8, 2002 that I do not work on the Sabbath, as I am a Christian.
June 8, 2002
It's been a great week. I spent most of today in the studio recording, starting in the afternoon until before the Sabbath starts at midnight.
July 31, 2002
I write songs everyday except for on the Sabbath when I don't work.
October 5, 2002
I'm going to work a bit more then stop before the Sabbath begins.
November 8, 2002
I write songs everyday except the on the Sabbath.
On September 25th, 2004 Madonna who was not, and in my opinion still is not religious, announced she is no longer working on the Sabbath, therefore she won't play shows on the Sabbath during her Reinvention Tour.
5. In my online bio, which was written in 2001, I wrote that I love Jewish culture and incorporate it into my work often.
In 2003 for her next album, "American Life," which contained the copyright infringing song, she started talking about Jewish culture and how she incorporates it into her work, leading to this Kaballah trend that she is currently promoting, and much to the detriment of Judaism. She has profaned it with her nonsense and gimmicks.
She hadn’t included it and so boldly in her music before, even though she later claimed she has studied it for years (her debauched behavior certainly doesn’t show it, which makes her a very poor representative).
6. I wrote on the interview page of my web site that “I don’t listen to my music at home.” Months later on April 12th, 2003, she does an interview on a UK show saying she doesn’t "listen to her music at home.”
7. I wrote an article on celebrity for the Sound Off page of this web site on January 7, 2002, in which I penned the original term, “Why do people like to see people fall” as a type of catch phrase. A year later on March of 2003, in promoting her then new single “American Life”, she said on Access Hollywood with Nancy O’Dell, “Why do people like to see people fall.” I had already copyrighted the article, as I do with all of the contents of this web site, prior to her repeating it word for word and attributing it to herself. Once again, that was more proof and another giveaway that she was reading the site and frequently.
8. Another item related to this, which I would chalk up to a coincidence, if it had not been for her odd, mimicking behavior, is that it was written that she believes in astrological signs. A June 2004 UK newspaper article discussed how she only hires people with compatible astrological signs and birthdays, as she (wrongfully) believes it will bring her good luck. Her back up dancer (Reshma Gajjar) was quoted to support this information. She picks specific dates that she wrongfully feels is lucky.
Her third children’s book “Yacov and The Seven Thieves” was released on her birthday in Russia, according to press headlines/articles. The release date for her follow up, “The Adventures of Abdi” was slated for my birthday on November 8, 2004th. I have written self-deprecating, humorous birthday stories and commentary on the Diary page to commemorate my birthday, so the date was hard to miss (see birthday commentary here). It is also on the information page of my web site. Therefore, of all the dates for her to pick.
However, oddly enough, when I sent the case to a lawyer for review, listing many of the items I have in this article, which outlined the similarities, within a couple weeks, the release date was mysteriously changed to November 4th, 2004, from my birthday of November 8th, 2004. Moreover, most books are released on Mondays, not Fridays, as they ended up doing.
One lawyer even warned me that "they may try to change things" to hide what happened - which is exactly what did happen. I told the attorney I had physical copies of the articles and interviews where she attributed my work to herself and product release dates, therefore going back and changing things online and elsewhere would be in vain and look very suspicious, only amplifying what she did.
I have several articles that I have saved that said the release date was November 8th, 2004. Google and other search engines show the same, which I have also saved. These items aren’t quickly purged from their computer systems.
As for the title, her unimaginative mind couldn’t use a name that wasn’t like mine…Aisha… Abdi? They are both names from the same culture with mutual letters.
UPDATE: Madonna was asked on the UK show Blue Peter, how she came up with the names on the book and she said from the internet.
9. I wrote on the Diary page of my web site on June 5th, 2004 that I’m writing two books with my dad.
June 5, 2004
For several months now, I’ve also been working on two other books with my dad, but he’s going to do the majority of the work on those. He’s always very busy, but last year I convinced him it was something he should do and he started working on them and so did I.
He has such a brilliant mind. God gave him a lot of talent. I mean the stuff he knows is incredible. I learn from him all the time. I’m always asking him questions.
Two weeks later it was announced in the British tabloid the Sun by Madonna's friend and cantankerous, characterless, malicious mouthpiece, Victoria Newton, that she is "writing a book with her husband."
She always gives Victoria exclusives, uses her to put a spin on her questionable behavior (like calling British People lazy and insulting British hospitals) and to answer insults other entertainers have hurled at her, via her articles. Ah, journalistic integrity at its finest.
Newton has bragged that she has Madonna’s email address, in her column titled Bizarre. Fitting name indeed. While we’re on the subject, that has got to be the most distasteful, corny column in all of Britain. Where do you get your ideas from Ms. Nuton, um, I mean Ms. Newton. See, you’re not the only one that can write a humorless, idiotic pun about another person, but unlike you, I don’t make it a habit.
10. On January 11th, 2003, I wrote on the Diary page of my site that I have a management company called Sonustar Management (with a web link/ contact information to it).
January 11, 2003
I remember a show I saw once where the character said "the word free is not in a good manager's vocabulary." It's a funny line. Management is something I've studied for years as well. I have a management company that I started at the same time as the record company (there's an email link for it on this page). I decided in May of 1992 that I wanted to have my own music company with a record, management and production branch (I was 15 at the time). I still have the first sketches of it and the registration from a few years later.
In a sense, I used it to house my work, which is basically what it is today. I have a lot of material by God's grace. It's wonderful working on it and getting it off the ground now. I'm really more comfortable with behind the scenes work like production, management and marketing. By God's grace, I've learned this industry and its markets very well.
Then in an April 11th, 2004 press release from her management and an accompanying New York Newspaper article, Madonna said she is "starting a management company."
Madonna even parted ways recently with her manager of 13 years, Carisse Henry, which was written about in the press last month. Henry, who is now working with Miami native Ricky Martin, responded by saying Madonna, “wasn’t doing anything anyway." She also cited not liking the turn Madonna’s personal and career interests were taking. What? You don’t like cultist, mimicking, copyright infringing behavior. I mean, who wouldn’t like that.
Madonna cited she did not like Caresse having sex with her bodyguard, as reason for firing her, as that type of conduct was unfaithful and not keeping with the Kabballah cult. However, I think she just wanted to get rid of her, as she has a habit of using people then discarding them when she feels she doesn't need them any longer. The books "Madonna" and "Madonna: An Intimate Portrait" write of people she has gotten rid of when they were no longer of use to her. The December 2004 issue of People Magazine also revealed that it wasn't about Henry's conduct at all:
"I'm the person who writes music for my next album, reads contracts and make sure everyone is making the right deals and and crossing the t's and dotting the i's."
Yea, sure you are.
Wow, that sounds like something I would say. Well, it was something I said on my diary page on July 29th, 2003:
July 29, 2003
Hi guys, I started working today at about 3 AM this morning. I spent most of the day doing paperwork. I found the right law firm I was looking for. I've outlined the basics I want covered for each contract, he will hammer out the rest. There are a few other matters I want addressed as well pertaining to this web site.
January 18, 2003
I'm having a great week. Monday and Tuesday I spent a large part of the day on the phone making business calls and doing paper work. Mostly legal/contractual work, advertising, promotional arrangements for the CD and scheduling arrangements for the promo tour.
Madonna isn't reading any contracts. I took law for a semester and you have to have a basic understanding of contractual law to go over industry contracts, otherwise it will look like a foreign language, and even then there are still items you can miss.
Moreover, how could she be the one who "writes the music" for her album as she claims, yet in the same article say "I no longer have time to be creative." That's a serious contradiction. Therefore, who's doing the work? Who's the one actually being creative? I don't believe she ever was creative. Too much evidence says otherwise.
Speaking of inappropriate behavior, how can she condemn Henry for having sex with her bodyguard, deeming it unfaithful, yet put on that debauched display with Christina Aguilera and Britney Spears. What was that French kiss she shared on stage at the MTV Awards with the two singers young enough to be her daughters? That was not faithfulness. That was perverse and people who claim to be decent individuals of a religious faith don’t engage in kissing orgies on stage at an international award show, televised to viewers of all ages at the respectable hour of 9PM. Her performance was ushered in by her 6 year old daughter, who she dressed up as a bridesmaid for mommy's disgraceful display (Then had the gall to author children’s books).
That’s far worse than what she claims her former manager did, in that she exposed millions of unwitting viewers, many of them children, to that perversion (not to mention grossing me out. I changed the channel immediately. To this day I don't know how the rest of the show went. Just read about the winners in the paper the next day).
Moreover, condemning people, especially for things she has done, is not a principle espoused by Judaism. It is also grossly hypocritical. She is in no position to throw stones at anyone, as her conduct is among the most vile. I guess self-awareness is not one of her strong suits.
11. On November 1, 2002, I wrote on my web site’s Diary page that I’m working on a restaurant, for which I would include some of my mom’s recipes, and that I just registered the name for it, “THE CONTINENTS” (this info is readily available online through any whois company).
November 1, 2002
I've been working on plans to start a restaurant. It's been a fun project for me. By God's grace I've written the menu, planned the architectural design, made a business plan and I've started registering it. It's something I've wanted to do for a while. My mom is an excellent chef, she can make any dish and I've learned about cuisine from her, from books and television shows.
Months later in 2003 she puts out a press release stating she is opening a restaurant, with her brother, and the name of it is THE CENTRAL. The name THE CENTRAL is similar to the name I registered for mine prior, THE CONTINENTS. The first four letters are the same. I wrote that mine would be with my mom. She is opening hers with her brother in Los Angeles.
12. On April 15, 2003 I made a joke about polishing my nails on the Sound Off page of this web site.
I waited for a web site to load, I polished my nails
(yes, the web site took some time to load because it had a lot of
content...and like this page is any quicker)."
hile I waited for a web site to load, I polished my nails (yes, the web site took some time to load because it had a lot of content...and like this page is any quicker)."
Shortly after she makes a comment in a British interview about "running her record label" and "having her nails polished."
13. I wrote an article on the Sound Off Page about young singers smoking and how bad it is for their voices.
Shortly after on September 4th, 2003, Rate the Music posted an article quoting Madonna and her rep Liz Rosenberg from the MTV Awards, saying that she (Madonna) told Britney Spears to stop smoking or it will ruin her voice.
14. On August 12th, 2004 I wrote about "editing" my music videos I'd been shooting:
August 12, 2004
Hi everyone, I’m here doing paperwork. I also have more footage to go over. I went over some more of it this morning. I have a lot of editing and processing to do on the latest stuff I got.
A month later, on September 21st, 2004 she wrote about "editing" her tour documentary in her monthly fan club newsletter, for which I found a scan of the letter on a fan site. Madonna isn't editing anything. I don't believe that for one second. I know the amount of work that goes into that and there is no way she is doing that or knows how to do that, mostly due to the editing software and equipment.
15. For over two years I've had a regular column titled "The Sound Off Column." I've also had a Q&A feature on the site where people can email questions to me, that if chosen would be answered with the new site launch (for further reference, see navigation tool bar for "Sound Off" and the Q&A's on the "Interact" page of the site). This is another item she has decided to steal. Recently in People magazine Madonna said:
"I want there to be an English Roses column where girls can write in and ask questions" December 6, 2004 (People Magazine).
So she can indoctrinate young girls with her Kaballah cult.
16. For over a year now I've been writing and posting Sound Off articles and Diary entries on my site about home studio recording. Madonna has been in the industry for over twenty years and did not have a home studio during that time. According to an article printed this month, Madonna is having one built in her home all of a sudden, and oddly at a time when her career is on its last legs.
From the interview page of this site click here:
What is your ideal
place to live?
- Aisha 2001
17. The most recent and funniest by far, is her announcement last month that she is now a director.
Madonna couldn’t direct traffic. Wearing a beret in a music video does not a director make (American Life).
My bio, which was copyrighted and put online in 2001, states that I directed all my music videos and that I write screenplays that I will direct. It’s not something I just started. I’ve been making mini movies and music videos since I was a teenager. I’ve authored and copyrighted many screenplays over the years, as I began writing them in my mid-teens. I started studying filmmaking at age fourteen.
Typical of Madonna. She makes a mockery of many art forms, collecting vain job titles she has not earned and cannot do, supported by all the infringement lawsuits and claims that have been filed against her over the years for stealing other people’s work and trying to horn in on credit for works she did not author.
Considering her history of butchering films and her recently being voted "The worst rock star actor of all time," by Blender magazine, her new declaration that she is a director is quite laughable. We’ve seen what she’s done before the cameras, as she is now the proud owner of the most panned filmed in history, "Swept Away" - which coincidentally she is being sued for $10 million dollars for stealing the idea from filmmaker and actor Vincent D'Onofrio, who says he pitched the idea to Madonna and her agents in several meetings.
Therefore, only a fool for punishment would give the scatterbrained cultist more responsibility in that arena and let her get behind a camera. Besides, she’ll only do what others have accused her of – let them do the work and she’ll horn in on or take all of the credit. She is a figurehead.
For example, former Maverick artist Jude referred to the label as a “den of thieves and liars” and said she was a figurehead who was not actually doing the work. Here is an excerpt from the interview with Jude:
Other respectable publications have called her a figurehead as well, echoing the same sentiments as Jude, but that didn’t stop her from taking credit for the label like she was doing all the work.
As a general rule, you can’t run a record label and for years during that time spend your days partying and under different men around the world.
To truly run a label takes a lot of time and work. In putting together this record, I hardly left my desk for a few years. I was constantly on the computers and the phone. Therefore, anyone who claims they run a label and all you see them do is go out partying and taking people home all the time, aren’t doing what they claim. To anyone who has done it, it is a giveaway that they are not doing the job. Just know there is some poor guy somewhere stuck behind a desk really running the thing.
All of the above mentioned information was copyrighted before she attributed it to herself each time in interviews, which proves access, thereby inextricably linking her to this web site. I have many copyright certificates that attest to this and every time she makes these announcements and attributions it is always shortly after I write it on the web site. That’s way too many times, too many items and way too detailed for it to be a coincidence.
18. The 2005 Versace Ads - UK newspapers like the Telegraph questioned the credulity of the new ads that feature Madonna in various shots as a secretary at the computer and on the phone. One paper even referred to it as her modernizing her image. Where did Madonna and Donatella get the idea for these ads from (rhetorical).
Recently in Italian Vogue, Donatella Versace said this in response to the UK press questioning the legitimacy of the ads featuring Madonna in what they viewed as a secretary:
"No I wouldn't call her a secretary, but Madonna herself says, a Chief Executive Officer. A high level working woman that does not renounce glamour when she's in the office. Madonna worked a lot to define that image: she's a woman who put her nose in everything that has got to do with her, and that's smart."
I wonder where she got that idea from (rhetorical).
See the part where Donatella says "Madonna herself says a Chief Executive Officer" also known as a CEO is the theme of the ads. They got that idea from here.
1. On the diary page I have said a number of times that I spend my day on the computer and the phone. I've written that on here several times in my copyrighted online diary for well over a year now. Those were my exact words and those ads feature her on the computer and and the phone.
2. Donatella said "Madonna herself says a Chief Executive Officer." In my bio and flash film intro on this site, I refer to myself as an indie label CEO (Chief Executive Officer). Madonna's never been a CEO. She was part owner of Maverick, but people connected with the company and others who have worked with the label said she wasn't the CEO and wasn't doing the work. She wasn't even the CEO in official legal documents.
Therefore, where did the idea for these multi-million dollar ads of a contemporary CEO working on the computer and telephone come from (rhetorical question). Based on these statements, Madonna obviously had a hand in the ideas/theme of these ads along with Donatella, for which Madonna was paid $20 million dollars according to press reports. This makes them both liable.
Journalists are even publicly laughing at the ads questioning why she is posing as a secretary on the phone and on the computer, as it is so incredulous coming from her.
By the way, the ads look foolish with her in it and the wig looks horrible:
Section Three: Madonna's Career Long History of Plagiarism and Copyright Infringement
Madonna has a long history of plagiarism - an unusually high amount of incidences. She is a habitual copyright infringer, which is reflected by several lawsuits that I will write about in this section. The following can be supported by lawsuits, articles and interviews, which were featured in a wide variety of reputable newspapers, magazines, books and interviews. Many of these items are also on the internet.
1. This year Madonna was sued by the family of deceased artist Guy Bourdin for ripping off images from his work for her music video “Hollywood.”
She brazenly stole 11 pictures from his work and duplicated them for her video without permission or credit, only altering them slightly to hide the theft. Of course, she denied this, as she always does regarding these allegations, but a British newspaper reported that she was seen leaving the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, which housed Bourdin’s work, a week before she filmed the infringing video. The curator for the Bourdin exhibition, Charlotte Cotton, confirmed this information.
Earlier in the year she was quoted as saying his work is “so sick and interesting,” however, she denied any wrong doing in this case. Bourdin’s family won a settlement thought to be $638,000. The late artist’s son said of her, “It's one thing to draw inspiration; it's quite another to simply plagiarize the heart and soul of my father's work.” True, indeed, as that seems to be her trademark.
Compare for yourself. Here are 4 images from the 11 photos Madonna ripped off from Guy Bourdin's work for her music video "Hollywood." The similarities are terribly striking. They look like they came from the exact same shoot. Photos courtesy of the Smoking Gun:
2. As mentioned above, filmmaker and Law and Order actor Vincent D'Onofrio sued Madonna for ripping off his idea he pitched to her and her agents for the remake of the film, “Swept Away.” The lawsuit is currently in the court system. However, the film fittingly bombed and was voted the worst movie ever. The copyright owner of the original Swept Away script recently expressed his regret at allowing her to remake his film, due to how badly it turned out.
3. Madonna ripped off the title, concept and dance for the song “Vogue” from dancers in downtown New York. She took full credit for it as her creation, but journalists who knew of the trend and its origins from the time of its inception in New York wrote otherwise, as having witnessed it prior to her claiming it as her own. "Vogue" has been widely credited to her, but that is a common misconception, as it was not her idea.
UPDATE: Madonna ripped off the 1989 song "Deep In Vogue" by Malcolm McLaren for her 1990 song "Vogue." As with my song, she stole it shortly after it was made available to the public. His song was released on July 19, 1989 on Epic Records and her rip off was released almost a year later on April 5th, 1990. His song came out first and was about "voguing." Madonna's rip off brought his idea/music/dance trend to the mainstream by stealing it from him, along with melodies, harmonies and portions of his beat. Madonna even tries to sing like the female vocalist on McLaren's track.
Here is an excerpt of the song she stole from entitled "Deep In Vogue" for her song "Vogue" (If the link does not work for you visit www.amazon.com and type in "Deep In Vogue" in the search box for a sample of the song):
4. In my opinion, one of her worst, most disgraceful and brazen rip offs was the work she outright stole from Prince protégé, Ingrid Chavez. She stole Chavez’s style and lyrics for her song, “Justify My Love” which is featured on her “Erotica” album.
Chavez said, "Madonna only changed one line of the entire song” and stole writers credit for the song, even though Chavez was the one who wrote it (this has been said of her by other credible writers as well involving other songs, one of which I write about further in this article). But this is what she does. She takes credit for other people’s writing and ideas then goes around declaring herself a writer. That is not songwriting. That is a joke. The song did match Chavez's trademark style, which at the time was once again unlike anything Madonna had done. Much like my style of music is unlike anything Madonna has done. An article excerpt:
5. A book that is currently available in stores titled, “Madonna: An Intimate Biography,” alleges that Madonna ripped off the idea for her “Sex” book from a publishing executive named Judith Regan (page 221).
6. Critics allege that Madonna ripped off visual concepts, video imagery and ideas from underground transvestite singer “Peaches” for her work. Several web sites mention this and the similarities are very, very striking. It was also reported that she would play Peaches' album over and over again before going on stage in Barcelona. A reviewer from the well-known industry company Muze wrote:
"If imitation is the greatest compliment, then Peaches received top honors when Madonna stole imagery from Peaches’ videos and applied them to her own. If the queen of controversy steals your ideas, you must have something going on." Muze Inc.
Hmmm why is everyone calling this woman a thief (rhetorical question). It seems to me her reinventions are reinventions of marginally known, unknown and underground artists that she tries to become in search of that next new trend in music. That is profoundly disturbing and sick.
Peaches' debut CD was released on a German label and sold only 50,000 - yet she managed to get a copy of one of them. Those numbers are good for an indie, but translates into obscurity in the mainstream.
However, Madonna and her team do what some unscrupulous executives in the music industry do - scour the clubs, internet and other venues for new music, dance and clothing trends and take full credit for them as their own in the mainstream (as she did with Vogue, among other things).
Never mind her reinventions are the creations of unknown or marginally known artists, she wrongfully feels taking these ideas, concepts and music to the mainstream automatically makes her the author. She is often referred to as trendsetting, but judging by these lawsuits and allegations from so many people, she is not a leader, but a follower who takes all the credit.
There is something Andrew Morton wrote of her in the biography he did that is very telling. He wrote that during the early days of her career, she would allegedly go around Manhattan in limos searching for guys to sleep with (and it was reported that she actually did). He said she believes that she felt she could deny any questionable behavior if someone were to talk about it publicly, because she feels she is such a celebrity that no one would believe them.
He's right. Some celebrities do think that way. However, at this point, she is a celebrity with no credibility due to years of unethical conduct, which resulted in lawsuits.
Back to Peaches. The mere fact that they knew who Peaches was, even with him being an underground artist below the radar, speaks volumes. Ask the average musicologist or music critic about Peaches, and they wouldn't know who he is, as he is an underground artist, but she actually knew him and had his CD. I find that very telling.
He was the inspiration for one of her many reinventions, which to me is not right. She is not talented, nor is she a smart business woman as they like to claim. She is very unscrupulous to take from other artists work in such a manner. It's plain to see that she and her team search the industry for ideas from underground acts and unknowns she feels she can get away with taking from - even if it infringes their copyrights.
NOTE: If you are listed on any kind of music site, which almost every new artist is, often without them knowing due to web crawlers, you would do well to be very careful and make sure your copyrights are in order. I get solicitations from retailers, music companies and involuntary, but appreciated, music directory listings in web sites all the time. There are industry executives and companies who've told me they know about me, when I had never done business with or met them prior.
Therefore, be careful, as some people visit music directory sites like UBL and Muze, go through the listings, which points them to your indie site. They'll visit to listen to the music, but others are predatory industry people looking for their next illegal hit or idea.
It is very important to remember that once you put something (music) out there, just because it is not in the mainstream, doesn't mean it's not being heard.
Here's a positive example of that. Eminem sampled a song by musician Edgar Winter, who was surprised Eminem even knew about him or the track, which he says never received any airplay. However, Eminem went about using the track legally by applying for a license (song clearance) through the music publisher, rather than stealing elements of it for his own work like Madonna does.
Winter said, "I'm as interested as everyone else to see how he came up with the concept. I would never have thought he'd ever heard of me, or the song. It never got radio play, so I don't know how he came across it."
You would assume no airplay, therefore no one knows about the artist, but that isn't true, especially with the introduction of the internet. I'm a prime example of that. Before I finished recording my debut album, this web site received over 4 million hits.
There are music industry record collectors who buy records by unknown artists that are in limited release. However, they are collectors who really just like buying music. There are also djs and employees at radio stations who keep copies of CDs submitted for airplay consideration that they don't play because the station already has there, um, preset playlist *cough* payola. You'd be surprise how those CDs make their way around the industry. Some are sold to record stores where anyone can buy them, while others land in the hands of A&R guys, which could spell trouble for your copyrights if it is an unscrupulous label representative (the cause of many a lawsuit over the past 20 years). However, if it's a decent executive, and you are looking for a deal, you could get signed.
7. The saddest of all these allegations is by a group named Hide The Babies. They published a web site that contained the allegation that they gave Madonna’s manager their demo (cassette) in the 80's, she liked it and asked if she could keep it. She returned the tape to them 6 months later. They alleged that shortly after one of their lyrics appeared in Madonna’s song as the basis for "Like A Virgin," but not credited to them. A group member stated they felt she did this because she figured if she got her version out first it would render their version useless.
Madonna's lyric for “Like A Virgin” goes: "Like a virgin. Touched for the very first time."
Hide The Babies lyric goes: "I'm not a virgin, but you're the first one..."
That’s the same lyric, just changed up a bit. It’s also the same concept/pun about not being a virgin, but someone seemingly making you feel like that.
It appears to be the same thing Madonna did with my song "Contemporary Girl." She took lyrics, tried to change it up in the same manner, but just enough to retain the idea and concept of the song and some of the lyrics, hopefully without getting caught.
"Like A Virgin" was Madonna's first real hit and credited to another writer that her label and management hired. However, this allegation of theft bears a pattern that would later be said of several other songs Madonna allegedly composed. I saw an interview on Bravo recently with producer Nile Rodgers, who said Madonna told him at the time that the concept of the song "Like A Virgin" was such a good idea and kept emphasizing this point to him.
The article from Hide The Babies web site states, "Then when her tune came out we couldn't do ours anymore because everybody thought we got it from her."
Wow when you think about that statement it is profoundly sad and terrible considering "Like A Virgin" was such a big hit that allegedly came from this band who are saying they did not get credit for it. Hey, I have to write the word "allegedly" in this case for legal purposes, however, their words do strike a chord, pardon the pun, based on what I experienced with my song that was ripped off by her. It bears the same pattern.
8. An article in a British newspaper alleged Eminem accused Madonna of ripping off his work, "Bonnie and Clyde" for one of her videos from her Greatest Hits album.
9. An indie art web site alleges Madonna ripped off their slogan "Express Yourself, Don't Repress Yourself" for one of her lyrics from her song "Human Nature." She seems to have a thing for stealing from art, as evidenced by the Bourdin case.
10. Madonna has a history of trying to horn in on credit for work she did not do or deserve credit for. This has been written about in several publications. It is discussed in the Andrew Morton biography about her titled "Madonna."
An award winning songwriting partner of Andrew Lloyd Webber complained of her trying to horn in on credit for his song by trying to change a few lyrics (Notice a pattern yet? Look how many writers keep saying this about her).
She somehow managed to get the lead role in Evita, regardless of the fact that she cannot act and people have begged her for years to stop for the sake of cinema. When it came time for the soundtrack, the studio hired two award-winning composers to pen the songs. After receiving his properly written song, sheet music and all, Madonna sent it back with revisions adding a few words (similar to what she did with the song “Justify My Love” by Ingrid Chavez, which I wrote about above).
Madonna doing revisions to a song is like Homer Simpson doing revisions to Shakespeare.
The composer who penned the song is a trained writer, unlike Madonna, but she wrote a few words, revising his already completed song in what was widely viewed in the industry as her unethically trying to horn in on credit for his composition. Credibility is something she’s always sought, but never achieved.
Never mind the man wrote the lyrics, piano and strings for the song already. When songs are credited, the names will appear as though each person did the same amount of work, when with some female singers today that’s not the case.
Horning in on credit for something someone else wrote by trying to add a few words and collecting underserved publishing royalties/credit is not songwriting and is just plain disgusting.
However, offended and branding her revisions "abysmal and banal lyrics” the writer stood firm, rejected her so called lyrics and later won an Oscar for the song she tried to add a few words to and horn in on the credit for. He won it without her so-called revisions.
If he hadn't stood firm, she would have won an Oscar for an already completed song that she tried to add a few words to, having nothing to do with its creation or music. What a travesty that would have been.
However, that’s what she does. According to a May 27th, 2003 Fox News article titled "Madonna Tour: Does She Need The Cash?" all her songs that were big hits were all written by someone else, while the latter, more unsuccessful songs that she performed and supposedly “co-wrote” were all written with someone else, which is a tell tale sign in the industry.
Music critic Chuck Dimaria commented, "I always felt that if you leave Madonna in a room with a guitar and a pad of paper, all she’ll write is her grocery list. I have a hard time swallowing that she’s as much of a songwriter as the credits would lead you to believe."
11. In a third similar case, singer/songwriter Jem, who's been featured on the television show The O.C., implied in an interview that Madonna did not write much of the song “Nothing Fails,” which she penned and submitted to Madonna. Yes, more of Madonna’s so called revisions to horn in on credit for already completed songs given to her to sing. She horned in on credit for this already completed song for the same album she ripped off my debut single for, "American Life." Here is an article excerpt:
Yea, sure she co-wrote it. Nice diplomatic save (LOL). Judging by her past behavior with Chavez and Andrew Lloyd Webber’s songwriting partner, I know what her idea of songwriting is. As Chavez said, changing “one line of the song.”
12. Several directors have publicly complained about her trying to take over their film sets and altering scripts. When that happens, it forces a screenwriters credit that is undeserved, so many resist her efforts. Many articles and books support this claim. An Oscar award winning director, Schlesinger, died of a heart attack as a result of her trying to alter his film and antagonizing him with her ridiculous demands on the set of what would be his last film. A VH1 one article referred to her as a "flick killer," but who knew that extended to directors as well. That man didn't deserve to lose his life over some Primadonna.
13. Madonna does not like to give people credit for their work, typical of a copyright infringer. She was bashed by a reputable newspaper for leaving the illustrator's name off the cover of her children's book, “Yakov and the Seven Thieves.” It was written in the article that it is customary in the publishing industry to put the illustrator’s name on the front, which they were aware of, but left off anyway.
14. The music video for her latest single “Love Profusion” is a rip off of British singer Billie Piper’s “Honey to the Bee” video, which was released 5 years before Madonna’s knock off. Side by side stills show the striking similarities. Madonna’s video features her in front of a red 3D computer generated flower, while floating on the ocean, which is the same as Piper's video - only Piper's video was filmed and released years before. I remember seeing the behind the scenes segment for Billie’s video a few years ago and you can tell it's a rip off of it. They even used the same technique.
15. I read a Slant magazine message board, where posters claimed Madonna heavily borrowed from Beth Orton for her music. Upon listening to the albums you can hear similarities.
16. According to a UK newspaper, Madonna's "American Life" Che Guevara themed CD cover is a rip off of a previously released Kylie Minogue poster:
17. Another article alleges Madonna ripped off copyrighted 1956 Marilyn Monroe pics for her 1985 “Like A Virgin” promo.
18. There was an article about plagiarism in Rolling Stone magazine, which stated Madonna ripped off the idea for the "Ray Of Light" video which was submitted to her by a director named Stefano Salvati. The album "Ray Of Light" won a lot of awards, even Grammys (I thought you had to be able to sing to win one of those) because of the breakthrough video, which also won awards. Based on records it was authored and filmed by Salvati, before he submitted it to Madonna. It was subsequently stolen by her according to this article and lawsuit:
Italian director Stefano Salvati is claiming that Madonna's "Ray of Light" video was stolen from a clip he shot in 1994 for local pop star Biagio Antonacci. Antonacci's lawyer, Gianni Massaro, said Friday that he will ask Madonna's Maverick Records to pull the "Ray of Light" video from distribution and that he will seek damages.
Salvati, who lives part of the year in Los Angeles, claims that his manager had sent copies of his videos to Maverick before "Ray of Light" was shot. A Salvati video for a song titled "Non e Mai Stato Subito" features Antonacci performing at normal speed against a backdrop of fast-moving images of clouds, traffic and food, somewhat like Madonna in the "Ray of Light" clip directed by Joanis Akerlund.
Rolling Stone Magazine
Joanis Akerlund is also the director Madonna hired for the "Hollywood" video for which they were also sued and had to pay the plaintiff a $638,000 settlement on last year (see number one plagiarism example in this article).
19. Madonna and her husband were accused of plagiarism by the British band BBMak, who had the hit "Back Here." BBMak publicly stated in an Annanova article that Madonna and her director husband Guy Ritchie plagiarized their music video "Still On Your Side" for her video "What It Feels Like For A Girl."
Madonna rips off Kylie
Madonna rips off Kylie
A follow up to last month’s Sound Off Column, where I wrote about how Madonna ripped off several people for her new album, "Confessions on a Dance Floor," - among them Kylie Minogue. I noticed the pathetic music rip offs on Madonna's album, but this month others have been pointing out the image rip offs - and they are quite blaring.
As pointed out by Dlisted, to the left are the original Kylie pics, to the right are the later Madonna rip offs (Madonna even stole 1-888-Confess from Kylie's previous 1-555-Confide). How pathetic:
Madonna was ripped by scores of people on different web sites this month for ripping off Kylie Minogue’s work. One site in particular was pretty blunt about it, where members of the public let rip.
21. Madonna was publicly accused of ripping off the song "She Comes In Colors" by Da Capo for the riff to her song "Beautiful Stranger."
22. She was also accused of ripping off John Lennon and Yoko Ono's work for use years later in one of her own rubbish projects, "In Bed With Madonna" - "Shortly after their marriage, John Lennon and Yoko Ono gave interviews from their bedroom in an attempt to promote world peace. Madonna ripped off the idea for a movie…" http://www.a-love-supreme.com/archive/archive096.htm
John Lennon and Yoko Ono [pic courtesy of Genesis Publications]
23. Madonna was slammed by rap fans for ripping off, "Public Enemy's 'Security of The 1st World' in her song 'Justify my Love' without paying for it" – Rap Network.
This is the same song that she stole the lyrics from Prince protégé Ingrid Chavez, erasing Ingrid's name from the writer's credit sheet and replacing it with her own that wound up on the manufactured CDs. Ingrid later initiated litigation against Madonna and reportedly obtained a settlement of a few million dollars. So basically, she stole the beat from Public Enemy and the lyrics from songwriter/singer Ingrid Chavez and took credit for it to the public. How lame.
24. Madonna was publicly accused of ripping off Cat Steven's "The Wind" for her later released song "Impressive Instant" from the album "Music."
Cat Stevens' lyric from "The Wind": "I let my music take me where my heart wants to go"
Madonna rip off lyric from "Impressive Instant": I let the music take me, take me where my heart wants to go"
Of course, she'll say it's different because she added an extra take to the lyric she stole.
25. Madonna ripped off a TV commercial for her song "Sky Fits Heaven" which is on her "Ray of Light" album. This is the same album she was sued for willfully stealing the song "Frozen" from a unknown Belgian songwriter and for separately ripping off the video for "Ray of Light" from a director, which brought another lawsuit against her. Well, the album contained more rip offs (as do all her albums).
From E- Those with a keen recollection of television advertising will notice the introductory lyrics to the 1998 song "Sky Fits Heaven"--credited on Ray of Light to Madonna and longtime collaborator Patrick Leonard--are similar to what poet Max Blagg recited for a 1993 Gap clothing commercial. Here, look for yourself:
Max Blagg's poem:
Meanwhile, the New York Daily News ran a story about the matter Thursday, reportedly getting Madonna's record-label publicist at Warner Bros. to admit the singer paid Blagg in lieu of reprinting the album's liner notes and crediting him.
How pathetic, she ripped off the poetry from a Gap commercial - then paid the poet off to get him to shut up about it. What is that, like the 50th rip off. Every single album she has put out has contained copyright infringing material. She is a fraud. Unequivocally the most unoriginal, uncreative person ever in the industry.
26. It was written in an article that even Madonna's book Sex was a rip off of an old French book by a well know French photographer.
Coincidentally, she did an interview with an Hungarian paper, and due to the translation, the name of the book was fittingly called "Slut." Here's an excerpt from Blikk (publication):
BLIKK: OK, here's a question from left space.
What was your book "Slut" about?
27. From E - "Madonna ripped off the idea [of charging her coworkers for swearing] from Loretta Young's TV show way back in the '50s. Supposedly, Robert Mitchum was a guest star one week and got tired of putting in a quarter each time he swore, so he reportedly said: "Here's 20 bucks, Loretta, now *** off!"
There is nothing original about this woman. She watches other people’s works, makes minor alterations, and lies to the public that it is hers.
28. Confessions On A Dance Floor Thefts
The synth on "Forbidden Love" is a blatant rip off
of the synth part used on the Pet Shop Boys song "West End Girls." "Let It Will Be" by her rips off the synth on
"Silent Mourning" by Mad Machinery. She ripped off the sound of the big hit in England
in 2005, "Call On Me" by Eric Prydz and mixed it with other
infringements for her song "Get Together."
She ripped off Kylie Minogue for "Like It Or Not"
and lines on "Get Together." "Confessions on a Dance Floor" is a real copy and paste of other people's
music, which is pathetic, as it was done without permission. And all that reverb
and vocoding due to her inability to sing well, is absolutely annoying and
It's like listening to a robot sing for 45 minutes.
The synth on "Forbidden Love" is a blatant rip off of the synth part used on the Pet Shop Boys song "West End Girls."
"Let It Will Be" by her rips off the synth on "Silent Mourning" by Mad Machinery.
She ripped off the sound of the big hit in England in 2005, "Call On Me" by Eric Prydz and mixed it with other infringements for her song "Get Together."
She ripped off Kylie Minogue for "Like It Or Not" and lines on "Get Together."
"Confessions on a Dance Floor" is a real copy and paste of other people's music, which is pathetic, as it was done without permission. And all that reverb and vocoding due to her inability to sing well, is absolutely annoying and grating.
It's like listening to a robot sing for 45 minutes.
Goldfrapp Slam Madonna For Stealing From Them
Goldfrapp Slam Madonna For Stealing From Them
Goldfrapp video still
Music duo Goldfrapp slammed Madonna and they have a right to be upset. She ripped off their music for "Confessions On A Dance Floor" as well. Several critics noticed the Goldfrapp knock off...and so did Goldfrapp.
"The singer continued her outburst by suggesting that Madonna lacks
creativity. 'I think it's quite clever, but I don't know if that's creative,'
Allison Goldfrapp." - Virgin Music News
30. Madonna Steals "Open Your Heart"
"Open Your Heart" was slated to be recorded by another singer, not Madonna. Did you know “Open Your Heart” was reportedly not supposed to be her song. It was
singer had already started work on it. Madonna coveting what she'd heard,
went to the song's producer and
unethically pried the song from the girl, recorded it and derailing the girl’s
career. She would have had a hit with “Open Your Heart,” but the covetous Madonna
destroyed her career to sustain her fraudulent one.
"Open Your Heart" was slated to be recorded by another singer, not Madonna.
Did you know “Open Your Heart” was reportedly not supposed to be her song. It was reported another singer had already started work on it. Madonna coveting what she'd heard, went to the song's producer and unethically pried the song from the girl, recorded it and derailing the girl’s career. She would have had a hit with “Open Your Heart,” but the covetous Madonna destroyed her career to sustain her fraudulent one.
31. Madonna Maybe Sued For Trademark Infringement In Stealing Semtex® Name
Never one to come up with anything original, Madonna boasted this week that she registered a name called "Semtex Girls."
Never mind it is already the trademark name for a dangerous plastic explosive used by terrorists - and considering she was bragging about being worst than a terrorist - coupled with the fact she is a member of a sick cult, is there something people need to know. Cult members + terrorism + Semtex = trouble.
"Prague - The Czech manufacturer of the plastic explosive Semtex may sue pop star Madonna for trademark infringement, a company spokesman told the CTK news agency Tuesday.
According to British news reports, the US singer recently started a London-based company called Semtex Girls Ltd.
But Semtex is the trademark name owned by Explosia, a maker of industrial and demolition explosives.
Company spokesman Ladislav Lehky said Madonna does not have permission to use the name, which he said is worth 130 million koruna (5.4 million dollars). He said Explosia would 'take the relevant steps because the trademark is protected.'
In an interview with ABC-TV last autumn, Madonna said she has three assistants whom she calls 'Semtex Girls.' But the purpose of her new company reportedly remains a mystery.
Semtex is an infamous terrorist weapon. It was used by the Irish Republican Army and in the bombing of a Pan Am passenger jet over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988.
The Czech beverage maker sells a power drink named Semtex with Explosia's permission. - Monsters and Critics.
It should be noted that 1.) she was sued in Miami for trademark infringement before by a comapny 2.) she is a lunatic 3.) cult members and Semtex are not a good mix.
32. Sued in Miami for trademark infringement (theft) relating to her fan club.
MORE ON HER QUESTIONABLE CHARACTER:
I'm always suspicious of singers who do not exhibit the intelligence level for the work they claim they do such as writing, producing, directing, and in one recent case, mastering (a trio who can barely string a sentence together in English, though it is their first language, claimed they mastered their own CD, when the major label they record for always sends their products to mastering facilities like the Hit Factory, due to the sheer complexity of the job).
As anyone who works in the industry knows, in some cases over-crediting is just pr to make the artist look better to the press and the public - but it is still wrong, as it trivializes very capable technicians' jobs. When you actually do these tasks or spend time with people who do, you realize how complicated, intricate and time consuming a lot of these studio related jobs are. Many of them have nothing to do with creativity, but actual engineering and computer science. Therefore, if you can barely check your email, there is no way you are doing all the stuff you claim. It takes years of study due to the type of equipment and formats the industry currently uses. It is not something the average person will learn over night.
Posing behind a console for the cameras does not a producer or mastering engineer make.
In Madonna's interviews she comes across as an airhead, yet amazingly writes lyrics way above her speech level. As I wrote above, she even claimed she is editing her tour documentary, which is a very complicated process, mostly due to the equipment. Much like her records sales, that doesn't add up.
Speaking of record sales, Madonna claims she's sold 250 million records, yet Soundscan and other international plaques that have been awarded for sales say otherwise.
In 2002, they put out a press release which stated she sold over 150 million records. That alone was a stretch, but in 2004, they put out another press release for her new album stating she'd allegedly sold over 250 million records.
Do you realize what that would mean? They are saying she managed to sell more records during the decline/fall of her career, in two years (between 2002-2004), than the Beatles managed to sell in 20 years (yea, sure she did). 100 million more records in two years during the time her career started bombing - amazing! How does she do it!
Is she trying to steal the title of the best selling female artist? Is there anything she won't steal?
I don't believe for one second she is the best selling. It's either Whitney Houston or Barbra Streisand, more leaning towards Houston due to the huge selling Bodyguard soundtrack, which believably shifted a lot of copies (last estimate was 25,000,000 million copies worldwide), along with all her other multi-platinum albums.
But with people like Madonna allegedly selling 100 million records in two years, during a time when Soundscan said her records sold under 1 million copies in America and was referred to as a flop with critics calling her washed up, how can we get a fair accounting. I guess the rest of the world bought that other 99,000,000 million copies (even though catalog sales and award plaques didn't even register anywhere near that, pardon the pun).
Who in music has sold 100 million records in two years, especially when their career hit a major decline? Somebody call Guinness World Book.
I'd like to ask her what they ask you when you go to exchange or return something..."Do you have a receipt for that?" And not a piece of paper that states in a childlike manner, "my label says I sold 250,000,000 records."
Top Selling Tour?
"Her tour is tops"- posted on Wed, Dec. 15, 2004 (Miami Herald)
Madonna's blockbuster Re-Invention tour took all the drama out of the top tour of the year race, ringing up $125 million in total box office gross by the time it wrapped in September, reports Billboard Online. Madonna sold out 55 of 56 performances worldwide, with an average nightly take of $2.23 million. Prince's Musicology tour drew nearly 1.5 million people, more than any other artist, and grossed $90.2 million, second only to Madonna.
According to the Herald and many other newspapers, based on information they got from her camp on her touring figures, she supposedly had the top grossing tour of the year, selling out 55 of 56 shows. However, earlier reports contradict her claims once again.
Read that article excerpt carefully. It says Prince's tour drew the most amount of people, 1.5 million, which was more than any other artist for the year.
Many articles wrote of Madonna's poor ticket sales with several brokers complaining that they can't unload the tickets. Different publications reported venues weren't full. Yet she amazingly managed to turn in a report stating 55 of 56 shows were sold out and that she allegedly grossed the most.
Prince's tour drew the most people, 1.5 million, but his ticket prices weren't so high that you had to take out a second mortgage to go see him. Some of her tickets were $350 and up, and according to newspapers many of those tickets did not sell.
Prince played to the most people, but Madonna charged the people the most to see her talentlessness (it's not a word, don't look it up).
I study industry trends and sales. During both tours, I checked on their sales and which shows were selling out. You can go Ticketmaster and other web sites to find out this information.
Many web sites wouldn't even let you purchase a ticket to Prince's shows, because they were sold out. Madonna's was a different story. When I checked purchasing for her shows on different occasions, none of them were ever sold out (even though her publicists and management claimed they were). You could always get a ticket to any of the Reinvention Tour shows, in just about any section of the venues. Yet they amazingly turned in a report stating 55 of 56 shows were sold out.
New York newspapers reported that none of the multiple shows she held at Madison Square Garden sold out - and that it showed in the venue by the number of people there and the ability to still purchase tickets. Other cities reported the same.
One excuse issued by her camp in the face of the newspaper stories was that she'd "held back tickets" and released them at the last minute, hence tickets still being available to the supposedly sold out shows. They actually issued an incredulous quote stating that. When I read it I shook my head.
Do you realize what that means? A venue can seat 50,000 people, an artist can hold back 20,000 of those 50,000 tickets and say the show is sold out, when they actually did not sell out the venue. An artist can say well we've sold 27,000 tickets, let's make the cut off/issued amount of tickets 30,000, rather than the actual 50,000 tickets that are available according to the venue's true capacity.
Therefore, I found her statements very dubious. Constantly moving the goal post to claim achievement.
Therefore, Prince, a very talented musician, may very well have had the most successful tour of the year...and we do know he did actually play to the most people.
Due to Madonna's questionable conduct and news clippings alluding to the same, I doubt what she and her team says.
Regardless, why operate that way. What's the big deal if you don't come in at number one. What's the big deal if another artist earned it and deserved it more than you did.
That type of ambition comes across as desperation.
In researching her dealings with other people when she started ripping off my work, I was appalled at the number of singers, musicians, writers and directors who complained of plagiarism, copyright infringement and or not being credited for their work - several of which sued her and won.
She is vocally and literarily untalented and the only way someone like that can thrive in the industry is to steal other people's work – which articles and lawsuits attest she has done. It’s not just one or two or even three or four lawsuits and or allegations of theft; it's well over a dozen. That's not a coincidence, that's a career long habit.
From a musicological perspective, I can unequivocally say, she is the most lecherous, self-serving, unoriginal artist in the history of music. After reading all these people's stories about her, in addition to witnessing the thoroughly disgusting way she ripped off my work, it made me question all these so called reinventions she's had throughout her career and exactly where they came from.
Furthermore, getting a makeover for every album never constituted talent - a split personality, maybe. Hence the reinventions.
At first I thought, maybe she just has a split personality and each one of them wants their own record.
At the end of the day, reinvention without talent is just rearranging a pile of doo doo. No matter how you look at it, it's still a pile of doo doo.
In some cases she tried to become just like the artist she chose as her muse and unwitting plagiaree (don't look it up, it's not a word), which explains all of these drastic changes over the years – which, coincidentally has nothing to do with music, as she still can’t sing. If you ask me, they were all gimmicks to distract you from her voice.
I think Joni Mitchell said it best, "She has knocked the importance of talent out of the arena. She's manufactured. She's made a lot of money and become the biggest star in the world by hiring the right people."
That was quite a statement - and completely true.
I dedicated my debut single and album to God. It takes a real degenerate to steal from a song dedicated to God, and to intermingle it with filth and expletives as she did, but how fitting and deserving that it turned out to be the one that ruined her career, as "American Life" was the first flop of her 20 year career:
From Fox News on May 6, 2003:
Madonna is in trouble. Her American Life album drops from number 1 to about number 8 this week, selling a paltry 65,000 copies. That's down from 235,000 the first week.
...woe is Madonna, who looks like she will have her first real flop in two decades. At this rate she'll be lucky to hit half a million copies. A Madonna album is so expensive to market - what with flying everyone around first class and catering to all whims - Warner Bros. must be in a panic. Stay tuned.
From the Star Telegram on May 24th, 2003:
. . . For the first time since Holiday became a hit back in 1983, Madonna, 44, is seeing her ability to generate interest wane, and wane quickly. After just three weeks, her new CD, American Life, has slipped from No. 1 to No. 15 on the national charts, an amazingly poor showing for any big-name artist.
...The first single, the CD's title track, generated almost no interest on radio. It's the least potent single of her entire career, and a second, Hollywood, has been rush-released.
...her new CD, shows undeniably that there is simply no buzz around Madonna anymore. The world yawned when she withdrew what was supposed to be a controversial video for American Life.
. . . the influential New Music Express said much the same thing in a lukewarm review of the CD: Critic Johnny Davis opined that her stabs at self-deprecation and self-analysis "just come across as gauche."
"What's the point of Madonna these days?" he asks, before going on to say that she's "simply done everything there is to do. . . surely that's enough now."
And this is the crux of the problem -- or, at least, one of them. Whereas once she sang about hot-button topics like sex and abortion, these days she's rapping (yes, rapping) about her Pilates class and drinking a latte. The mystery, it seems, is gone.
There is a lesson to be learned in all of this. Never steal from something about or dedicated to God. He will make it far more trouble than it's worth. She is living proof of that.
Furthermore, how is any of her very unethical behavior acceptable conduct from anyone who could possibly venture to refer to themself as a decent human being. Good people don't do things like that.
She said she is a Kaballist. My question to Madonna is how do you justify claiming you are a Kaballist and are allegedly "becoming like God," as you put it, yet continually take credit for work you have not done and defraud so many artists out of their rightful future earnings by stealing their music, ideas and dreams, to further your own sewer of a career.
You are an absolute degenerate - you know better, yet continue to behave like the scum of the earth.
That's not "becoming like God." That behavior is becoming like the Devil, because according to the Bible (which you claim you read) and many preachers, the Devil tries to mimic everything God does.
In the Bible, the Devil tried to use magic to emulate and duplicate miracles God did (in the Bible miracles were always associated with God and magic always associated with the Devil). Therefore, the Devil is the phony, the pretender, the fake. You ought to remember that the next time you decide to mimic and rip off someone's work.
People do not need her stealing their lyrics and rewriting them in her vulgar vernacular using a trite, elementary, one line style of writing. It is an absolute joke.
The Primadonna and Con Artist
She has made herself into the stereotypical caricature of the characterless, talentless, self-absorbed, egotistical singer people joke about in films and skits. She is a real primadonna and one with a serious anger problem.
A forthcoming book titled "THE BIG SHOW: HIGH TIMES AND DIRTY DEALINGS BACKSTAGE AT THE ACADEMY AWARDS" by Steve Pond, detailed how a camerawoman fell into the orchestra pit and was seriously injured, and as she laid there on the floor waiting for paramedics, a furious Madonna was upset that she wouldn't be able to rehearse for the show. Madonna, obviously not concerned for the woman's welfare exclaimed, "But she's just lying there. Can't we just do this."
Still upset at not being able to rehearse (like it was gonna help), Madonna later choked a technician who accidentally fell asleep during her show (can you blame him) and ruined a planned microphone stunt for her performance. According to the book she then, "Launched into an astonishingly profane tirade, despite the fact that the area below was occupied by a group of children." And now she's writing children's books. Alrighty, then.
I can see why my song "Contemporary Girl" appealed to her, as there is a lyric in it that unintentionally fits her to a tee, "you put the con in contemporary" and that she does, as only a con artist could go around ripping off people's work and horning in on credit for songs that have already been written by changing one line (get it? con artist, con and she is a recording artist).
I've nicknamed her horrible rip off of my song Contemporary Girl, "Contemporary Hurl," as only Madonna can illegally and selfishly take someone else's work and turn it into such garbage (i.e. her most recent plagiarism lawsuits "Swept Away" and the "Hollywood" music video). She continually does substandard versions of the work she rips off. Whether she realizes it or not, she has found her niche…destroying art.
She's like a scum sucking leech draining the creative life out of other people's work that she plagues like a nuisance, insinuating herself into their lives without their consent and to the point that they have to get a lawyer to remove that leech, lest it egotistically destroys and desecrates every creative thing it touches.
She steals, then clumsily tries to reinterpret people's work to the point that it just becomes a joke.
Art does not need an interpreter… it speaks for itself.
Watch this space.
Section Four: Lyrics for Further Comparison
Lyrics by Aisha
You put the
con in contemporary
Madonna and Mirwais
Do I have to change my name?
I tried to be a boy,
I tried to stay ahead,
I tried to be a boy,
drinking a Soy latte
© 2003 Warner Bros Records.
Article written by Aisha. © 2004 Aisha. All Rights Reserved.
All article excerpts and photos contained herein are the property of their respective owners.
© 2001- 2011 AG All Rights Reserved. Web site design by Aisha for Sonustar Interactive
Sites: Aisha | Blog | Blog Archive | Goodison Trust | Sonustar | Sonustar News | Sound Off Column | Judiciary Report| Celluloid Film Review | Compendius | United Peace Initiative | Consumer News Reviews |