A lawyer decipher Katherine Jackson-Howard Mann contract



--------------------------------------------
My apologies for not posting this reply sooner. I finally had the opportunity to review the contract between Vintage Pop Media Music, LLC (Howard Mann) and Katherine Jackson. Herein are my impressions and interpretations of the “Performance Agreement” signed and dated by each party on February 3, 2010.

Let me tell you upfront there are a multitude of problems with this contract. Some areas are in point of fact contradictory. We could literally go line-for-line highlighting issues. For those of you not wanting to weigh into a long post, the bottom line is the estate will challenge Howard Mann and Henry Vaccaro over their claim to rights of the memorabilia in their possession (my guess is in the new year) and the estate will win as the law does not support the Mann/Vaccaro assertions. The courts will then rule by entering into the aforementioned contract Howard Mann and Katherine Jackson contravened the estate’s position. This obviously hurried agreement is about greed and a way for the parties involved to make a quick buck before the estate comes and shuts them down.

Understand this contract was not drafted by an attorney. The choice of language and wording and construction are a dead giveaway. (That fact does not make the agreement between the parties any less valid, for now, however it is telling.) In Section WAIVERS, Part 36, Katherine Jackson attests “I have sought the advice of council in this matter or herein waive my rights thereto.” If the latter portion of her declaration is true and Katherine Jackson chose to “waive my rights [to council] thereto” she is gravely misguided. If Katherine Jackson “sought the advice of council” it certainly was not legal council. I PROMISE you there is NO WAY that Adam Streisand (Katherine Jackson’s council of record) would have allowed her to enter into such an agreement. Mr. Streisand is a highly competent attorney and Katherine Jackson would be wise to avail herself of his council. Frankly, due to her actions I will not be the least bit surprised if Mr. Streisand files to remove himself as Katherine Jackson’s council of record come the new year.

One chief reason the courts will nullify this agreement when the estate takes legal action against Vintage Pop Media Music, LLC and Howard Mann (and they absolutely will - bet on it) is because Katherine Jackson entered into said agreement asserting authority she does not legally have. Under Section GRANT OF RIGHTS, Parts 9 and 10, Katherine Jackson grants Vintage Pop Media Music, LLC the exclusive right to “(9) use, commercialize and exploit for the purposes of profiting, the name, likeness, images, materials, and any intangible assets not governed herein in conjunction and in combination with the programming and related assets contemplated herein. (10) KJ hereby waives any inherent rights to privacy and grants VPM the exclusive right to produce, promote, market, sell, trade and generally commercialize the content it records, without limitation thereto, providing payments are made as laid out herein.” This is a problem and the courts will jump on it. Whomever drafted this agreement attempted to be clever in their wording but they missed their mark in a BIG way. (If you have more questions about this aspect of the contract just ask and I will expound further.) In sum, Katherine Jackson does NOT legally have the authority to commercialize and exploit Michael Jackson’s name or likeness, et cetera for profit.

EQUITY TERMS / ADVANCES / MEDIA and PROMOTIONAL ENGAGEMENTS

Vintage Pop Media Music, LLC, agrees to pay Katherine Jackson 25% of the net profits derived from the “exploitation efforts” (their words) of VPM and guarantees Katherine Jackson a minimum payment of $10,000.00 each month. In addition to her monthly share of the profits Katherine Jackson will be compensated at the rate of $5,000.00 per day for making any media or promotional appearances to promote the VPM endeavor (plus travel, security and other expenses at their [VPM’s] discretion.) For example in June 2010 Katherine Jackson returned to Gary, IN to commemorate the one year anniversary of Mr. Jackson’s death. For this appearance she was paid $5,000.00 for each day she was there, plus travel expenses and 25% of the profits generated by the Gary, IN event or $10,000.00 whichever amount was greater; For her Oprah interview about her book, Katherine Jackson was paid an additional $5,000.00 by VPM. You get the idea.

In the agreement Katherine Jackson and Mr. Jackson’s minor children are collectively referred to as “The KJ Party.” Not only does Katherine Jackson agree that she will make herself available to promote the VPM projects, she commits the children as well. Under SPECIFIC TERMS, Parts 13 and 14, Katherine agrees “The KJ Party will appear in person to promote the program as required” and upon the mutual consent of VPM and Katherine Jackson, “The KJ Party will conduct further interviews, promotional materials and marketing related efforts, including but not limited to television appearances, radio interviews, magazine interviews and any news media association or affiliation as required.” I know many of you will read this and be understandably appalled at the idea of the children in the media spotlight given Mr. Jackson’s longstanding distain for the media and his well-do***ented desire that his children be afforded their privacy. It is a valid concern. However, what is more disturbing is NOWHERE in this contract are the children financially compensated for their time, efforts, or participation in the VPM project(s). Katherine Jackson is compensated and receives 25% of the profits, but the children, either collectively or individually, do not receive a dime.

Regardless of any personal feelings you may have on the subject of Mr. Jackson’s children (I know from reading your posts opinions are wide and varied) this contract irrefutably shows Katherine Jackson is not above using Mr. Jackson’s children for the purposes of promoting and generating profits for “her” business ventures.

MISCELLANY
The PDF posted by TMZ contains two copies of the “Performance Agreement” one witnessed, the other not. One of you noted in your post the contract is dated February 2009. You are correct, and the copyright on the bottom of each page also says 2009. I believe this is in fact a typo and NOT a “renewal” of an agreement originally drawn 2009. I really cannot emphasize enough how poorly this do***ent is put together. For all the problems in this do***ent THIS is actually the least of them. What I did notice was the seal. Magnify your version of the PDF and look closely at the sworn affirmation on the last page (page 12 of the TMZ PDF.) The contract unquestionably states it was executed under seal on the 3rd day of February. Now look at the seal which is clearly dated 25th day of February.

I will check back tomorrow if there are any follow up questions.
Be well all,


Mjuls, Esq.


**DISCLAIMER: The information expressed is not intended to substitute for professional legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. You should accept legal advice only from a licensed legal professional with whom you have an attorney-client relationship.
As a matter of record I state I am in no way affiliated with the Estate of Michael Jackson.

http://www.tmz.com/2010/11/11/kather...omments-anchor

Reply · Report Post