Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Talk about Randy Rhoads here.

Moderators: Randy Perry, The Flying Dutchman, Stiltzkin, skezza, Trigger

shawn
Cool Member
Posts: 270
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:06 pm

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by shawn »

hansolo wrote:BOO and DOAM were OZZY's GRAVY TRAIN, not Crazy train. Best sellers. Ozzy has abandoned Lee and Bob. I don't think Ozzy has spoke about their contributions since they laid 'em down on tape.

Ozzy has said before that he regrets not making more than two albums with that line up. We all know the tragic reasons that made this not possible though. Ozzy did get Bob back again to write for him remember. He most definitely has talked about Bob and the contributions that he has made to his career. He just does not want to pay him for it that is all.
houselabdj
Junior Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2011 3:15 pm

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by houselabdj »

Just go caught up in reading ALL 10 PAGES of this , made for interesting reading a few questions though ,
1. Wasn't it Randy's intention to leave BOO & learn classical in music school ? ( an indication of his getting tired of the scene / follow his real passion for learning & teaching ) my 2 cents
2. Sharon was dating Ozzy back then so she basically would have done whatever it took to help him + icing on the cake was to marry Ozzy ( I'm sure she would've married him anyway ) to "Spite " her father
3. Jurisdictions in the courts ? ........... I recently took a business of music class & didn't matter what country you were in as long as the territories are covered in the contract ( which I'm guessing USA wasn't at the time ) PLUS when those songs are written ( in most cases ) the MANAGER is the one who files for copywright ( well ...handling the red tape end of it ) , liason to ASCAP , BMI etc. On the forms it CLEARLY asks who the AUTHOR / S is / are . I'm sure their names are on it .....it's just the CONTRACT that appar. Bob thinks he didn't get a fair deal. Join the club 'cause SOOOOO many artists back from him to Elvis to Hendrix & countless others got screwed , IT'S NOT ABOUT WHO GETS CREDIT .....IT'S WHO OWNS THE PUBLISHING RIGHTS THEREFORE GETTING THE ROYALTIES .
Sky
Madman
Posts: 414
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:43 am

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by Sky »

houselabdj wrote:Just go caught up in reading ALL 10 PAGES of this , made for interesting reading a few questions though ,
1. Wasn't it Randy's intention to leave BOO & learn classical in music school ? ( an indication of his getting tired of the scene / follow his real passion for learning & teaching ) my 2 cents
2. Sharon was dating Ozzy back then so she basically would have done whatever it took to help him + icing on the cake was to marry Ozzy ( I'm sure she would've married him anyway ) to "Spite " her father
3. Jurisdictions in the courts ? ........... I recently took a business of music class & didn't matter what country you were in as long as the territories are covered in the contract ( which I'm guessing USA wasn't at the time ) PLUS when those songs are written ( in most cases ) the MANAGER is the one who files for copywright ( well ...handling the red tape end of it ) , liason to ASCAP , BMI etc. On the forms it CLEARLY asks who the AUTHOR / S is / are . I'm sure their names are on it .....it's just the CONTRACT that appar. Bob thinks he didn't get a fair deal. Join the club 'cause SOOOOO many artists back from him to Elvis to Hendrix & countless others got screwed , IT'S NOT ABOUT WHO GETS CREDIT .....IT'S WHO OWNS THE PUBLISHING RIGHTS THEREFORE GETTING THE ROYALTIES .
The fact that so many artists have been screwed, and continue to be screwed, doesn't make it right. Bob has stated several times that he gets royalties for his contributions to writing the songs on Blizzard and Diary but not for performing on them. When Bob and Lee won their case against Jet Records in London they received a lump sum for the back royalties that they should have received, those royalties were meant to continue, they didn't. Years later when Bob and Lee finally found out that the Osbournes had been pocketing the performance royalties that they were due, they sued the Osbournes. By which time, the statute of limitations came into play, too much time had elapsed and they were denied a hearing. So much for 'Justice'....
"Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away." - Elvis Presley
electricmombie
Senior Member
Posts: 98
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:11 pm

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by electricmombie »

AndrewT1976 wrote:Electricmombie....totally perfectly stated. I agree 100%.
Thanks Andrew.

Is that Pete Way of U.F.O. in your avatar, or is that you?

:)

Peace/Thanks again.

Tim
SLAGER
Cool Member
Posts: 130
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 2:39 am
Location: New Hampshire

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by SLAGER »

Remedylane wrote:I still say Tommy smokes Lee. I will agree that Bob is better than Rudy, and was an important part of Ozzys career. But im sorry, I refuse to give him all the credit. And for the record, Lee and Bob aren't owed ANYTHING. They signed the same kind of contract that a lot of musicians sign. Its true, no one knew how successful Ozzy was gonna be after Sabbath, but at the end of the day he was already a star. Sabbath was huge. In music your average person will always identify with the singer. Bob and Lee signed a bad contract. They had no idea how successful those albums were gonna be. My singer is a songwriter. When he sells a song he can choose to take a lump sum, or he can choose to sell the song for royalties. Usually the lump sum is what he takes, because you never know. Thats exactly what Bob and Lee did. The courts have already thrown it out. Its over and done with. The only people that did them wrong were themselves. My drummer toured the world in a mid tier rock band. He also recorded with them. His contract was the same. A lump sum, no royalties. Thats just the nature of the beast. There is no doubt that those first two albums were magic. But it wasn't just one person. It was the perfect combination of people. Thats why it worked.


Matt
Tommy does not smoke Lee. Style, songwriting ability, and chemistry are 100% essential ingredients and clearly Lee smoked Tommy in those areas for writing and recording those albums. Lee was the right guy at the right time in the right place to help make those albums happen. Tommy wasn't.

Bob and Lee are definately OWED A LOT. If nothing else, they are owed commeon decency and repect, which they were not given. And since we have not seen their contracts, we cannot say they arent also owed lots of royalty money and official credits. They were ripped off no matter how you slice it.
User avatar
shred1
Madman
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:24 am

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by shred1 »

I see Bob has posted the isolated bass tracks to some of the Blizzard tunes on his website.
probably got'em from here.

This guy is starting to look desperate. Loser move.

Bob's credibilty with ME is really nosediving.
MOVE ON, you are damaging your own legacy with these actions.
Sky
Madman
Posts: 414
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:43 am

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by Sky »

shred1 wrote:I see Bob has posted the isolated bass tracks to some of the Blizzard tunes on his website.
probably got'em from here.

This guy is starting to look desperate. Loser move.

Bob's credibilty with ME is really nosediving.
MOVE ON, you are damaging your own legacy with these actions.

Some of us are pleased that the bass and drum tracks have been posted on Bob's website.
I couldn't disagree more with your views.
"Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away." - Elvis Presley
User avatar
shred1
Madman
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:24 am

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by shred1 »

Bob is 'bootlegging' himself and Lee to prove his point, on his own website. Desperation move.
Lame.

What will that prove or solve.... to anyone? Here is a guy chirping about injustice, then he sets himself up for another ripoff.

We are not supposed to have access to those files. They were hacked from Guitar Hero.

Whether YOU enjoy them or not is not the issue. Hell, I found it it interesting to listen too as well.

In my books, Bob and Lee have gone from respected players, to a couple of whiners, milking their association with RR for their retirement fund.

Up until TODAY, I had some respect for Mr Daisley. Not anymore. Starting to see why these guys got dropped on their heads.

Hoping some rapper grabs Bob's isolated tracks from his website, builds a loop/mash-up with it and has a smash success on YouTube. Mr. Daisley will be back in court, complaining he got ripped off, except he is supplying the files.

Ridiculous.

'We didn't find out until later that RR wanted to work with us'...... I could say RR wanted to work with me but I never knew too.

Bob, here is a tissue.
Sky
Madman
Posts: 414
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:43 am

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by Sky »

shred1 wrote:Bob is 'bootlegging' himself and Lee to prove his point, on his own website. Desperation move.
Lame.

What will that prove or solve.... to anyone? Here is a guy chirping about injustice, then he sets himself up for another ripoff.

We are not supposed to have access to those files. They were hacked from Guitar Hero.

Whether YOU enjoy them or not is not the issue. Hell, I found it it interesting to listen too as well.

In my books, Bob and Lee have gone from respected players, to a couple of whiners, milking their association with RR for their retirement fund.

Up until TODAY, I had some respect for Mr Daisley. Not anymore. Starting to see why these guys got dropped on their heads.

Hoping some rapper grabs Bob's isolated tracks from his website, builds a loop/mash-up with it and has a smash success on YouTube. Mr. Daisley will be back in court, complaining he got ripped off, except he is supplying the files.

Ridiculous.

'We didn't find out until later that RR wanted to work with us'...... I could say RR wanted to work with me but I never knew too.

Bob, here is a tissue.
Bob's site is run for him not by him. The bass and drum tracks have been on his site for quite a while, I was told they were sent in by a fan when I asked. I'm not sure why you've quoted Lee when you're slagging Bob off, but it probably makes sense in your world.
"Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away." - Elvis Presley
User avatar
shred1
Madman
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:24 am

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by shred1 »

He is bootlegging himself with illegal files. Yet crying over legalities and fair play - for 30 years.
Hope he has his lawyer on speed dial.
He is gonna get burned again.

And he can't blame Sharon on this one. Further more, if Sharon catches wind of this, and she will, he might be setting himself for another round of losses with the Osbournes.

This a brainless course of action he has taken.
User avatar
RhoadsRockPhotographer
Cool Member
Posts: 247
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 8:39 pm

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by RhoadsRockPhotographer »

shred1 wrote:Bob's credibilty with ME is really nosediving.
Image
User avatar
shred1
Madman
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:24 am

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by shred1 »

How he got the files means shit. And technically, what he is doing is illegal.
Consider my YouTube theory above.

Sharon will come down on him like never before.

Judge: So where did the illegal isolated tracks come from?
Bob Daisley's website.

Judge: Bob, Did you knowingly allow distribution of these illegal files, which are partly, or wholly "OWNED" by the Osbournes?
Yes.

By the letter of the law, Dude, you are in trouble.

Some of you guys act like Bob's your pal, leave your FEELINGS out of it... The above picture may morph into a crowded courtroom shot. With Bob and Lee once again shaking their head at the verdict.

And at this point, I hope he gets nailed. Yep, its a drag when you find out your heroes just ain't "ALL THAT".

Good news is, Bob and Lee can keep their names in the news, sobbing about injustice and how they have been wronged, instead of talking about a NEW record they have made.

I should add that yes I have voiced my FEELINGS about this matter, but not without pragmatic insight and evidence. I am backing my FEELINGS with facts.
User avatar
shred1
Madman
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:24 am

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by shred1 »

Sky. Thanks for straightening me out!

Offer something more than smug comebacks please. I have offered up a plethora of evidence to support my claims.
You offer up vapid comebacks. Zero content. Zero insight. Just Bob lover's angst. I'm sure your Googling for a 'funny' image to illustrate your points right now.

Most of the evidence I have found countering Bob and Lee's claims has been lifted from Bob's website. Fact.

Don't need to be a lawyer to see that he is setting himself up for a whole new batch of legal hurt. Self-inflicted I might ad.

Sky, I DARE you to offer up some factual insight on the matter. It would be more than welcome.

cheers
Sky
Madman
Posts: 414
Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:43 am

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by Sky »

shred1 wrote:Sky. Thanks for straightening me out!

Offer something more than smug comebacks please. I have offered up a plethora of evidence to support my claims.
You offer up vapid comebacks. Zero content. Zero insight. Just Bob lover's angst. I'm sure your Googling for a 'funny' image to illustrate your points right now.

Most of the evidence I have found countering Bob and Lee's claims has been lifted from Bob's website. Fact.

Don't need to be a lawyer to see that he is setting himself up for a whole new batch of legal hurt. Self-inflicted I might ad.

Sky, I DARE you to offer up some factual insight on the matter. It would be more than welcome.

cheers

I visit this site to read about Randy and all the musicians that he worked with not to get into a slanging match with someone who seems to prefer hurling insults, creating scenarios and wishing harm on a musician that many on this site respect.
So far I haven't seen any evidence to back up your claims. Give some examples of what you're talking about when you say 'Most of the evidence I have found countering Bob and Lee's claims has been lifted from Bob's website', and I'll be pleased to put in my two cents worth.
"Truth is like the sun. You can shut it out for a time, but it ain't goin' away." - Elvis Presley
User avatar
shred1
Madman
Posts: 340
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:24 am

Re: Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

Post by shred1 »

Text from Bob's site:

4. In his book 'Gods, Gangsters & Honour', Steven Machat gives his thoughts and observations on events surrounding The Blizzard of Ozz...
'Blizzard of Ozz' came out in 1980 in the UK and 1981 in The US, where it would eventually sell more than four million copies. Although it would be billed as Ozzy's first two solo albums, the real creative power behind the throne lay with a trio of musicians: guitarist Randy Rhoads, Rainbow bassist Bob Daisley, and drummer Lee Kerslake, who was with rock group Uriah Heep. I made sure CBS signed Ozzy on a solo deal because I didn't want to waste my time negotiating with the lawyers representing other members of Blizzard. The irony was that CBS made this easy for me because they didn't realise where the creative drive lay.

FACT: They were not signed as a band, as Bob claims.

10. Both you and Lee must have been confident that justice would prevail in the US courts, particularly when Don Arden offered to help you in your case against the Osbournes. In his book 'Gods, Gangsters & Honour', Steven Machat writes about Don Arden's intention to tell the truth:
Don agreed to do the right thing by the boys and tell in his testimony the whole unvarnished truth: Daisley and Kerslake had been royally screwed. Affidavits were drawn up which said that Blizzard was a group recording with Ozzy as a vocalist and the group should split the royalties. Daisley and Kerslake were not sidemen or session musicians playing for a fee. They were equal members of the group and co-owners of the proceeds.

FACT: Papers were drawn up AFTER the fact trying to recoup credits. Not before.
Post Reply