Bob Daisley's grail stuff.

[rokket]

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

You have a copy of Bob's contract from those days?

Since Bob is complaining about getting royalties, I'm assuming that his original contract included royalties. Don didn't pay them out to ANYONE, not even Ozzy I believe, I think Ozzy and Sharon even worked with Bob trying to sue Don for royalties at one point. When Ozzy and Sharon bought the contracts, they did the same thing to Bob and Lee.

After Bob was fired from the band and was rehired (Under a different contract) he was to be payed in a lump sum for the album BatM. That is why he doesn't complain about any other albums. Not because he was payed poorly, but because he wasn't OWED anything from those.

So I guess you have a copy of the contract from those days then??

Seriously, this is like beating a dead horse. Honestly, I don't know the details of what was in the contracts anymore than you do. I am simply assuming. All I know is that their lawsuits have been dismissed. ( Yes I am aware that they did win one lawsuit) Seems to me that the evidence that Bob, Lee, and you guys claim, simply isn't there. Ive heard 50 different stories on this crap. So when its all said and done, Ill go with the courts, and not what Bob says. Sorry.


Matt

I think it's more about educating ourselves than just beating a dead horse for the sake of it. I would imagine, when Bob's book is about to be published, Ozzy and Sharon will try and do the same thing they did to Rudy and his book, try and stop it from being published. I also would say that if Bob makes any claims in the book that the Osbournes can prove are lies, they will sue him, for all sorts of legal reasons.

[Remedylane]

Im more than willing to educate myself. I just need more than Bobs words to convince me of certain things.

[Cryptic Night]

Im more than willing to educate myself. I just need more than Bobs words to convince me of certain things.

All I'm saying is, BOO and DOAM are the ONLY albums that Bob complains about not getting royalties for, which would lead one to suspect that his contract at the time included royalties for those albums.

And Bob won the case in England, but lost the ones in the United States. I'm assuming it's because he joined the band in England, therefore the United States has no say on it. Or something to that degree.

[rokket]

Im more than willing to educate myself. I just need more than Bobs words to convince me of certain things.

We'll all decide in our own minds what or who we prefer to believe, regardless of who writes a book about what, but it's good to keep an open mind, look at both sides of the story and come to a conclusion based on that.

Sometimes it can be difficult for people to believe something different when they have believed a certain version of events for a long time, to suggest it isn't so, to some, is impossible to entertain no matter what is read in a book.

Ozzy's book is a classic example........he's got a lot of the details of the crash wrong, so can we say he got other things wrong in the book as well....seems likely.

I wonder just how much we can believe of anyone's book, including Bob's when it comes out......perhaps we need to discount stories in books altogether.

[Remedylane]

Im more than willing to educate myself. I just need more than Bobs words to convince me of certain things.

We'll all decide in our own minds what or who we prefer to believe, regardless of who writes a book about what, but it's good to keep an open mind, look at both sides of the story and come to a conclusion based on that.

Sometimes it can be difficult for people to believe something different when they have believed a certain version of events for a long time, to suggest it isn't so, to some, is impossible to entertain no matter what is read in a book.

Ozzy's book is a classic example........he's got a lot of the details of the crash wrong, so can we say he got other things wrong in the book as well....seems likely.

I wonder just how much we can believe of anyone's book, including Bob's when it comes out......perhaps we need to discount stories in books altogether.

You are exactly right. I said in an earlier post that I don't totally believe the Osbournes or Bob. The truth likely lies in the middle somewhere. I don't think that Ozzy intentionally lied in his book, and I don't think Bob will intentionally lie in his book. But it was 30 years ago. I don't think anyone can accurately remember what happened when that many years pass.

Cryptic:
Im not sure why Bob only sues for those 2 albums. But we all know he continued to work with Ozzy for 15 years after BOO and DOAM were released. Did he suddenly discover he wasn't getting royalties that he thought he deserved? I just don't buy it. I know the court in England sided with him, but the court in the US didn't. That seems odd to me. I assume the US court had the contract in hand. I don't see the courts screwing Bob over. Again, im not taking the Osbournes side either.. They are as crooked as they come. But at the same time, I can't see them launching Ozzy's solo career after Sabbath and offering the guys on the albums royalties. I may be wrong. If I ever see anything that convinces me otherwise ill be glad to admit it.


Matt

[Alex]

xx123456

[electricmombie]

I can't get over how happening the Chelmsford 10/22/80 gig is. No matter what went down with contracts, lump sum payouts, court cases or two shows in a day/two times per diem and expenses, etc., The Band Rocks During This Show (and era)! It's pretty rare that four musicians (ok, five, with Lindsay Bridgewater) sound magically as one playing live. Check out any little bit of this gig (or any boot from this UK tour in 1980) and it hits you all over again The Magic that the band had at the time. No matter what went down after that, we did get two timeless albums out of this lineup.

I do like Rudy and Tommy on quite a bit of the live stuff, but there's a distinct vibe with the original band that brought out the best in everyone musically. It's pretty wild to think how much was accomplished in a span of about sixteen months (Nov. '79 - March '81).

I was listening to Chelmsford again last night marveling at how fresh and killer this gig still is. Ozzy is even singing well on this one, by and large. Plus, it has the vibe of a smaller hall, which makes it even more interesting as a listen.

It's just awesome to finally be able to hear full gigs from all sorts of eras from 1980-1982. For years, all I ever heard from the original band live was the 'Mr. Crowley Live E.P.' and the pair of live tracks on 'Tribute'. It's great, great fun getting into all of these shows posted up, so Thanks Again to all of you in here for the great environment/vibes/community. Peace! Tim G.

[rokket]

I can't get over how happening the Chelmsford 10/22/80 gig is. No matter what went down with contracts, lump sum payouts, court cases or two shows in a day/two times per diem and expenses, etc., The Band Rocks During This Show (and era)! It's pretty rare that four musicians (ok, five, with Lindsay Bridgewater) sound magically as one playing live. Check out any little bit of this gig (or any boot from this UK tour in 1980) and it hits you all over again The Magic that the band had at the time. No matter what went down after that, we did get two timeless albums out of this lineup.

I do like Rudy and Tommy on quite a bit of the live stuff, but there's a distinct vibe with the original band that brought out the best in everyone musically. It's pretty wild to think how much was accomplished in a span of about sixteen months (Nov. '79 - March '81).

I was listening to Chelmsford again last night marveling at how fresh and killer this gig still is. Ozzy is even singing well on this one, by and large. Plus, it has the vibe of a smaller hall, which makes it even more interesting as a listen.

It's just awesome to finally be able to hear full gigs from all sorts of eras from 1980-1982. For years, all I ever heard from the original band live was the 'Mr. Crowley Live E.P.' and the pair of live tracks on 'Tribute'. It's great, great fun getting into all of these shows posted up, so Thanks Again to all of you in here for the great environment/vibes/community. Peace! Tim G.

Agreed. And I think I know why. Not sure how many of you have been in original bands, but when you first get a lineup together that really works well, it's exciting on many different levels, and that does reflect in each individuals playing and thus the overall sound of the band.

For Rudy and Tommy, still exciting, to be in a band, but what is not reflected in their playing is the excitement of playing songs you helped work up and develop or playing the part you wrote, there's a different feeling playing covers, or someone elses part, that isn't as fun as playing your own, and that comes out in the music, even if you try not to let it.

[Cryptic Night]

Cryptic:
Im not sure why Bob only sues for those 2 albums. But we all know he continued to work with Ozzy for 15 years after BOO and DOAM were released. Did he suddenly discover he wasn't getting royalties that he thought he deserved? I just don't buy it. I know the court in England sided with him, but the court in the US didn't. That seems odd to me. I assume the US court had the contract in hand. I don't see the courts screwing Bob over. Again, im not taking the Osbournes side either.. They are as crooked as they come. But at the same time, I can't see them launching Ozzy's solo career after Sabbath and offering the guys on the albums royalties. I may be wrong. If I ever see anything that convinces me otherwise ill be glad to admit it.


Matt

That's because Bob took a lump sum after that. He didn't want to deal with the royalties from the record company, so he sold the music to Ozzy (Hence, why BatM says that only Ozzy wrote all the music) and played on the album for one paycheck, and that was it.

And, IMO, the reason the courts threw out Bob's cases is because when he signed with them, it happened in England, putting it out of the US's jurisdiction. So the United States really had no say on what happened. And that would be the reason he won the case in England.

I could be wrong about that, but it makes the most sense to me.

[Remedylane]

Cryptic:
Im not sure why Bob only sues for those 2 albums. But we all know he continued to work with Ozzy for 15 years after BOO and DOAM were released. Did he suddenly discover he wasn't getting royalties that he thought he deserved? I just don't buy it. I know the court in England sided with him, but the court in the US didn't. That seems odd to me. I assume the US court had the contract in hand. I don't see the courts screwing Bob over. Again, im not taking the Osbournes side either.. They are as crooked as they come. But at the same time, I can't see them launching Ozzy's solo career after Sabbath and offering the guys on the albums royalties. I may be wrong. If I ever see anything that convinces me otherwise ill be glad to admit it.


Matt

That's because Bob took a lump sum after that. He didn't want to deal with the royalties from the record company, so he sold the music to Ozzy (Hence, why BatM says that only Ozzy wrote all the music) and played on the album for one paycheck, and that was it.

And, IMO, the reason the courts threw out Bob's cases is because when he signed with them, it happened in England, putting it out of the US's jurisdiction. So the United States really had no say on what happened. And that would be the reason he won the case in England.

I could be wrong about that, but it makes the most sense to me.

Interesting theory. As the mythbusters say, that is plausible. Haha.. Would love to hear why it did get thrown out in the US courts.


Matt

[rokket]

Cryptic:
Im not sure why Bob only sues for those 2 albums. But we all know he continued to work with Ozzy for 15 years after BOO and DOAM were released. Did he suddenly discover he wasn't getting royalties that he thought he deserved? I just don't buy it. I know the court in England sided with him, but the court in the US didn't. That seems odd to me. I assume the US court had the contract in hand. I don't see the courts screwing Bob over. Again, im not taking the Osbournes side either.. They are as crooked as they come. But at the same time, I can't see them launching Ozzy's solo career after Sabbath and offering the guys on the albums royalties. I may be wrong. If I ever see anything that convinces me otherwise ill be glad to admit it.


Matt

That's because Bob took a lump sum after that. He didn't want to deal with the royalties from the record company, so he sold the music to Ozzy (Hence, why BatM says that only Ozzy wrote all the music) and played on the album for one paycheck, and that was it.

And, IMO, the reason the courts threw out Bob's cases is because when he signed with them, it happened in England, putting it out of the US's jurisdiction. So the United States really had no say on what happened. And that would be the reason he won the case in England.

I could be wrong about that, but it makes the most sense to me.

Interesting theory. As the mythbusters say, that is plausible. Haha.. Would love to hear why it did get thrown out in the US courts.


Matt

I heard that the limitations on making a claim for the Diary royalties had run out........don't know if thats the case, but I know there are time limits for a lot of legal issues. And fair enough too, or the court rooms would be clogged up with people who wake up one day and think...."mmm might start a legal claim for that time 10 years ago I was off work for 12 weeks with a broken leg...I think I can prove it was...blah blah blah...".....I know everything owed for Blizzard was paid when the London case was won........

[Cryptic Night]

I heard that the limitations on making a claim for the Diary royalties had run out........don't know if thats the case, but I know there are time limits for a lot of legal issues. And fair enough too, or the court rooms would be clogged up with people who wake up one day and think...."mmm might start a legal claim for that time 10 years ago I was off work for 12 weeks with a broken leg...I think I can prove it was...blah blah blah...".....I know everything owed for Blizzard was paid when the London case was won........

As I said, I could be wrong.

[rokket]

I heard that the limitations on making a claim for the Diary royalties had run out........don't know if thats the case, but I know there are time limits for a lot of legal issues. And fair enough too, or the court rooms would be clogged up with people who wake up one day and think...."mmm might start a legal claim for that time 10 years ago I was off work for 12 weeks with a broken leg...I think I can prove it was...blah blah blah...".....I know everything owed for Blizzard was paid when the London case was won........

As I said, I could be wrong.

Whatever we read has to be taken with a grain of salt to some degree, and what people say as well.......take it at face value and decide, bit like Jake Duncan and his version of events the day of the crash, only he knows how much he said is true......who knows.

[hansolo]

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. He certainly didn't give them even a small bit of recognition on the "Thirty years after the Blizzard" DVD. This you can't argue, not anyone can. Whether or not you like Lee and Bob or Rudy and Tommy better isn't the point. Sharon mentioned the 2011 remasters as "The original guys" and that was that. I'll have to check the box set further but come on! IMHO Bob and Lee are the "right band" for hearing the album sound. I do like the diary (we all wish more Randy) footage. It has the bootlegs sound! I remember listening to Kalamazoo '82 after buying it at a show. Randy's stereo echo that bounced between channels (L & R). Ozzy saying, "Say hello to Ronnie (Dio)!" Referring to the dwarf. I like Rudy and Tommy - I appreciate the F outta them but the moves seem nervous and jerky from Tommy and Rudy's hand-over-the-neck and bass licking is Kiss-like. The Blizzard Band had soul. IMHO

[AndrewT1976]

Blizzard all the way!!!!!!! Bob+Lee+Randy+Ozzy = THE ORIGINAL MAGIC.