- Joined
- Dec 2, 2015
- Messages
- 25,118
- Reputation
- 14,993
- Daps
- 106,689
- Reppin
- Charlotte - Washington D.C.
I remember Katt explaining it. Someone needs to find and put it up
EDIT: A heavy, heavy gem was dropped about Bernie Mac.
I remember Katt explaining it. Someone needs to find and put it up
I remember Katt explaining it. Someone needs to find and put it up
This is why you listen to elders and why Black men NEED to be in the home with their family. So much shyt we have to deal with never gets told, or, if it is, no one believes it.


Well damn say it wit yea chest Dave. That man wants his Chappelle Show money.
CC: Hey, great job on those first two seasons, check this out we'll give you $50M for all your hard work but you'll owe us two more seasons, a tour, and a 1 hour stand up special.
Dave: Hold up, my show generated $500M off the first two seasons, I had the highest selling DVD of all time, you guys pocket $493M in PROFIT after stiffing me out of my DVD sales, and then want to offer me $50M of my own money but only if I give you two more seasons, a tour, and an hour special..

I think that is where the current age differs from the Diddy era. Yes, you can still get jerked in a legal contract. It can be legal and still be exploitative relative to someone's current/future market market value.This is unfortunate but you need to fully understand contracts and the ramifications before you sign them. It sounds like a shytty deal but it is one he signed and just because you get the short end of the stick does not mean you are getting jerked. Hopefully he can get something out of this but i doubt it.
Understandable but contracts are not about what is fair but what both parties agreed to. He should of thought about this before signing regardless of his situation back then. If they are not following through on their contractual obligations then CC should be roasted, but if they are then there is nothing wrong.
Streaming didn't even exist when Chappelle Show came out.