"If that isn’t enough to alert you that the interview is a hoax, just consider the basic premise behind it. A wealthy Japanese ex-corporate executive is willing to risk both jail and death in order to rat out the mafia to a blogger. What’s more, we are never given the name of this executive. Instead he goes by a one name pseudonym making it impossible to verify who he is or even if he exists. This violates the 6th rule of the Authority Appeal fallacy. You should never trust unnamed sources ! What is even more heinous is that the entire interview hinges on his being an industry insider. Evidence supporting his claims is never provided. Instead, readers are expected to uncritically accept the conspiratorial nonsense, bolstered only by the assumption that it is coming from a “real” visual kei insider telling us the “truth”. In an ideal world this nonsense would be rejected whole heatedly and sink into obscurity were it belongs. Sadly, as P.T Barnum once said a “sucker is born every minute”.
Of course, authority appeals are only the beginning of the failings of the claims made by this purported “ex-executive”. Many of the claims he makes are blatant contradictions. In the beginning, he claims that members of successful indie bands can leave their label when they want to:
“Every band has one smart guy who, after a few years, wants to actually make some money. And because of his band, he has contacts with all the major musicians, businesspeople, roadies, managers. . . so he decides to leave his band and start his own label.”
Later he says members of successful indie bands can’t leave their bands.
“Of course if the band isn’t making money , who cares? But if the band is making money, and they want to leave the label, that’s not allowed.”
He even admits that Kamijo switched labels four times! That’s not even bothering to consider the many real life examples of people leaving bands unharassed. Miyavi left Due le Quartz, Malice Mizer switched singers twice and lost their first drummer, Araki left Buck-Tick. In one part he claims that bands can’t join major labels but are licensed to them by the indie labels
“The indie sells a LICENCE to the major. They sell the major the right to release one or two records by the band . So the indie still owns the band – they still manage the band, but they get major advertising and major distribution.”
Before that he claims that all Indie labels are secretly owned by major labels.
“They (the top 3 guys) have the right to start as many record labels as they want, as long as everyone in ‘the family’ knows who owns what. And if you want to avoid taxes, you just go bankrupt! The label suddenly vanishes . . .and soon you start another one!Together, they got the whole country! By giving, I suppose ‘licences’ (if I can call it like that) to other musicians to start their own small labels (which are secretly tied to the main guys), they can do much more business than with 3 big, slow-moving labels.”
“Both! You put up some of your own money, and borrow the rest. But there is never –never! A point where you have paid off the debt to the major guy. You will always be his employee, even if it looks like you run your on label. Also, all the publishing rights for the music go directly to the parent label!”
This is contradictory. If indie labels are all employees of major labels then licensing bands to major labels would be pointless, since the major labels already have complete ownership of the labels and their bands to begin with. Also notice how he claims that the indie labels need licenses from the majors while the major labels need licenses from the indie labels. Which is in control of which? These are just some of the most obvious inconsistencies in this “interview”."