The Beatles Remastered

[Evans Electric]

Refering back to The Beatles thread, I see that the estate of Michael Jackson will benefit from the millions in royalties from their earlier recordings ,as he purchased the rights to them some years ago.

That must **** off Paul , Ringo and Yoko I'd imagine ( no pun intended)

 

[The Godfather]

Refering back to The Beatles thread, I see that the estate of Michael Jackson will benefit from the millions in royalties from their earlier recordings ,as he purchased the rights to them some years ago. That must **** off Paul , Ringo and Yoko I'd imagine ( no pun intended)

He actually outbid Paul McCartney, as I recall.

Don & His Boys

 

[bassman]

Paul Mc

Has tried to buy them back a couple of times the rights did not originally belong to the group.

Me thinks someone like EMI who sold the rights.

May be wrong but something like that any way.Yoko doesny deserve anything anyway what did she sing apart from give peace a chance (ie chant)

 

[The Godfather]

It does appear that MJ's sudden departure, has left Paul without any chance of regaining ownership of the Lennon/McCartney tracks.

The Godfather

 

[Evans Electric]

Paul Mc Has tried to buy them back a couple of times the rights did not originally belong to the group.

Me thinks someone like EMI who sold the rights.

May be wrong but something like that any way.Yoko doesny deserve anything anyway what did she sing apart from give peace a chance (ie chant)

I know but I understood she inherited John's rights.

 

[septiclecky]

Thought Sony now owned the rights?

 

[exbdc]

It's just as well Macca didn't get hold of them before his recent divorce otherwise Heather Mills might have ended up owning them.

 

[Couleddie]

Paul Mc Has tried to buy them back a couple of times the rights did not originally belong to the group.

Me thinks someone like EMI who sold the rights.

May be wrong but something like that any way.Yoko doesny deserve anything anyway what did she sing apart from give peace a chance (ie chant)

EMI own the rights to the recordings not the actual compositions. They are two separate things.

 

[Evans Electric]

The story I read a few weeks back is that Jackson was visiting with Paul Mc. who metioned in conversation that the rights to their early recording was being offered for sale. Next thing he knew Jackson had secured them .

 

[exbdc]

The story I read a few weeks back is that Jackson was visiting with Paul Mc. who metioned in conversation that the rights to their early recording was being offered for sale. Next thing he knew Jackson had secured them .

Might have been when they recorded those twee duets together like The Girl is Mine & Ebony & Ivory.

 

[Evans Electric]

You never know , twee is being kind , though somewhat transient.!! The copyright thing with music is quite interesting , Paul Mc. , I heard, owns the rights to the Buddy Holly recordings.

Also you could record , say , a Beatles song but cannot alter the words without permission. Beatles would recieve the writer's fee from the sales. Fortunes were made in the sixties ,I believe, if someone like Elvis recorded your song.

I did once hear Noddy Holder say , that that Christmas song was his pension.

 

[The Godfather]

Regardless of the rights, are they not all rich enough? With endless royalties anyway?

The Boys

 

[exbdc]

You never know , twee is being kind , though somewhat transient.!! The copyright thing with music is quite interesting , Paul Mc. , I heard, owns the rights to the Buddy Holly recordings. Also you could record , say , a Beatles song but cannot alter the words without permission. Beatles would recieve the writer's fee from the sales. Fortunes were made in the sixties ,I believe, if someone like Elvis recorded your song.

I did once hear Noddy Holder say , that that Christmas song was his pension.

Gene Pitney said the same about He's a Rebel.

P.S. you used transient but not ephemeral.

 

[The Godfather]

I did once hear Noddy Holder say , that that Christmas song was his pension.

You have to admit, it has become a classic.

The Boys

 

[SPECIAL LOCATION]

EMI own the rights to the recordings not the actual compositions. They are two separate things.

heres a bit of bumff from the ole tinterweb hyperspace linky searchy sort of thing..........

What Michael Jackson bought for $47.5 million in 1985 was the publishing rights to 159 or 251 Beatles songs, depending on who's counting. To maybe oversimplify a complicated business, publishing rights are basically the sheet music rights. When Paul McCartney wanted to print the lyrics to "Eleanor Rigby" and other Beatles classics in the program for his 1989 world tour, he discovered he'd have to pay a fee to Michael Jackson. The owner of the publishing rights (hereinafter the publisher) also gets a royalty when someone plays a Beatles song on a jukebox or the radio or does a cover version of a Fab Four tune. Particularly in the case of elevator music, to which, let's be frank, a lot of Beatles tunes are well suited, this can earn the publisher some serious cash.

But there are a couple things the publisher can't do. The first is to mess with, or license the use of, Beatles recordings. Michael Jackson agreed to license the words and music of "Revolution" to Nike for a 1987 shoe commercial, but he had to persuade Capitol Records, owner of the tune's North American recording rights, to allow use of the actual record. Most likely he'd have to do the same to overdub said record with his own voice, although he might get away with including a snippet in a musical collage, something even John Lennon did that has now become impossible to control.

Another thing the publisher can't do (in the U.S. at least) is prevent somebody from recording a cover version of a song the publisher owns. Usually the would-be cover artist and the publisher work out a deal on royalties. However, if negotiations fail, U.S. law allows the cover artist to make and market the recording anyway provided he pays a stipulated (and fairly stiff) royalty to the publisher.

The point is, being a publisher doesn't give you all that much control over the songs you own; mainly it gives you the right to the profits they earn. You don't even get to keep all of that; typically you have to give 50% to each song's composer(s), one reason not to feel too sorry for Paul McCartney and the estate of John Lennon. Another reason is that McCartney, despite having gotten skunked out of his own songs, contrived to buy the rights to 3,000 others, including the Buddy Holly catalog, and reportedly is worth $600 million. Not that he's happy, of course. Paul's mad at Michael Jackson not merely because he lost control of the Beatles library but also because Jackson won't discuss giving McCartney a higher composer's royalty for the old tunes.

The last reason not to feel sorry for Paul is that if he got skunked it's his own fault. In the 60s, to avoid confiscatory British taxes, he and Lennon turned their publishing rights over to newly-organized Northern Songs, a publicly-held company in which they owned sizable but apparently not controlling blocks of stock. In 1969 music mogul Lew Grade launched a takeover bid for Northern Songs in which he offered seven times the stock's original offering price. Lennon and McCartney, feuding as usual, were unable to organize an effective defense and the company was sold out from under them. This made them even more fabulously wealthy than they already were, since their stock was now worth seven times as much. However, they were still ****ed on account of, you know, the principle of the thing. The Teeming Millions can surely sympathize.

so there you go......

oh and a bit more...

Jackson, 46, acquired the Beatles song catalog in 1985 for $47.5 million, outbidding ex-Beatles singer/bassist Paul McCartney. Jackson then sold a piece of his stake to Sony a decade later, creating a joint venture called Sony/ATV Music Publishing. The venture is now believed to be worth more than $400 million.

Song catalogs have become hugely lucrative in the last two decades due to the compact disc boom, rising sales of Internet downloads, and movie studios and advertisers willing to pay royalties to use hit songs in film scores and commercials.

Jackson, through Sony/ATV, owns all but a small selection of the Fab Four's compositions, including megahits like "Yesterday," "Let It Be," and "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band." He does not, however, own the actual sound recordings; those rights are held by EMI's Capitol Records.

Royalty arrangements can be quite complicated. Basically, Jackson and Sony receive a fee each time one of the Beatles songs is played on the radio or a Beatles album is sold. Industry royalty rates for single-song plays can run under 10 cents, while rights holders typically earn a small percentage on each album sold.

Clear as mud!!!ROTFWLBlushing

you will all be tested on this tomorrow to make sure you have all read and fully understand it!Blushing:^O

 

[Couleddie]

As easy to fathom as the adiabatic equation. Or whatever that thing's called. :coat

 

[Evans Electric]

Gene Pitney said the same about He's a Rebel.P.S. you used transient but not ephemeral.

Just making sure you are still awake !!