As Paul told Michael, there is a lot of money being made from owning the rights to songs. I remember vaguely, that PM owns rights to a popular colleges fight song, so whenever it got played at a game, he got a cut. PM supposedly owes a ton of song that aren't his. On one of David Gilmour's videos, he, the band and their WAGs are singing Happy Birthday to Richard Wright, but the sound is off so DG doesn't have to pay royalties. Kind of odd that Happy Birthday is not in public domain.
According to Wikipedia, Warner Brothers (who own the current rights) say the US copyright will not expire until 2030, while apparently the European copyright will expire in 2016.Originally Posted by Tangram
The topic of the mechanical rights to use a song, just for the purposes of having someone sing the chorus or whatever, is a running joke on That Metal Show. Anytime anyone threatens to sing something, Eddie's always like "Don't! We can't afford to pay for the rights".
Another example was a show I saw back in the early 90's, hosted by some Englishman. It was actually a series where each show focused on things like B movies, Hong Kong horror movies, Jackie Chan's career, etc. One particular episode hinged on exploring the Elvis impersonator phenomenon, with the host learning how to become an impersonator. At the end, they had to him sing an Elvis song at an Elvis convention or something like that, but they couldn't actually use it in the program because they couldn't secure the rights to use the song.
Then there's the Remembrance Of The Daleks debacle. This particular late 80's Doctor Who serial is set in 1963 (I think it was meant to commemorate the 25 anniversary of the series, but they got a lot of details wrong), and as such, there were a couple scenes where they used Beatles songs in the original broadcast. But when it came out on DVD, they had to substitute cover versions because, due to the unique way the BBC is funded (that would probably be Jeremy Clarkson's explanation) they couldn't use The Beatles versions. Then later, another DVD came out, only in the UK though, which did have The Beatles versions.
Jackson and McCartney fell out when Jackson (a) started letting Beatles songs be used in adverts and (b) ignored McCartney's request for a larger cut of the publishing than they originally signed for back in the early 60s. Jacko told Macca that it was "just business".
Though publishing companies buy up song copyrights, there's always an obligation to pay the writers (though not necessarily to consult them over usage). I think there was a test case in the UK many years ago which successfully challenged publishers' right to take more than 50% of publishing royalties, so I'd assume Breatles composers get their minimum 50% to this day. Quite right too! Why should a royalty-collection company get more than the original creator?
The difference is that somebody owns The Beatles' music as opposed to it falling into Public Domain................
I'm not even bothering reading this thread because it's always the same-old, same-old.
Instead, I will ask why you care enough to create yet one more thread about it. If I'm a jewel thief, I sneak into rich people's homes and steal their jewels and go on my merry way. I don't feel the need to justify my actions or to talk about them. You know who talks about the crimes they commit? Stupid criminals -- the ones who want to get caught. If people download music or movies or books or whatever, why are they never satisfied by simply collecting their ill-gotten gains? Guilty conscience? The proper and successful criminal has divorced himself from feelings of guilt or at least compartmentalized them somehow. That's why he's successful at it.
I understand that some people are militantly pro-download. I see it. I get it. But let's be real, if the goal is to download stuff so you don't have to buy it, then go ahead and do it. Why worry about whether anyone is going to agree with you or not?
Even if its to personally justify an individual's question of conscience, it is supportive to know how others feel about any subject that is deemed taboo......
On this particular subject, I believe that any recorded product that falls into Public Domain under Creative Commons licence is up for grabs....I also personally feel that any OOP album (especially an album that has been OOP for decades) is up for grabs...... but just because I feel this way doesn't mean that I am legally correct: It still all boils down to a question of conscience
Yup, author's rights are usually inalienable (can't be taken away/permanent), IF the songwriting credits have been coorectly attributed at first (I just read a thing with Micky Most making money from the traditional House Of The Rising Sun, instead of the Animals)...
in very rare cases were these taken away from the real author .... like Rod Evans for the fake Purple episode in 79 or maybe Daevid Allen signing them off to Charly Records drunk/stoned in an airport in a rush to catch a plane... It doesn't mean either that they can't be redirected to someone that the author has a debt to, until the counts are settled.
Last edited by Trane; 06-26-2014 at 07:50 AM.
my music collection increased tenfolds when I switched from drug-addicts to complete nutcases.
They do until such time as they choose to sell them.
You have a very unrealistic view of how the world and how business works.
It was for sale. He paid the best price for it. Ergo, it's his. That doesn't mean he doesn't have to pay others, but he gets a cut.
Just like Paul McCartney's MPL group, the largest music publisher in the world, iirc. Paul/MPL gets a cut of everything that MPL owns that someone else uses.
Imagine how hard life would be if you hated Paulie!
Last edited by Steve F.; 06-26-2014 at 08:37 AM.
Steve F.
www.waysidemusic.com
www.cuneiformrecords.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
“Remember, if it doesn't say "Cuneiform," it's not prog!” - THE Jed Levin
Any time any one speaks to me about any musical project, the one absolute given is "it will not make big money". [tip of the hat to HK]
"Death to false 'support the scene' prog!"
please add 'imo' wherever you like, to avoid offending those easily offended.
Give Brad a prize for cutting to the chase.
Steve F.
www.waysidemusic.com
www.cuneiformrecords.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
“Remember, if it doesn't say "Cuneiform," it's not prog!” - THE Jed Levin
Any time any one speaks to me about any musical project, the one absolute given is "it will not make big money". [tip of the hat to HK]
"Death to false 'support the scene' prog!"
please add 'imo' wherever you like, to avoid offending those easily offended.
Brad gets publishing royalties for "Let it Be"!!!
If you're actually reading this then chances are you already have my last album but if NOT and you're curious:
https://battema.bandcamp.com/
Also, Ephemeral Sun: it's a thing and we like making things that might be your thing: https://ephemeralsun.bandcamp.com
If you bothered to read any of my posts on this, you would know I have nothing to feel guilty about.
I was just asking a question, which in the podcast I was listening to, the same question was brought up after I posted this.
I was posting for the discussion about if an artist got nothing from legally downloading, would people still support the labels and big business that get the money.
Not "Hey I'm stealing shit from every band I listen to!"
But thanks for reminding me why I don't come here much anymore.
Adding to Brad's accurate sentiment...some songwriters choose to outright sell their unpublished songs to established artists, sometimes even for a flat price and no songwriting credit--which effectively bargains away their otherwise valuable first-issue rights as well as any subsequent derivative rights. Any agreement that can be legally negotiated is fair game.
As a possible balm to those irritated by the Beatles/MJ thing...if memory serves...after the Beatles sale to MJ, there was a musical event, at which MJ and George Harrison were in attendance. "Something" was heard by both, and MJ [allegedly] speculated about how much money he was making from it. Harrison [allegedly] set him straight..."Sorry, Michael, that's one of mine."
Even if that's an apocryphal anecdote, I like it.
What I don't get is how McCartney couldn't scrape up more than the $50 million or so that MJ paid for the rights back in the 80s.
Yes, it is just business. When it becomes a travesty is when an artist cannot legally perform his own music publicly.
"The White Zone is for loading and unloading only. If you got to load or unload go to the White Zone!"
He could. He didn't want to.
Steve F.
www.waysidemusic.com
www.cuneiformrecords.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
“Remember, if it doesn't say "Cuneiform," it's not prog!” - THE Jed Levin
Any time any one speaks to me about any musical project, the one absolute given is "it will not make big money". [tip of the hat to HK]
"Death to false 'support the scene' prog!"
please add 'imo' wherever you like, to avoid offending those easily offended.
Has he actually said he didn't want to pay more for them?
I can't imagine we would know for sure what his financial situation was at the time.
But if he said he had the money, but didn't want to pay for them, then I don't feel bad for him anymore.
Here's a good article on the McCartney/Jackson situation: http://www.celebritynetworth.com/art...-music-empire/
Mike
MPL is the biggest music publisher in the world.
Paul McCartney is one of the richest entertainers in the world.
He had the money. Period.
Steve F.
www.waysidemusic.com
www.cuneiformrecords.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
“Remember, if it doesn't say "Cuneiform," it's not prog!” - THE Jed Levin
Any time any one speaks to me about any musical project, the one absolute given is "it will not make big money". [tip of the hat to HK]
"Death to false 'support the scene' prog!"
please add 'imo' wherever you like, to avoid offending those easily offended.
The sad part is that it was a very good business decision on MJ's part. It was right before the CD industry took off, so I'm sure he raked in tons and tons of money. I believe he later sold part ownership to Sony.
I recall at the time that McCartney's net worth was astronomically high. Yoko was involved, too. (John's estate was worth $232 Million when he was murdered.) Were they not bidding together?
"The White Zone is for loading and unloading only. If you got to load or unload go to the White Zone!"
Hey...you're obviously getting me confused with someone else. I never said I or anyone else had the right to steal it...geez...you might try to actually read my posts before you attack me.
Check out my solo project prog band, Mutiny in Jonestown at https://mutinyinjonestown.bandcamp.com/
Check out my solo project progressive doom metal band, WytchCrypt at https://wytchcrypt.bandcamp.com/
You don't know anything about my view of the world or my business experience so I'll be sure to apply your implied "imo" to the above statement. To clarify, I never said this wasn't the way the music business worked...I'm simply stating my opinion that it pisses me off when a songrwriter does not have full control and financial reward for their work...whether that be Macca, Buddy Holly, or whoever.
Check out my solo project prog band, Mutiny in Jonestown at https://mutinyinjonestown.bandcamp.com/
Check out my solo project progressive doom metal band, WytchCrypt at https://wytchcrypt.bandcamp.com/
Then you must walk around pissed off all the time.
p.s. please be sure to read my sig file.
Steve F.
www.waysidemusic.com
www.cuneiformrecords.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
“Remember, if it doesn't say "Cuneiform," it's not prog!” - THE Jed Levin
Any time any one speaks to me about any musical project, the one absolute given is "it will not make big money". [tip of the hat to HK]
"Death to false 'support the scene' prog!"
please add 'imo' wherever you like, to avoid offending those easily offended.
I think the Czar asks an interesting question that I don't and didn't know much about . I guess it's like when someone writes a play - for Broadway plays there are two publishers that publish them and collect royalties for the author whenever a production is done. But I don't think a band would be REQUIRED to have their songs published.
Who got the $50 million?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks