Rabs Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Paul McCartney launches bid to Get Back his Beatles songs http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-35860868 Sir Paul is due to begin his One On One world tour next month Sir Paul McCartney has filed legal papers in the US, as part of an attempt to reclaim the publishing rights to The Beatles' back catalogue. Although he co-wrote most of the band's hits, the star has never controlled the publishing. However, the US copyright act of 1976 gives writers the opportunity to reclaim the rights after 56 years. The Lennon-McCartney catalogue becomes available in 2018, and Sir Paul has recently moved to recapture it. According to Billboard, the star filed a termination notice for 32 songs with the US Copyright Office in December. Most of the songs date from 1962 - 1964, although others come from much later in the band's career. Some of those, including Come Together and Why Don't We Do It In The Road, are not due to become available until 2025. An unnamed source told the magazine Sir Paul would only regain publishing rights for his half of the compositions, most of which he co-wrote with John Lennon. Furthermore, the act only applies to the US, so The Beatles' back catalogue would remain in the hands of Sony / ATV in the rest of the world. Publishing rights determine how a song can be exploited - for example by licensing its use in a film or television programme. The publisher shares any resulting royalties with the songwriters, helping Sir Paul to amass a personal fortune of £730m. But the lack of control over the songs has long been a thorn in the musician's side. 'Dodgy' deal In the very early days of their career, The Beatles' manager, Brian Epstein, persuaded Lennon and McCartney to form a publishing company with music impresario **** James - explaining it would be the smartest way for them to make money from their songs. Within a few years, the band had become bigger than anyone expected and the publishing company - Northern Songs - was floated on the stock market. Lennon and McCartney ended up with a 15% share, while James and his partner Charles Silver took 37.5% between them as the company's chairmen. George Harrison and Ringo Starr were given just 0.8% - prompting the former to write the bitter Only A Northern Song, expressing his dissatisfaction at being considered a junior songwriter within the company. Michael Jackson acquired the catalogue in 1985, much to Sir Paul's displeasure In 1967, after Epstein's death, relations between the band and the chairmen soured - and James abruptly sold the publishing rights to ATV Music for £1.5m (£24.5m adjusted for inflation), without giving notice to The Beatles, robbing them of the chance to obtain the rights for themselves. Almost 20 year later, Michael Jackson bought the ATV catalogue - which by that time also included songs by Little Richard, the Pointer Sisters, Pat Benatar and The Pretenders - for $41.5m (£28.8m), permanently souring his friendship with Sir Paul. "I think it's dodgy to do things like that. To be someone's friend and then to buy the rug they're standing on," the Beatle was quoted as saying in J Randy Taraborrelli's biography of Jackson. In 1995, Jackson sold half of his share in ATV Music to Sony. The Japanese company purchased the remainder of Jackson's stake earlier this month. While Sir Paul's motion to terminate copyright is likely to be successful, Lennon's share in the Beatles' songs will not return to his estate. Yoko Ono sold the rights to his music to Sony/ATV Music in 2009, with those rights lasting the entire copyright's lifetime (70 years). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retired Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Very interesting. I didn't know all of that. Thanks Rabs. Boy, it's a dog eat dog world isn't it? Yea, it's not music but when I drag raced, my best friend that I grew up with from grade school, became a partner with me in two race cars. The second one he stole behind my back and sold it as well as two expensive engines and a whole bunch of my stuff after I got married and moved to Omaha. I lost $50,000.00 or more probably closer to $55,000.00 back in the 70's. And that was my Best Man at my wedding. But really, I always wondered how Michael got the rights to certain years of the Beatles music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted March 21, 2016 Author Share Posted March 21, 2016 Very interesting. I didn't know all of that. Thanks Rabs. Boy, it's a dog eat dog world isn't it? Yea, it's not music but when I drag raced, my best friend that I grew up with from grade school, became a partner with me in two race cars. The second one he stole behind my back and sold it as well as two expensive engines and a whole bunch of my stuff after I got married and moved to Omaha. I lost $50,000.00 or more probably closer to $55,000.00 back in the 70's. And that was my Best Man at my wedding. But really, I always wondered how Michael got the rights to certain years of the Beatles music. Ahh man that sucks big time.. that's no small change there.. Damn.... And yes.. Its one thing that people who know people or are in the industry become aware of very quickly... The music business is first and most prominently a business, there to make money.. Just the way of the world I guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retired Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 1458590078[/url]' post='1753632']Ahh man that sucks big time.. that's no small change there.. Damn.... And yes.. Its one thing that people who know people or are in the industry become aware of very quickly... The music business is first and most prominently a business, there to make money.. Just the way of the world I guess... Oh it ended our friendship but you know, there were better friends I found and worked with and I found out he wasn't really a friend at all because real friends will never do stuff like that to anyone. I mean I'm a guy that if I go through a drive through fast food and they give me to much back in money like a buck or two, I'll park the car and go inside and give it back to them telling them they over changed me. This world is all about the almighty dollar it seems but you can't take it with you when you die. Long time ago on vacation we went into this shop and bought something. Two blocks away I counted up the money and I had $10.00 more then I should have so I told the wife to wait while I returned it. People said, ah just keep it but I thought that isn't right and took it back anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdgm Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 I'm surprised he isn't a billionaire - yet. What they don't mention is that Sir Paul has himself bought whole song catalogues, notably Buddy Holly and some 'Great American Songbook'-type standard songwriters - J Van Heusen I think is one. There was some concern expressed about this within the American music publishing business a few years back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennis G Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 What they don't mention is that Sir Paul has himself bought whole song catalogues, notably Buddy Holly and some 'Great American Songbook'-type standard songwriters Macca has no one but himself to blame for Jackson owning the Beatles stuff. He urged MJ to invest in buying musical catalogs, then got pi$$ed when MJ outbid him for the Beatle stuff. Karma, Macca, Karma... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly campbell Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Although you are right that McCartney did encourage MJ to get into the business it still is a pretty low dude who would do that..Shows you the true character of MJ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darling67 Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Although you are right that McCartney did encourage MJ to get into the business it still is a pretty low dude who would do that..Shows you the true character of MJ. I agree, kc... It was a travesty that McCartney was not allowed to own his own songs when he had a chance. As I understood the article, he can never truly own them in their entirety, at this late stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingarmadillo Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 I'm surprised he isn't a billionaire - yet. ... He is in America. At current exchange rates £730m ~ $1.05 Billion. (US dollars). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quapman Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 I have a real hard time feeling sorry for multi millionaires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Scales Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 I am bemused at what I can only guess is a delusional state among many fellow human beings of perceived immortality. I mean, you are likely entering the last maybe 10 years of your life, have $1 billion at your disposal with which to have fun, do some good, maintain your health.... and you wish to waste (IMO) some of that precious remaining time on some seemingly narcissistic 'treasure hunt' involving the need to deal with bureaucracy, copyright law, and Yoko Ono?? I'm reasonably confident that, if offered the chance to spend a while longer alive in exchange for a chunk of publishing credits, his band mates might have chosen the former. Not a bash on Mr McCartney - its his right to do what he wants, and its probably a fair enough claim he has, but isn't the remaining time precious enough, aren't there 7 billion people less fortunate,... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
merciful-evans Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 I am bemused at what I can only guess is a delusional state among many fellow human beings of perceived immortality. I mean, you are likely entering the last maybe 10 years of your life, have $1 billion at your disposal with which to have fun, do some good, maintain your health.... and you wish to waste (IMO) some of that precious remaining time on some seemingly narcissistic 'treasure hunt' involving the need to deal with bureaucracy, copyright law, and Yoko Ono?? I'm reasonably confident that, if offered the chance to spend a while longer alive in exchange for a chunk of publishing credits, his band mates might have chosen the former. Not a bash on Mr McCartney - its his right to do what he wants, and its probably a fair enough claim he has, but isn't the remaining time precious enough, aren't there 7 billion people less fortunate,... I am thinking the same way. Is wealth poisonous? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 It was the most common mistake in the business, and even the pedestal'd Lennon and McCartney made it. Too bad for you. rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted March 22, 2016 Author Share Posted March 22, 2016 I am bemused at what I can only guess is a delusional state among many fellow human beings of perceived immortality. I mean, you are likely entering the last maybe 10 years of your life, have $1 billion at your disposal with which to have fun, do some good, maintain your health.... and you wish to waste (IMO) some of that precious remaining time on some seemingly narcissistic 'treasure hunt' involving the need to deal with bureaucracy, copyright law, and Yoko Ono?? I'm reasonably confident that, if offered the chance to spend a while longer alive in exchange for a chunk of publishing credits, his band mates might have chosen the former. Not a bash on Mr McCartney - its his right to do what he wants, and its probably a fair enough claim he has, but isn't the remaining time precious enough, aren't there 7 billion people less fortunate,... Im not a massive fan of Macca.. He too often comes across as a complete d**k... Pretentious and arrogant.... HOWEVER, I think that the fact that he does have that much money means that hes doing it not for the extra income (I mean we are only talking about some of their early songs here, the later stuff doesn't become available till 2025).. I reckon that hes just always hated what happened and its a principle thing. If it helps him die happier then what ever.. Im not going to judge.... Its like he got screwed over three times, by the record people, then by MJ and then Ono... I guess that must have hurt some. The thing that stood out to me the most is the Ringo and George only got 0.8% :o that's just shocking. Stupid record industry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 The thing that stood out to me the most is the Ringo and George only got 0.8% :o that's just shocking. Stupid record industry Not to argue, but at that time there was no record industry. The Meatles got Beat by a shifty, savvy guy that called himself "management". rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted March 22, 2016 Author Share Posted March 22, 2016 Not to argue, but at that time there was no record industry. The Meatles got Beat by a shifty, savvy guy that called himself "management". rct Well whatever you want to call them... They set the example of what the music industry turned into.... cos from what I know, its still the same, if not worse..... Ive been watching that series Vinyl, its all about this sort of stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Well whatever you want to call them... They set the example of what the music industry turned into.... cos from what I know, its still the same, if not worse..... Ive been watching that series Vinyl, its all about this sort of stuff. All true what you put there, all true. Here's to celebrate, but better than the other one they put out: Lennon D-28 rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabs Posted March 22, 2016 Author Share Posted March 22, 2016 All true what you put there, all true. Here's to celebrate, but better than the other one they put out: Lennon D-28 rct Ha, I like the glasses 12th fret inlay... Kinda cheesy and cool at the same time... But the price.. MAN oh man, it makes you wonder whos getting the lions share of that??? It certainly isn't John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rct Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 You could probably get one for around 4k, little under. I think they will sell oodles of them to monied elderly gents who remember, like me maybe. But Dreadnought is too big for me, so not me. A very nice guitar though, I like it! rct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dennis G Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Im not a massive fan of Macca.. He too often comes across as a complete d**k... Pretentious and arrogant.... The thing that stood out to me the most is the Ringo and George only got 0.8% :o that's just shocking. Stupid record industry Read the unauthorized bio of Macca "Fab". It will explain a LOT. Two comments from the book stood out. One was (paraphrasing) "When you've had everything your way since you were 18 years old..." and the other was (again paraphrasing) "The best I can say about him is that he's a charming user." As for the George and Ringo thing, I remember reading somewhere that when George once quit the band, Lennon's comment was along the lines of "he probably figured out how bad we've been screwing him all these years." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Scales Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 Im not a massive fan of Macca.. He too often comes across as a complete d**k... Pretentious and arrogant.... ... Im not going to judge Good to hear Rabs. I guess I wasn't talking specifically of Sir, he was an opportune vehicle to share a broader view. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdgm Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 He is still a very powerful figure in the industry. He was head of the PRS (Performing Rights Society) at one time too. And likely sees it as one more stage in getting back HIS property from those who have no real right to it. He wrote the songs. D**k James (long gone) is usually painted as the villain - with some justification - he did what was standard industry practice back then. Times have changed and in general terms things are much more in the artist's favor today; even so there is a hint of old scores being settled here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 As someone who owns some 50 odd copyrights, I totally understand Paul wanting his songs. They are his. He wrote them, they are his creation. Even if he is a hack as a person, I understand THAT part about him....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cougar Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Sir Paul is due to begin his One On One world tour next month.... Featuring Paul's band of the last 10+ years – Paul "Wix" Wickens (keyboards), Brian Ray (bass/guitar), Rusty Anderson (guitar) and Abe Laboriel Jr (drums) – the show is never anything short of life-changing. Good to see my old bandmate Brian will be on the tour... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelly campbell Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Great Band Brian is very talented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.