BMG today announced the rights management company will represent the Rolling Stones music publishing catalog dating back to the early-Sixties.

Starting July 1, BMG will be the publisher for all Jagger and Richards compositions since 1983 and will also administer the duo’s previous copyrights represented by ABKCO (1963-1971) and EMI Music Publishing (1971-1983).

Rolling Stones Update iTunes Store, Remaster Albums

The deal, which marks the first time the Stones have used an outside music publisher in 40 years, comes just as the Stones celebrate the 50th anniversary of the release of their first single (Chuck Berry’s “Come On) which came out in June 1963. The band is currently on the US-leg of their successful 50 and Counting Tour which has topped Billboard's Hot Tour Charts. The band also recently remastered their catalog for iTunes.

“Mick Jagger and Keith Richards are among the greatest songwriters in rock ‘n’ roll history. It’s a huge honour that they have chosen us to represent their interests,” BMG Chrysalis SVP Alexi Cory-Smith, said in a statement. Beginning July 1, we will be working alongside all of our offices around the world to give them the very best BMG can offer.”

Mick Jagger and Keith Richards also commented that they, “look forward to a fresh and fruitful long-term business relationship with all the team at BMG.”

The songs to be directly published by BMG span the six albums Undercover (1983), Dirty Work (1986), Steel Wheels (1989), Voodoo Lounge (1994), Bridges To Babylon (1997) and A Bigger Bang (2005) as well as future compositions. BMG will also administer Jagger and Richards’s interests in all of their Rolling Stones hits dating back to 1963 including their classic tracks ‘(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction’, ‘Brown Sugar’ and ‘Angie’.

BMG CEO Hartwig Masuch said the opportunity to work with Mick Jagger and Keith Richards is a milestone for the company, less than five years after it was founded. “This deal is incredibly important for BMG,” he said in a statement. “Keith and Mick have clearly created one of the most outstanding song collections in rock 'n' roll history. They have not only created the soundtrack of all of our lives, they have been a dynamic and constant force for cultural change.” He also added that “we will justify their trust in us.”

The Rolling Stones play the Glastonbury Festival this Saturday (June 29) and two dates in London’s Hyde Park on July 6 and July 13. Their latest album is the career retrospective GRRR! In 2012 the band released the documentary "Crossfire Hurricane" charting the band’s ascent.

"Well my heavy throbbers itchin' just to lay a solid rhythm down"

Mick Jagger and Keith Richards also commented that they, “look forward to a fresh and fruitful long-term business relationship with all the team at BMG.”

The songs to be directly published by BMG span the six albums Undercover (1983), Dirty Work (1986), Steel Wheels (1989), Voodoo Lounge (1994), Bridges To Babylon (1997) and A Bigger Bang (2005) as well as future compositions.

I wonder, I wonder, does this establish incentives for the band to release a new studio album, not present up to now? Gazza, who has emphasized the importance of such a fact, if it was (I don't know for certain myself), especially might be called upon to comment on this, but, of course, anybody.

Well, since this is about the "music publishing rights" = the compositions, NOT the recordings, I doubt that this deal will have a direct influence on their decision to record new material or not. This isn't a recording deal, this is a publishing deal.

Isn't BMG owned by Sony?

It sure sounds like Universal wasn't willing to pay up for a new album. This could indeed be good news!

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Isn't BMG owned by Sony?

It sure sounds like Universal wasn't willing to pay up for a new album. This could indeed be good news!

I wouldnt be that optimistic.

The last deal didnt give the Stones any obligation to deliver new studio albums. It was geared more towards repackaging and remastering their back catalogue. There was a 'request' for the Stones to make two albums but it was an option, not a contractual obligation (Im thinking maybe the SG and Exile bonus discs may have fulfilled that)

So now that UMG have milked that cow dry, theres no financial incentive to sign the Stones to a new deal if they arent going to release a new album.

this is a very strangely worded statement. It just appears to be a publishing deal as opposed to a record deal, yet the band's record deal with UMG is due to expire this year as far as I recall.

Ah, I didn't see that at first, it's only a publishing deal.

Well, that is indeed different. It was strange that they used the BMG label name, instead of Sony as well - but when it comes to publishing, I guess they still use the BMG name...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-26 18:40 by DandelionPowderman.

I think this Sky news report explains it a bit better. More to do with licensing rights for Tv etc on past (and any future) songs

[news.sky.com]

I agree, Gazza, that the Sky report leads to a more specific understanding. And this and the need for it, seem more aimed at taking care of their already existing material,yes.

From the link you gave:

The company has expanded rapidly as it maximised returns for artists and sought new and lucrative areas to market music.

Its responsibilities will range from marketing and licensing the songs to the film, TV and advertising sectors in the fast-growing number of digital music services.

Couldn't they have signed a deal that goes from when the UMG one is finished? If it expires this year, the BMG continues where UMG left off?

JumpingKentFlash

Hollywood and television are just salivating to license that body of work.

Quote

It is the first time the veteran rockers have appointed an outside music publisher in 40 years.

So who did that before? Promopub B.V.? Surely people wanting to licence the music had somewhere to go to? Does it maybe mean that BMG will be *seeking* opportunities as opposed to just waiting for requests to come in?

Quote

The songs to be directly published by BMG span six albums from 1983's Undercover to 2005's A Bigger Bang

Future compositions will also be represented by the company, which was started in 2008

Hehe...the fact that this wording is there has to mean that future projects were indeed discussed...the earlier, the better!

Yeah, but this is publishing (holding rights for the USE of their music, media plays, note sheet sales etc), right? Not licensing of the actual RIGHTS to the music/release sales?

The term publishing is used very sloppily in the music world today

We should get prince Rupert in the board to explain these things to us :-)

Quote
sonomastone
We should get prince Rupert in the board to explain these things to us :-)

Who cares of that. Sometimes people are a litte bit far from the roots. Listening the music, that's all.

Does this mean that we could see a real excavation from the vaults? There must be hours upon hours of alt takes, live stuff, unreleased material that they could now release.

I think the best we might hope for is someone, somehow at BMG might persuade the Stones org. to REALLY allow them to release a collection (or two?) of rarities. And not anything like the insult that was the EMI 'Rarities 1971-2003' from 2005... Better stop now, that EMI 'Rarities' was my biggest downer of '05!!!

<<Starting July 1, BMG will be the publisher for all Jagger and Richards compositions since 1983 and will also administer the duo’s previous copyrights represented by ABKCO (1963-1971) and EMI Music Publishing (1971-1983).>>

Is this to indicate that Jagger/Richards also don't have the rights to their material from 1971 to 1983? If so, then no wonder they've concentrated so heavily on touring since then.

<<The songs to be directly published by BMG span the six albums Undercover (1983), Dirty Work (1986), Steel Wheels (1989), Voodoo Lounge (1994), Bridges To Babylon (1997) and A Bigger Bang (2005) as well as future compositions.>>

The "future compositions" phrase means nothing in terms of contractual obligation for Jagger/Richards to produce new material, but merely that should this actually happen BMG will be the direct publishers of this hypothetical material.

Perhaps BMG will act as the go-between with ABKCO to negotiate deals for expanded deluxe editions of albums from the 1963-1971 catalog. The Beatles are due to soon be releasing expanded versions of their albums, so like the 2009 remasterings, it is likely that The Stones may follow suit.

as well as future compositions
as well as future compositions
as well as future compositions
as well as future compositions
as well as future compositions...

AFAIK, BMG Music Publishing still belongs to the Bertelsmann corporation from Germany and is not part of the major label Sony BMG which is now again called merely Sony. If I recall correctly, BMG Publishing has recently bought the EMI Publishing catalogue from the remains of that former major label which had gone into administration. I have no idea about whether the ABKCO era publishing rights were licensed out to BMG or sold, neither about the Promopub B.V. publishing rights but it seems likely the Stones merely licensed their publishing catalogue to them, since they have done that with their recorded output, too, in the past.

Unfortunately, we didn't get a new album during their Universal record deal. Who knows who the Stones might sign with next time around, now that Prince Rupert is out of the picture?

I just hope it doesnt affect the wide availability of watching Stones youtube videos.

Publishing is a really arcane business, where teams of people literally count pennies. This deal will have no influence on future recording plans. It seems as if Promopub is being wound down, and exploitation of the copyrights is being outsourced. I am a tad confused, though, as to why BMG would administer the ABKCO catalog. That would be done by ABKCO itself - unless(!) - the ABKCO compositions have reverted to Jagger/Richards

Yeah, just saw this statement from ABKCO about the confusing BMG statement:

In light of today’s announcement by BMG concerning its involvement in music publishing interests in songs written by Mick Jagger and Keith Richards, ABKCO Music, Inc. wishes to reiterate that ABKCO, and ABKCO alone, owns and controls 100% of the worldwide copyright to the original 1963-1971 publishing catalog of Jagger/Richards Rolling Stones compositions.

ABKCO CEO Jody Klein stated that the BMG announcement “has no relevance whatsoever to ABKCO’s ongoing role in its ownership or control of all existing copyrights, including such seminal titles as ‘(I Can’t Get No) Satisfaction’, ‘Brown Sugar’, ‘Can’t You Hear Me Knocking’ and others from that period as has been the case for more than 40 years.”

“We wish BMG all the best with their new endeavor but it must be noted that ABKCO, a wholly owned independent entertainment company, remains the sole source of rights and licensing for these compositions along with the corresponding master recordings by The Rolling Stones. It is unfortunate that BMG’s statement may have led some to conclude otherwise.”

[www.abkco.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-27 00:19 by DeanGoodman.

Quote
Silver Dagger
Does this mean that we could see a real excavation from the vaults? There must be hours upon hours of alt takes, live stuff, unreleased material that they could now release.

Only if they're planning to do something like license 'Honest Man' for use in an insurance ad or 'Blood Red Wine' in a promotion for Beaujolais.

McDonalds have already made an approach to use 'Hamburger to Go'. Gay TV have already issued a denial that they made an offer to use an outtake from 1970 which shall remain nameless.

Quote
dcba
as well as future compositions
as well as future compositions
as well as future compositions
as well as future compositions
as well as future compositions...

Just covering their options. Doesnt mean there's any obligation that the band will release any.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Yeah, but this is publishing (holding rights for the USE of their music, media plays, note sheet sales etc), right? Not licensing of the actual RIGHTS to the music/release sales?

The term publishing is used very sloppily in the music world today

Right, the publisher owns the rights for the use of the songs (he owns the songs, like when Jacko bought the Beatles catalog or Macca Buddy Holly's) or in this case he gets a licence to do it. Do you mean that the owners of the actual recording would still have to agree? Seems like it would make deals a bit too complex. I think they just get their cut.

I found a pretty good write-up here [www.hevedburgmusic.com] and I still think they're farming this out to BMG to maximize revenue with active "song placement" as opposed to previously having Promopub B.V. answer incoming calls.

Quote
stonehearted


Is this to indicate that Jagger/Richards also don't have the rights to their material from 1971 to 1983? If so, then no wonder they've concentrated so heavily on touring since then.

My fairly educated guess is that EMI administers - as opposed to owns - the '71 to '83 catalog. No way is Prince Rupert going to extricate the Stones from Klein and then sell the family silver going forward to EMI. If you look at the copyright records, songs from this period were published by Stones corporate entities such as Cansel Ltd. and Schaltone BV, so EMI just does what BMG is doing with the post '83 catalog - collecting royalties, exploiting the copyrights and taking a big cut. Of course, I don't know why the 71-83 catalog would need two administrators, and ditto with the ABKCO-era stuff.

BMG's statement today was clear as mud, forcing ABKCO to issue a clarification and outlets such as Billboard and Reuters to correct their reports.

Oh, FWIW - Macca does not own the Buddy Holly catalog as such. He just bought the interests in the songs that were owned by Norman Petty, Buddy's manager/label boss. Buddy's widow and siblings own Buddy's share.

Ah, ok, but MPL is probably the publisher of the Buddy Holly catalogue? They certainly did some pretty powerful promotion in the beginning, like Macca helping Denny record "Holly Days", or the "Buddy Holly Week-End" (or whatever it was called).

So let's see what BMG have up their sleeve ;-)

Sorry to get off topic, but to reply to your question -- as of 2009, straight from the horse's mouth: Peermusic administers the Buddy Holly catalog, but it is a split - a) world, excluding USA, Peermusic administers certain songs on behalf of MPL; b) world, on other songs, Peermusic owns 100%. For example, Peer has 100% of Everyday, but 50% of Think It Over, as it doesn't have Norman Petty's share.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-27 01:59 by DeanGoodman.

I thought BMG was a Sony company.
Didnt BMG use to advertise the 10cd's for a penny if you buy 5 at regular price or one of those promotions?

Any "future" songs can be anything that is unreleased as well...