Or, does abkco get everything since they own the publishing rights?

I find it a shame that the two biggest bands in rock 'n' roll history, (The Stones and The Dave Clark Five, have lost all or most of the publishing rights to their songs.

I ain't stupid, I'm just guitarded.

It is my understanding that they get paid royalties, but ABKCO gets final say as to who the songs get licensed out to. Some may recall Snickers using Satisfaction in one of their commercials several years ago.

yes.....klein gets a piece of it just like virgin...

Does anybody know when Klein's ownership of this material run's out??

I'm wondering when Jagger/Richards can buy it back, Like Michael Jackson
bought John Lennon's 1/2 of the Lennon/McCarthy catalog??

Maybe when the Glimmer's get control again maybe we'll see the release of:

Ladies & Gentelman the Rolling Stones from 1972!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

MLC

I would think that Klein's ownership runs until he wants to sell. Michael Jackson owns both Lennon and McCartney's share of their catalog, although with his legal troubles, maybe he'll be force to sell. If I recall, Yoko told Paul that she could buy the catalog fairly cheap back in the early 80's so he left it up to her. Jackson then came in and outbid them so he ended up getting it. I believe that McCartney now owns the rights to Buddy Holly's catalog.

Ladies & Gentelman the Rolling Stones from 1972!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I saw that movie. DGA35, are you talking about an album of live tracks from that tour?

Also, on the 'singles collection' abkco they have Brown Sugar and Wild Horses on there. Is that because Klein had tapes of these songs before the Stones formed their own company?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-04-26 02:55 by RankOutsider.

Dont we have any Anglo-American lawyers here at the board?
(Ok, if there are some Europenas they are all asleep)...
This is tricky stuff though interesting.
Ol´geezer Bill might have something to add here (which user name is his?).

Michael Jackson does not own 100% of the copyright on each Lennon-McCartney song, he only owns controlling interest in the catalog, thus he is able to make the decisions on how the songs are leased.

McCartney owns at least 25% of every one of those songs, plus he collects his 50% of the songwrtiers royalties on all of those songs. In late 1962, after the Beatles had success with their first single Love Me Do, the original publishing company for these songs, Northern Songs, was set up, with well known English music publisher owning 50% and John and Paul each owning 25%. Paul has never sold his portion of this. John apparently sold off part of his percentage to Sir Lew Grade and his ATV company. I believe Grade also purchased Dick James' portion and this is what Michael Jackson now owns. He owns somewhere more than 50% but less than 75% of the copyright.

Paul does own 100% ownership of Love Me Do and PS I Love You, both sides of their first single, as they were published by Ardmore and Beachwood and as such were not included in the catalog that Jackson owns controlling interest in. Paul bought these 2 songs from this publisher.

As far as Mick and Keith, they should be receiving their full composers royalty on the ACKBO songs, but receive nothing form the publishers royalties and have no control over the usage of the songs.

Halup Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As far as Mick and Keith, they should be receiving
> their full composers royalty on the ACKBO songs,
> but receive nothing form the publishers royalties
> and have no control over the usage of the songs.

No, this is not true: both the publishing royalties and the copyright royalties are devided between the Stones and ABKCO, and for some part even Andrew Loog Oldham (he gets a writers royalty over the 1964 - 1967 period, a gift from Klein). In short, the one company can not release anything without approval of the other, and publishing credits are devided between both companies. This is the reason why nothing ever gets released: Klein needs the approval of Jagger/Richards and vice versa. As they weren't on speaking terms so to say, nothing ever was released (if Klein would have had full control, he would have flooded the market with releases). It wasn't until the R&R Circus and Live Licks that both companies burried the hatchet as they needed eachother, because the Stones didn't have an album to tour behind.

Mathijs

And as the Stones sued over royalties for Licks perhaps the door is closed again?

Is it Andrew that gave Klein a portion of control over these songs when he set-up affairs with him in the beginning? Without The Stones really knowing what was happening? I alway's find it amazing when musicians lose control of their songs, (it's NOT a new story), when will they learn, that's where the money is! Well, as long as people (listeners), pay for songs it is.

I ain't stupid, I'm just guitarded.

The Stones sued DECCA for unpaid royalties last year, not ABKCO. And, it's not Oldham who gave anything to Klein. Klein bought the entire thing when he signed the Stones, and he gave Oldham, who was married to/dating (if I remember well) Klein's niece. Klein gave Oldham a share in the author's credits. In that way, he receives a certain amount every year.

Mathijs

Thanks Mathijs for clearing out the deal between Klein and the Stones. But what is with the album like Metamorphosis and those dozens of different Decca era compilations, a'la Stone Age, Gimme Shelter, No Stone Unturned, For Collectors Only..? The Stones have even tried to promote against them, so they (Mick and Keith) don't seem to have control over publishing stuff like that.

- Doxa

When the Stones started their own record company Rolling Stones Records in 1971 Decca made parallel releases. It took the Stones by big surprise that "Stone Age" was advertised and released at the same time as their own new studio album "Sticky Fingers". They even ran an advertisement in UK music press warning their fans about the Decca release no being their new album. Then Decca released new compilation albums through the 70's until they came to some sort of understanding. Just check the release dates of Decca and RSR releases in the 70's, and you will see how funny this was.

Bjornulf

Doxa Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thanks Mathijs for clearing out the deal between
> Klein and the Stones. But what is with the album
> like Metamorphosis and those dozens of different
> Decca era compilations, a'la Stone Age, Gimme
> Shelter, No Stone Unturned, For Collectors Only..?
> The Stones have even tried to promote against
> them, so they (Mick and Keith) don't seem to have
> control over publishing stuff like that.
>
> - Doxa

There are rules about those kind of albums that are not really clear. One of the rules that Decca has to obey for example is that only a certain percentage of the material is allowed to be Jagger/Richards material, and therefore on the old Decca compilation LP's you mostly find the early 60's covers that the Stones did (Under the Boardwalk and the like). Klein has to have permission by the Stones to release material. The Hot Rocks series was released with permission of the Stones, and logical they will give permission. To this day the pre-1971 catalogue still is the biggest seller, and Jagger/Richards don't want to miss a piece of the pie, even if the piece should have been a bit bigger. Klein did release Metamorphosis without permission, but that album is for 75% existing of material not even played by the Stones (side 1), or cover versions never officially released by the Stones (side 2). There's certain songs that are in a grey area. Loving Cup, All Down the Line, Sweet Virginia and some more were registered under Klein, but released under RSR. As far as I knwo an agreament was made that these right belong to RSR, and Klein's rights would go until Bown Sugar, Wild Horses and You Gotta Move (December 1969).

Mathijs

bv Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When the Stones started their own record company
> Rolling Stones Records in 1971 Decca made parallel
> releases. It took the Stones by big surprise that
> "Stone Age" was advertised and released at the
> same time as their own new studio album "Sticky
> Fingers". They even ran an advertisement in UK
> music press warning their fans about the Decca
> release no being their new album. Then Decca
> released new compilation albums through the 70's
> until they came to some sort of understanding.
> Just check the release dates of Decca and RSR
> releases in the 70's, and you will see how funny
> this was.
>
> Bjornulf

thats right

Stone Age came out same time as SF
No Stone Unturned = GHS
Metamorphosis was released at the same time as Made In the Shade. Even the Stones own compilations on their own label had to compete with Decca.

of course, now theres a certain irony in the Stones taking out adverts to bash Decca for repackaging old material, yet they themselves have released two live albums, one new greatest hits package and three re-cycled old greatest hits albums (with more to come) since their last studio release.

Since IORR came out 30 years ago (their 4th album in 4 years on their own label), the Stones have released

9 studio albums
6 live albums
6 repackages of their post-1970 back catalogue


(Not to mention the fact that every time they switch record labels, the post-1970 material gets reissued in some form or another)




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-04-26 18:54 by Gazza.