Quote
retired_dog

Quote
24FPS
Stonehearted's theory is that the Stones won't release their 1964 material because it's mostly covers and would therefore not be copyrighted by the Stones. Yet, the Beatles are releasing such material as Taste of Honey, Misery, Money, etc. So maybe we finally get Stones at the BBC and maybe some unreleased songs next year.

And this theory is, sorry to say this, plain wrong. I read many posts here that confuse songwriting copyright with neighboring rights (copyright of the actual recording). The "use it or lose it" term deals with the right of the recorded performances (and this includes the artists -not composers!- and tape owners - record companies, producers, radio or TV stations etc. - rights).

So even for cover versions, the Stones "own" exclusive rights for the recorded performances, which they are about to lose if they don't use them.

And yes, if they still have, let's say, 20 unreleased takes of "Come On" in their vaults, they have to release all 20, not just one or two. Any recording/take that will NOT be released will be in the public domain.

Please note that songwriting copyrights run substantially longer, depending from country to country, in many cases 50 to 70 years after the death of the songwriter. So if you want to release a CD with a public domain Stones performance of, let's say "Roll Over Beethoven", the payment of copyright fees to Chuck Berry is absolutely essential if you don't want to have the police knocking on your front door one day!

Quote
whitem8
Ok, I dont think I was being fair to Yoko. I did some researching and there is no accounts of Yoko blocking it. However, Macca did say he was working on a photo collage with CL as the soundtrack, yet there is no more mention of the track for possible release, and it would need Ringo, Olivia, and Yoko's approval to release it.

That being said...there are still a lot of interesting things that would be nice. The full version of Helter Skelter please...

I also liked the orginal idea that they were going to release alternate albums for each of the official albums they did, with alternate takes... that would be very cool.

Quote
whitem8
Not sure I agree there is no market. Everything the Beatles release sells well. Love, Beatles at the BEEB, and One (which astounded me, basically greatest hits packages seem redundant now that you can buy individual songs from iTnes) but it sold and was the top selling disc of the decade.

Quote
whitem8
Well if you follow their music as I do you would be aware they are continually selling any of their recorded product in large quantities. iTune doesn't mean a thing, as they have consistently had top sellers and were not on iTunes for most of its history. They just recently in the last few years began selling their products via iTunes, and yet not having been on iTunes did nothing to squelch their high sales. And now that they are on iTunes they sell even more. So alternate albums would undoubtably be big sellers. Oh and check out Beatles at the BEEB Vol 1 and 2, they are selling great!

Quote
whitem8
It did surprise me. One a collection of songs that have been released over and over again and yet still sold so well. Kind of crazy but the demand seems to never go down. I do admit I didn't get One, though the packaging was very cool as is the cover.

But that was the original intent of my previous post, that I think if they did release the alternate albums they would sell.

Quote
whitem8

Everything the Beatles release sells well. Love, Beatles at the BEEB, and One (which astounded me, basically greatest hits packages seem redundant now that you can buy individual songs from iTnes) but it sold and was the top selling disc of the decade.

Quote
Big Al

'One' was released before the introduction of iTunes and the like, though.