Michael and the Beatles catalogue mentioned...

[Datsymay]

5 little boys from Indiana knocked the Beatles from the top of the charts and as the DJ said, if he were to play all j5 songs as requested, there would have been no airplay for any other songs. Now that is revolutionary. There were more people turned up to see J5 in Beatles own home town than turned up to see the beatles. Don't believe the hype.

 

[Datsymay]

I don't know where the books were published, just that I remember having a lot of text books for high school music where you turn to the chapter for 20th century music and it's all about the Beatles. It's funny that who don't get the significance of the Beatles when you yourself are comparing them (one group) to an entire empire of artists and groups (Motown). Doesn't that show their significance?

You said the beatles were the most significant in music, and I said, No Motown is. The Beatles is considered a genre, as is motown and incidentally, the writers at Motown were the same for all the artists so it is relevant.

 

[Bob George]

Exactly. The Beatles are considered a genre. That's significant. But let's round this out, bring it back to topic. Do you think the Motown songs belong to the songwriters and the artists or the publishers? Are the Motown songs significant enough that if the writers don't want them used in commercials the publisher should respect their wishes? So similarly, don't you think Paul deserves some day over how the Beatles songs are used?

 

[Datsymay]

Exactly. The Beatles are considered a genre. That's significant. But let's round this out, bring it back to topic. Do you think the Motown songs belong to the songwriters and the artists or the publishers? Are the Motown songs significant enough that if the writers don't want them used in commercials the publisher should respect their wishes? So similarly, don't you think Paul deserves some day over how the Beatles songs are used?

As much as I love Motown and grew up on their music, I couldn't care less who owns the publishjing rights. If Motown sell it, which they have anyway, they have no claim or say over it, unless they wrote that in a contract. If you sell something and do not stipulate how it should be used, you have no say on the matter,. You sold it and was rewarded. What would be the point in spending all that money to be told how to use your purchase?

 

[Bob George]

It's not so much telling the publisher how to use the music, as much as it is asking nicely. It's not about what the publisher technically can do and what rights the songwriters and artists technically have over their music. It's about what's the right thing to do. Isn't the right thing to do, let the genius who wrote these amazing song have at least some say as to what happens to them? Shouldn't Michael at least take Paul's wished into consideration?

 

[Datsymay]

It's not so much telling the publisher how to use the music, as much as it is asking nicely. It's not about what the publisher technically can do and what rights the songwriters and artists technically have over their music. It's about what's the right thing to do. Isn't the right thing to do, let the genius who wrote these amazing song have at least some say as to what happens to them? Shouldn't Michael at least take Paul's wished into consideration?

NO. That would be cheating. When you sell something and get paid for it, you let it go. You do not have any right over it anymore. For anyone to want to hold on to control would like asking for money but still having it. You cannot have your cake and eat it. Paul Ate it when he took the money. He cannot have it anymore. He needs to go take care of the other catalogues that he has been running which includes other people's songs.

 

[Bob George]

But it's obvious he wants the control of his songbook, so should MJ sell it to him? He deserves those songs. They are his songs. I reckon all MJ fans would be up in arms if Michael sold his songs and someone else let them be used in commercials and what not. If Paul, for example, bought MJ songs (even if it was from MJ) MJ fans would expect Paul to one day sell the songs back to MJ.

 

[arXter]

I reckon all MJ fans would be up in arms if Michael sold his songs and someone else let them be used in commercials and what not. If Paul, for example, bought MJ songs (even if it was from MJ) MJ fans would expect Paul to one day sell the songs back to MJ.

... but he didn't and won't do it.

and if that happened, why would anyone in their right mind expect a proprietor to have any obligation towards the previous owners? no i wouldn't expect anyone to sell anything back.

 

[Datsymay]

But it's obvious he wants the control of his songbook, so should MJ sell it to him? He deserves those songs. They are his songs. I reckon all MJ fans would be up in arms if Michael sold his songs and someone else let them be used in commercials and what not. If Paul, for example, bought MJ songs (even if it was from MJ) MJ fans would expect Paul to one day sell the songs back to MJ.

Should you sell your prized possesion because someone wants it? It is obvious that Yoko ono don't have a problem with MJ owning them. Also, how is Paul going to ever be able to buy them now? Maybe you didn't listen to his interview with the obnoxious dj. Paul said, HE COULDN"T AFFORD to buy them back.

Paul doesn't want them, he get's royalties as a writer anyway. He just don't want the little boy from gary owning them. He never complained when the other companies owned them. He never minded who bought them on the open market. But not 'the little boy from gary'.The same little boy who told him he would bid on them, and Paul laughed at him, he said he didn't take him seriously.

Somebody forget to read Michael the script when he came into show business. He was only supposed to sing, dance and entertain,and die poor. I forgot, MJ was only 5 years old when he came into show business. He was too young to read the script. Joe jackson read it and screwed it up and threw it away without ever telling MJ. So unfortunately, MJ did what every other successful business man does. He invested.

 

[hopespringseternal]

Should you sell your prized possesion because someone wants it? It is obvious that Yoko ono don't have a problem with MJ owning them. Also, how is Paul going to ever be able to buy them now? Maybe you didn't listen to his interview with the obnoxious dj. Paul said, HE COULDN"T AFFORD to buy them back.

Paul doesn't want them, he get's royalties as a writer anyway. He just don't want the little boy from gary owning them. He never complained when the other companies owned them. He never minded who bought them on the open market. But not he little boy from gary.The same little boy who told him he would bid on them, and Paul laughed at him, he said he didn't take him seriously.

Somebody forget to read Michael the script when he came into show business. He was only supposed to sing, dance and entertain,and die poor. I forgot, MJ was only 5 years old when he came into show business. He was too young to read the script. Joe jackson read it and screwed it up and threw it away without ever telling MJ. So unfortunately, MJ did what every other successful business man does. He invested.

:clap: :clap: well said!

 

[elusive moonwalker]

if mj sold his songs under his own free will u wouldnt expect anyone to give him back those songs unless he had to sell them cause he was living in a cardboard box for eg.its called business and those beatles songs were sold under free will. its funny how no one told lou grade to give them back to macca etc.why is it an issue that mj owns them yet not anyone else?? what about all the other songs in the world that arent owned by those who wrote them.wheres the outcry there??? the hypcrosey (sp)and outright jealously is pathetic.

some act a if these songs were stolen and macca etc recieved no money for them.they sold them for money on the open market. their choice.they made their money when they sold them.aint nobody elses fault that it was a terrible business decision that they made.

 

[hopespringseternal]

if mj sold his songs under his own free will u wouldnt expect anyone to give him back those songs unless he had to sell them cause he was living in a cardboard box for eg.its called business and those beatles songs were sold under free will. its funny how no one told lou grade to give them back to macca etc.why is it an issue that mj owns them yet not anyone else?? what about all the other songs in the world that arent owned by those who wrote them.wheres the outcry there??? the hypcrosey (sp)and outright jealously is pathetic.

some act a if these songs were stolen and macca etc recieved no money for them.they sold them for money on the open market. their choice.they made their money when they sold them.aint nobody elses fault that it was a terrible business decision that they made.

Thank you for speaking sense now i hope Bob gets over it and move on!

 

[Steve Jobs]

You were right. People who love the Beatles have convinced themselves that Michael TOOK the catalogue from Paul. That is just the way they want to see it. But if they were to be honest with themselves, they would admit that....

1. Paul is a very selfish man. This is the same Paul who tried to switch John Lennon's names from the songwriting credits and put it last....he wanted it to be McCartney/Lennon instead of Lennon/McCartney. Upset Yoko. And poor Lennon had already died and couldn't defend himself.

For 4 re-recorded songs on the 'Wings Over America' McCartney and Wings album (Blackbird, Yesterday, Long and Winding Road, I've just seen a Face). Not the entire catalogue. And don't forget that songs that were once credited as 'Lennon/McCartney' we're dropped to just 'Lennon' for Lennon's 'John legend' greatest hits album.

2. If Michael was not black or if Sony were a 100% owner of this catalogue, no one, including the Beatles fans would be fussing about Sony TAKING Paul's music.

lol, race card.

3. Paul had the first opportunity to buy back this music, but he thought that $20 mil was too much to pay for it. In other words, that music did not mean that much to him. If Yoko had first dibs because of Lennon, then Paul had first dibs too. She declined....and so did he. So Michael didn't take anything from Paul.

The Beatles tried to gain control over the catalogue but had no choice. When Epstein died (Beatles manager and part owner of the catalogue) Associated TV (ATV) bought out his share as well as everyone else apart from Paul, John, Ringo, and George. and gained the majority share taking control of the publishing rights. There was then many, many, many attempts from Apple Corps to buy back the rights way before MJ purchased it.

And another thing.....the very reason why Paul and John had to sell the stupid songs is because they didn't want to pay the enormous taxes on it. They would rather sell the catalogue than pay the taxes. So that should tell you right there just how important those songs were to Paul and John.

No they didn't, they took them public for tax reasons but it was still 100% solely owned by all the Beatles, and the Beatles managers/associates.

And even better, everyone knows how much control Michael has over the Beatles music. Now, I hear the Beatles songs on commercials, too. If you look on iTunes, there are barely any Beatles songs, maybe like 5 hits at the most. It goes to show how Paul probably regrets "losing" the catalog in the first place. And he goes around telling people that Michael outbid him. What a brat.....

That's for another completely different reason. Back when Apple .Inc used a synthesizer on the Apple II there was a dispute with Apple records (Beatles label), and Apple .Inc were forbidden to enter the music business which obviously led to a huge lawsuit with iTunes.

And I wish that all of you could have seen that documentary because I learned a lot of things about the Beatles that shocked me. Like John Lennon having a homosexual relationship with that gay manager

OH THE HORROR.



lol at this thread and people thinking Paul is just being a dick. Everyone on here FLIPPED when MJ's house was going to be auctioned to a stranger.

 

[Steve Jobs]

And nice avatar Bob George 

 

[hopespringseternal]

Oh please there were plenty of fans who said that if MJ hadn't handled his financial affairs correct then he will loose his house like anyone else would who don't pay their bills, clearly you are nothing but a newly registered troll trying to stir the pot.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Everyone on here FLIPPED when MJ's house was going to be auctioned to a stranger

i would flip with MJ that he didnt decide to sell it himself rather let an auction happen.other than that i dont quite see what it has to do with this convo. as said earlier they sold the cat for financial reasons out of their own free will so why all the crying? they messed up but dont be blaming mj for it blame lou grade etc they bought it first if you wanna blame someone.not that anyone is to blame its called business.the songs are no more sacred then any others.no more than the cats of marvin,dylan etc etc.but there seems to be an ego issue inregards to the beatles and they are above anyone else. at the end of the day it seems to be a case of jealously because no seems to have issues with who owns songs by other artists.

 

[hopespringseternal]

i would flip with MJ that he didnt decide to sell it himself rather let an auction happen.other than that i dont quite see what it has to do with this convo. as said earlier they sold the cat for financial reasons out of their own free will so why all the crying? they messed up but dont be blaming mj for it blame lou grade etc they bought it first if you wanna blame someone.not that anyone is to blame its called business.the songs are no more sacred then any others.no more than the cats of marvin,dylan etc etc.but there seems to be an ego issue inregards to the beatles and they are above anyone else. at the end of the day it seems to be a case of jealously because no seems to have issues with who owns songs by other artists.

That's exactly right but the diehard Beatles lovers will never see that to them Michael Jackson a black american has no right to own those songs that is their mindset now if a white european owned them we wouldn't be having this discussion and that is the sad reality.

 

[Steve Jobs]

I personally have no resentment of MJ for buying the catalogue, it was long gone for the Beatles before MJ even put out his first solo record. But I can see why McCartney would feel betrayed considering their history and the way the catalogue was handled.

I was just a little miffed at the lies being spread by people on here. Why is there even this resentment of The Beatles by MJ fans anyway?

 

[Rasta Pasta]

I personally have no resentment of MJ for buying the catalogue, it was long gone for the Beatles before MJ even put out his first solo record. But I can see why McCartney would feel betrayed considering their history and the way the catalogue was handled.

I was just a little miffed at the lies being spread by people on here. Why is there even this resentment of The Beatles by MJ fans anyway?

has a lot to do with how the media protrays Paul vs Michael .

 

[Bee.]

The Beatles and Paul lovers always ignore the 1,000 songs that Paul owns by other writers that he does with them whatever he pleases, for example Paul owns a college theme song of a college in the same state i live in the USA and nobody complains about that, much of the criticism leveled at Michael is rooted in racism, ignorance, and bitterness about this black man being smart enough to own part of the industry that has pimped and profited off of so many dead and broken black stars for so long.

On point. You hit the nail on that.

The Beatles fans needs to go and sit down. If those songs meant ANYTHING to that stupid fool Paul, WHY DIDN'T HE BID ON THEM? This guy went on television and told the world that MJ "broke off their friendship" because MJ purchased the damn catalouge. Why even go there? He has never stated why he did not buy his own songs and it seems as though the media's hating asses are not even going ask Paul that question. Paul made MJ look like a theif when he said that crap. MJ should have slapped that fool.

BTW, who gives a damn what the Beatles songs means to anyone? I do not really care about them because it has nothing to do with my personal life, the songs do not move me and I did not grew up listening to the Beatles. I really do not see the big deal about four guys from England. I am more into the Motown greats than four guys from Liverpool. Now, that is just me. The Beatles sang, wrote, produced some great songs, but who did not during that time? And their songs did not shape my life in anyway. MJ is a businessman, he saw an opportunity and went for it. Heck, I would have done the VERY SAME THING if something was on SALE and I bought that stuff, you know what I am saying? I can't blame Mike, heck, the dude is getting PAID very nicely. All power to the guy.

Paul did that to himself and that is why his karma is Heather Mills. They are trying to play her ass in the media, but they know she is on the money on him. See, what I noticed is once you mess with Paul, the media is going to get get you. Just see what happened to MJ - they try to put him in jail. That is why I seriously doubt that what happened in the trial had nothing to do with crime, rather a certain catalogue. MJ stepped on some toes and sadly, in the kind of society that we live in when we expect a group of people to act a "certain way" so they can be treated with respect, MJ is not going to respected by some folks. No way. I mean, Ia m reading comments from people saying that they lost respect for the guy because of what he "did". That is insane. How are you gonna lose respect for someone over a business decision? A black man who has money, who has the most powerful thing in the industry is a NIGHTMARE to a certain group of people. You know I am not lying. Hey, it is karma. When black artists could not even own their songs let alone be on the cover of their own CD/albums, you know something was going to shape up.

This thread is another reminder of why it is so obvious that what happened to MJ was planned.

 

[Datsymay]

I have always believed that MJ's persecution by the media has everything to do with that catalogue. Who owns the major media network. Rupert Murdock, a personal friend of Paul McCartney. We have seen how the media went after Heather Mills and called her all sort of names. Imagine how much they hate MJ.

 

[Bee.]

Should you sell your prized possesion because someone wants it? It is obvious that Yoko ono don't have a problem with MJ owning them. Also, how is Paul going to ever be able to buy them now? Maybe you didn't listen to his interview with the obnoxious dj. Paul said, HE COULDN"T AFFORD to buy them back.

Paul doesn't want them, he get's royalties as a writer anyway. He just don't want the little boy from gary owning them. He never complained when the other companies owned them. He never minded who bought them on the open market. But not 'the little boy from gary'.The same little boy who told him he would bid on them, and Paul laughed at him, he said he didn't take him seriously.

Somebody forget to read Michael the script when he came into show business. He was only supposed to sing, dance and entertain,and die poor. I forgot, MJ was only 5 years old when he came into show business. He was too young to read the script. Joe jackson read it and screwed it up and threw it away without ever telling MJ. So unfortunately, MJ did what every other successful business man does. He invested.

Period. On Point. Word. You said it.

People expected the little boy from the Hood to sing songs, dance his ass off and shut the hell up! Oh no, not Michael. Once he did Thriller and own that catalogue, there were all kinds of crap coming out of him. Everything that has happened to MJ since 1983 was planned. Just read the articles. Macca is not getting that catalogue back, the media and the Beatles fans need to get over it.

 

[Bee.]

I was just a little miffed at the lies being spread by people on here. Why is there even this resentment of The Beatles by MJ fans anyway?

What lies? List them. I think, wait - KNOW the lies regarding the catalogue, how MJ got them and Paul's whines about them have plenty of lies in them. Look it up instead of hijacking and MJ board. I doubt you are a fan.

As for the race card - Hmmmm, interesting. Once the truth is told about the situation, there is always someone mentioning something about the infamous term known as the "race card". LOL. I laugh at the denial of some people.

Dats - I believe that as well. The trial had NOTHING to do with the crime. That is why MJ was freed - he was innocent and it is a damn conspiracy. Period. Mike said it himself "it is a conspiracy" and you know, the kind of popularity and fame he has and on top of that he is a black man, YOU KNOW that it is truly a conspiracy regarding what he went through and is still going through. Also, Rupurt Murduch, who I HATE, owns most of the media and is buddies with Paul. What happened to Heather in the media is proof of that.

 

[wannabestartinsomthin21]

Paul McCartney doesn't have any grounds by which to feel betrayed by Michael. He could have easily outbid Michael back in 1984 for that catalog, if he really wanted it. He was by far the richer of the two at that point. But being the tight wad that he is, he didn't want to pay the 47 million. And now look, it's estimated to be worth 2 billion. Michael tried to call Paul and stay in contact with him after he purchased the catalog, but Paul refused to call him back or speak with him. So you can guess who created the riff. Michael even sent people to ask both Paul and Yoko if it would be alright with them if he placed a bid on the catalog before he did and planned on not doing so if either of them were against it. Niether were, so Michael placed the bid, and only after he won it did Paul act like Michael had run over his grandmother. It's such a joke. Michael bought that catalog with his own, hard earned money, and Paul just has to deal with the fact that he was too limited to see what it would be worth down the line. Business is business and Michael has treated the Beatles songs with respect and he has treated Paul with respect, never uttering one bad word about him. Yet Paul's got a bug up his ass the size of the grand canyon.