Latest on MJJC

The Michael/Paul McCartney/Beatles Catalog Story - What's the real story? [MERGED]

Hudson112;4286171 said:
To the people here saying “I’m not listening to the Beatles after what Paul McCartney did to Michael.” You can still enjoy someone’s music and everything else about them but still criticize when they are wrong about things.
Click to expand...

Exactly. none of them are perfect. i called out artists if they did anything wrong. this is not hate.
 
somewhereinthedark;4286155 said:
Thank you for posting this- FACTS!!! 100%!! The lies that Paul McCartney has perpetuated all these years is just ONE of the reasons that the some in the industry and the MSM has this hate towards Michael. I wonder why Paul never speaks on the fact that Yoko Ono did not WANT him to have the rights to this catalogue. Paul could have cleared up this misinformation about Michael, years ago. YET, he allowed it to fester and fans of the Beatles, including the media and the industry used it against Michael. For newer fans of MJ, this is what all of the media hate is against Michael. The fake allegations have ALWAYS been a smoke screen. Older fans have always known the agenda behind the hate and jealousy of Michael and it has crap to do with fake abuse allegations.
Click to expand...

Kind of agree with your statement. but i wouldn't say all of this have nothing to with the catalog. the fake lies came out about Michael around 1993 that was 8 to 9 years ago after Michael brought the catalog. so i wouldn't put that with this. but you make some points though.

somewhereinthedark;4286157 said:
Let’s not forget that Paul McCartney was on David Geffen’s boat with Oprah, Gale and other conspirators when the child porn/NAMBLA film LN was shown. Yes, a big portion of this hate/jealousy toward Michael has a LOT to do with his purchase of the ATV catalogue. Another thing is that Michael refused Geffen’s advances toward him(confirmed by PEOPLE IN THE KNOW) years ago. Geffen never forgave Michael for that and threatened to destroy him. He is STILL trying to do that 11 years after his death. The viewing of the NAMBLA film on Geffen’s yacht was NO COINCEDENCE. Don’t be fooled by the fake allegations and the lies and manipulations of the media. This is and has ALWAYS been a part of the AGENDA! Every AWARE fan and supporter knows this and have known it for over 30+ years.
Click to expand...

I agree with the hate and jealously toward Michael. ugh. what could he do? he was just popular to the world. that's another thing too. Michael never like people treating him like god. like i said in another thread. it wasn't his fault though. some of his crazy fans did this to him as well. he loved all his fans. but some fans and still today are crazy. these people make the fanbase looks crazy.
 
Re: Do you think it was wrong for Michael to take The Beatles Catalog away from Paul McCartney?

We really shouldn't make this thread about race because that's not what it about. the fact is they both humans and speaking out their wrong doings.
 
ScreenOrigami;4286269 said:
Back in the day when Paul started telling his own version of events, he couldn’t anticipate that this thing called “internet” would soon make all kinds of photos and videos publicly available to everyone. :laughing:

And like with just about everything else regarding MJ, reconstructing the timeline of events allows for some interesting insights. ;)
Click to expand...

Things come out one way or another. you really can't hide anything anymore with this teach age.
 
ScreenOrigami;4286142 said:
If Michael hadn’t bought it, someone else would have. The other bidders were huge corporations, and I wouldn’t even want to think of what they would have done with the catalog. Paul did have the money, but he thought the price was too high, so he didn’t bid on it. His loss. I like Paul, but he needs to let this rest. It’s not like he ended up in the poor house because of MJ.
Click to expand...

I agree. if he did have the money he should of brought it. not let it get away. maybe it was right for Michael to get a hold to it because he took care of it while other people would have done other things to it. i'm not sure how much money both artists had at the time but let me tell you bidding is a lot. especially what you are paying for.
 
Re: Do you think it was wrong for Michael to take The Beatles Catalog away from Paul McCartney?

dethorro said:
I highly doubt that Paul believing Leaving Neverland has anything to do with the catalog at all.
Click to expand...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA that made me laugh. :laughing: if it's not then what is it? money? because he has money. i'm not sure what's going on with him. so. i don't know for sure.
 
PoP;4286165 said:
This is the main reason why I don’t trust Paul anymore other and whining about the catalogue too much and why I hardly listen to the “Beatles” anymore.
Click to expand...

I agree. i still listen to beatles music though that's not saying what he doing is wrong and not on my list of people who believes Michael is guilty.

analogue;4286169 said:
I always preferred the demo version of The Girl Is Mine
Click to expand...

lol!
 
Re: Do you think it was wrong for Michael to take The Beatles Catalog away from Paul McCartney?

leokulik said:
I guess that Michael Jackson was the best heart to buy that.
can you imagine in other hands? evil hands? a corporation who can't see the legacy, the art, just the money coming?
Nahh... I'm happy it was w/ Michael.
Click to expand...

I agree.

terrell said:
You summed it. Also, Paul OWNS alot of other artists music (that is why he was viewed as the richest musician) and alot of black artists music. Bo Didley talked about Paul owning his music. where is the outrage on that? Let just keep it 100, many were upset that a black artist (MJ)was able to own the biggest white group music (Beatles). Amazing after MJ got the catolog, UK started calling MJ out of his name. Do they do that to anyone else (and lord knows there are many others who can be viewed as 'weird" or "odd" whom they do NOT disrespect if they want to stand behind that stupid logic)?
Click to expand...

I agree with some of your statement.
 
ScreenOrigami;4286218 said:
he wouldn’t have posed for a funny photo, or would he?
Click to expand...

:scratch:

elusive moonwalker;4286225 said:
Mcartney is a hypocrite. Owning other artists music. At the end of the day he messed up.selling and not be re buying when he had the chance but instead of admitting it he would rather blame someone else. So go along with the MSM and turn mj into the wipping boy.
Click to expand...

I kind of agree with your statement.

ScreenOrigami;4286226 said:
Most people just don’t like to look stupid, so they blame other people for their mistakes whenever they can. It’s human nature, I guess. ;)
It’s also very telling that MJ remained friends with Yoko Ono. Unlike Paul, she was totally ok with MJ buying the catalog. I wonder why. :laughing:
Click to expand...

Nahhhh. most people speak out with their mistakes.
 
Re: Do you think it was wrong for Michael to take The Beatles Catalog away from Paul McCartney?

Anna said:
What I think was wrong was not giving Paul a better deal once he bought the catalogue. Given their friendship and that he knew Paul wanted the rights to his music, that is the least he could have done. It was also wrong to commercialize the songs against the wishes of Paul and the other Beatles. I can certainly understand Paul feeling hurt and betrayed by both of those aspects. If I was in Michael's position I would have either not bought the catalogue at all - due to conflict of interest - or bought it and given Paul the rights to his music. But then, loyalty is very important to me.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. even if Michael did brought it he really should of at least give the beatles songs to paul and took the rest of the songs. that way they could of spit it in half. who actually was apart of the beatles? paul was and i agree he should of got the beatles songs back. also Michael should of respect the wishes of paul and the beatles. i like some of Michael covers of their songs but if it wasn't meant for him to use them. then he shouldn't never used them. through he did buy the log through so he kind of could of did covers if he want through like you said against their wishes. so yeah i agree with you. they said when paul tried to call Michael he never pick his phone. so i don't what that was really about. maybe he was scared or he knew what he was doing.

Anna said:
Paul was put on the spot about Leaving Neverland so he gave an answer. An answer which was civil and acceptable, given the gravity of the allegations and the fact that their friendship had ended decades earlier.
Click to expand...

Ehhhhh i really don't agree with this. do he really believes he guilty because he saw the doc or he saying he guilty because he didn't get the log? Michael is innocent. so i'm not sure why he believes he guilty.

Anna said:
Also, a lot of people know David Geffen and associate with David Geffen, that has nothing to do with anything, so I don't know why some people insist on bringing that up when it comes to Paul. He was on Geffen's boat, wow, who cares. You can't "guilt by association" every single person who knows people like Geffen, Oprah, etc. They are huge people in the business. Does being friends with R. Kelly and Brett Ratner mean Michael was also guilty of being a perve? No. Give it a rest.
Click to expand...

I agree. this is very true. some people are in the business socially with people who don't know about or just for business. not everyone who hangout with these people are not always on their side. i'm not sure what paul was doing at the time. maybe Geffen, Oprah, etc invited him to his boat . so yes i do agree with you with this. i never thought about this. yeah a lot of people were apart of this. we don't know for sure if half these people knew they were set up to not. so yeah you made so good points.

Anna said:
Does being friends with R. Kelly and Brett Ratner mean Michael was also guilty of being a perve? No. Give it a rest.
Click to expand...

LOL! okay that made me laugh.
 
NatureCriminal7896;4286291 said:
I agree with you. even if Michael did brought it he really should of at least give the beatles songs to paul and took the rest of the songs. that way they could of spit it in half. who actually was apart of the beatles? paul was and i agree he should of got the beatles songs back. also Michael should of respect the wishes of paul and the beatles.
Click to expand...

What the actual hell? Paul didn’t want to shell out the money, MJ did. We’re talking about 48.5 million dollars here, if I remember correctly. You don’t spend that amount of money and then hand the product you just purchased over to your muli-millionaire friend, because? What kind of screwed up deal would that be? :laughing:

Also, the Beatles songs were the main reason MJ purchased the catalog. Why would he want to give them away? Might as well just not have bought them in the first place. No, really, I don’t get the reasoning behind this.

Paul made a dumb business decision, end of story.

And I’ve been a Beatles fan all my life and only became an MJ fan last year, so I’m not really biased in favor of MJ when it comes to this.
 
ScreenOrigami;4286292 said:
What the actual hell? Paul didn’t want to shell out the money, MJ did. We’re talking about 48.5 million dollars here, if I remember correctly. You don’t spend that amount of money and then hand the product you just purchased over to your muli-millionaire friend, because? What kind of screwed up deal would that be? :laughing:

Also, the Beatles songs were the main reason MJ purchased the catalog. Why would he want to give them away? Might as well just not have bought them in the first place. No, really, I don’t get the reasoning behind this.

Paul made a dumb business decision, end of story.

And I’ve been a Beatles fan all my life and only became an MJ fan last year, so I’m not really biased in favor of MJ when it comes to this.
Click to expand...

Anna meant the beatles songs not the whole thing. i get what she mean. i don't know how the music business works so i don't know. i agree with both of you opinions.
 
Re: Do you think it was wrong for Michael to take The Beatles Catalog away from Paul McCartney?

Nite Line said:
Please use the multi-quote feature and please stop replying to everyone.

Thanks!
Click to expand...

I'm am. and i can reply to any thread i want. the mods said it's okay as long i'm not hurting anyone in anyway. i'll try to make some of my posts in to one post if i can. but i can go to any thread. if it feels it's too much you can unfollow the thread or ignore me.

this what the mods said. you can try talking to them. because this isn't my site. :scratch:
 
NatureCriminal7896;4286293 said:
i agree with both of you opinions.
Click to expand...

They’re mutually exclusive, though. ;)

And by the way – and this is just speculation of course – calling it a “friendship” might actually be an overstatement. They recorded a handful of songs together, and they took a few photos. This can be said about many people, though. Does MJ owe all of those “friends” millions of dollars of his business investments? I don’t see MJ and Paul hanging out like best buddies all the time through the years. How is he suddenly a friend when it comes to money?

NatureCriminal7896;4286293 said:
i don't know how the music business works so i don't know.
Click to expand...

As for the actual publishing business, an important reason for owning such a catalog is to have some steady income from the publishing rights. For example, very simply put, MJ made money every time a Beatles song was played on the radio. Having a steady source of income like this gives a certain financial security and allows for more creative freedom, because you don’t have to worry so much about making money. It’s also an investment in the future, kind of like the luxury version of a retirement pension. ;)

So, to break the bank to achieve all that, only to give a huge chunk of it away because you’re such a good-hearted guy and dear “friend” would be absolutely stupid.

Besides, I’m also absolutely sure that, had Paul ever been in serious financial trouble, MJ would have helped him out. But taking a multi-million dollar financial loss just to make a rich man even richer? What’s the point?
 
ScreenOrigami;4286296 said:
They’re mutually exclusive, though. ;)

And by the way – and this is just speculation of course – calling it a “friendship” might actually be an overstatement. They recorded a handful of songs together, and they took a few photos. This can be said about many people, though. Does MJ owe all of those “friends” millions of dollars of his business investments? I don’t see MJ and Paul hanging out like best buddies all the time through the years. How is he suddenly a friend when it comes to money?
Click to expand...

I see your point of view. Michael always paid everybody. if they were apart of video or song he always paid. I don't know Paul personally. maybe he want it the money or maybe he just want it the darn songs. lol. I don't know. no one knows what would happen if paul actually got it. I think if he did it wouldn't matter because Michael could find other company. he was big. just like went mtv didn't want him. it wouldn't matter because he would of find some other way. Michael was very smart. he could of got through any kind of way.



ScreenOrigami;4286296 said:
As for the actual publishing business, an important reason for owning such a catalog is to have some steady income from the publishing rights. For example, very simply put, MJ made money every time a Beatles song was played on the radio. Having a steady source of income like this gives a certain financial security and allows for more creative freedom, because you don’t have to worry so much about making money. It’s also an investment in the future, kind of like the luxury version of a retirement pension. ;)

So, to break the bank to achieve all that, only to give a huge chunk of it away because you’re such a good-hearted guy and dear “friend” would be absolutely stupid.

Besides, I’m also absolutely sure that, had Paul ever been in serious financial trouble, MJ would have helped him out. But taking a multi-million dollar financial loss just to make a rich man even richer? What’s the point?
Click to expand...

I agree. i actually feel bad for both of them. well. i guess paul should of got it when he had the chance. oh boy. well they both great artists.
 
Re: Do you think it was wrong for Michael to take The Beatles Catalog away from Paul McCartney?

I can't even imagine this idea that someone, after buying a valuable asset for millions of dollars, should give up on it and hand it over to someone else (a millionaire) who didn't plan to buy it in the first place. I never heard similar criticism towards anyone even though many businessmen (incl. Paul himself) own publishing rights of others.

Going by this logic the previous owners should have been criticised in the first place, that instead of selling the rights for profit they should just give them back to the Beatles for free - let's face it this sounds absurd, so why would it be different with MJ?

Sure, it's unfair that composers can lost their publishing rights while others are profiting from it, but the potential faults of the system can't be blamed on one targeted individual, especially by the other participants. It's not MJ's fault either if the Beatles was cheated by their managment/business partners in the past and the catalogue wasn't in their possession to begin with. If MJ didn't buy it, someone else would have, as Paul decided not to invest in it (even though he was offered first right of refusal).

The most interesting thing in this whole situation IMO is why Paul didn't want to buy it? He was considered the richest musician at the time, the songs were obviously precious for him, and he already lost them once in the past - so why didn't he take this opportunity? Don't get me wrong, it's not a criticism towards him, he may have had his reasons, it's just hard to understand why.
 
ozemouze;4286326 said:
The most interesting thing in this whole situation IMO is why Paul didn't want to buy it? He was considered the richest musician at the time, the songs were obviously precious for him, and he already lost them once in the past - so why didn't he take this opportunity? Don't get me wrong, it's not a criticism towards him, he may have had his reasons, it's just hard to understand why.
Click to expand...

As far as I recall, his official version was that when John was still alive they agreed that neither of them should own the songs alone. Unfortunately we can’t hear John’s version of events, of course. ;)

And Yoko didn’t want it because she didn’t want to have to deal with Paul. Go figure.
 
Re: Do you think it was wrong for Michael to take The Beatles Catalog away from Paul McCartney?

Everybody tend to have their own opinions with this.

so this is what i'm gonna say.

maybe paul should of never say anything about it. i know he was joking about it with Michael and giving him a business thing. but knowing he wanted it so bad i wouldn't of never said anything about it.

when paul had the chance he should of brought it. not turning it down. if he really wanted it those songs he should of got on it in a heartbeat.

i do not know how much money both of them had at the time. was it an bidding thing? because if it had anything to do with bidding then i kind of get what he meant. bidding is a lot depends on what you are paying for. trust me i know and seen how much money people bid on stuff. it's really good to get something while it's at an lower price because people go up on that money.

i think it was good Michael got a hold to it because it went to the right hands not someone who was gonna destroy it. it did give Michael more creative freedom which he wanted it. thought i feel sorry for paul because it could of been the same way for him too.

so honestly i actually feel sorry for both but they both great artists.
 
Last edited:
Re: Do you think it was wrong for Michael to take The Beatles Catalog away from Paul McCartney?

NatureCriminal7896 said:
I'm am. and i can reply to any thread i want. the mods said it's okay as long i'm not hurting anyone in anyway. i'll try to make some of my posts in to one post if i can. but i can go to any thread. if it feels it's too much you can unfollow the thread or ignore me.

this what the mods said. you can try talking to them. because this isn't my site. :scratch:
Click to expand...

I know you can reply to any one you want, but you don't have to. Do you really have to reply to someone saying "I agree?" If you agree with someone's post, just click on 'thanks' under their post, instead of replying with "I agree with your statement."

It makes for not a pleasant viewing of a thread with your oversized signature, especially on my phone when you have made 5-6 consecutive posts. It's really annoying tbh.

I'm sorry if I came across as rude, but I had to say it.
 
Re: Do you think it was wrong for Michael to take The Beatles Catalog away from Paul McCartney?

Again, Paul did not give not music back to anyone so why should he be treated different? He was cheap.
 
Re: Do you think it was wrong for Michael to take The Beatles Catalog away from Paul McCartney?

elusive moonwalker said:
Paul was very rich he had every opportunity to bid for the cat. Why should mj have given him the songs back. You could say that about all the other songs in the cat that mj may have known the artists. Artists who didnt have much income and had been screwed over by labels were given songs back by mj. because mj thought it was the right thing to do and he loved those artists. Mcartney was neither of them. He had his chance fair and square and lost it.he made a bad business decision. His fault not mjs and not for mj to feel sorry for him like he was the victim. And for buying the ATV (well the beatles songs cause thats what grated the establishment) mj was punished for it forever and a day. it would be bad business sense to spend tens of millions on songs and then not use them to make profit and exploit the ownership of them. Thats why they were bought for 40 plus mill and sold for knocking on a billion when you add on the 95 deal

Macartney should give back all the songs he owns. Especially if those artists are rich and powerful and had opportunities to either keep them or re buy them but because of bad business sense didnt. I doubt he would as he would call it business.

No one batters an eyelid at all the black artists who got screwed over and ended up with jack thanks to labels. but god forbid one did what mj did. How dare you!
Click to expand...
Thank you!
 
Re: Do you think it was wrong for Michael to take The Beatles Catalog away from Paul McCartney?

Nite Line said:
I know you can reply to any one you want, but you don't have to. Do you really have to reply to someone saying "I agree?" If you agree with someone's post, just click on 'thanks' under their post, instead of replying with "I agree with your statement."

It makes for not a pleasant viewing of a thread with your oversized signature, especially on my phone when you have made 5-6 consecutive posts. It's really annoying tbh.

I'm sorry if I came across as rude, but I had to say it.
Click to expand...

I use quotes with my saying. I can reply to anyone I want. when I wanna say I agree with a person I can. and give a thanks if I like. I been doing this and mods said it's nothing wrong with it. that why I said talk to the mods. this isn't my site. because I really can't help you. i'm serious. @_@
 
NatureCriminal7896;4286328 said:
i do not know how much money both of them had at the time. was it an bidding thing? because if it had anything to do with bidding then i kind of get what he meant. bidding is a lot depends on what you are paying for. trust me i know and seen how much money people bid on stuff. it's really good to get something while it's at an lower price because people go up on that money.
Click to expand...

Paul McCartney at the time had the money to buy the ATV Catalog, but he found the price of it as unreasonably pricey.

Besides, Paul McCartney was interested in buying only his own songs (that he wrote/co-wrote for The Beatles), and he was not interested in buying all those other artists’ songs that were included as well on the ATV Catalog.

Paul McCartney has already revealed in his interviews that he has not been holding a grudge towards Michael Jackson who eventually was the one who bought the ATV Catalog.

Paul McCartney implied also that he felt somewhat upset by that only the very first period after Michael Jackson bought the ATV Catalog.

It has also been strongly suggested by various sources that Michael Jackson’s main reason for buying the ATV Catalog was not that he wanted to own The Beatles’ songs, but because he wanted to own the songs from the black artists (such as, the ones from Nat King Cole) that were included also on the ATV Catalog.
 
Re: Do you think it was wrong for Michael to take The Beatles Catalog away from Paul McCartney?

No. It was a great business move.

Paul could have bought it himself if he wanted to.
 
The title of this thread alone is terrible. No matter which way you look at it or what your opinion is, MJ didn’t “take the catalog away” from Paul. Makes it sound like he was somehow stealing it from him when in fact he bought it for almost 50 million dollars when it was freely available on the market.
 
Since we on the subject.... >_>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Thank you ... <a href="https://t.co/JIC932Krzb">pic.twitter.com/JIC932Krzb</a></p>&mdash; ArmyWalker (@Jyoti95903045) <a href="https://twitter.com/Jyoti95903045/status/1249844020630568961?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 13, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I didn't know come together was actually an chuck berry song. this really doesn't surprise me due to the fact a lot white artists stole songs from black artists back then. Elvis was one of them as well.
 
NatureCriminal7896;4286407 said:
Since we on the subject.... >_>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Thank you ... <a href="https://t.co/JIC932Krzb">pic.twitter.com/JIC932Krzb</a></p>&#8212; ArmyWalker (@Jyoti95903045) <a href="https://twitter.com/Jyoti95903045/status/1249844020630568961?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 13, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I didn't know come together was actually an chuck berry song. this really doesn't surprise me due to the fact a lot white artists stole songs from black artists back then. Elvis was one of them as well.
Click to expand...

From looking back at this. it was right for Michael to take the catalog. those songs wasn't paul's. those songs were from black artists who songs were stole from them. love the beatles. love paul. but yeah. Michael did the right thing.

bless you Michael may you r.i.p dear.
 
Re: Do you think it was wrong for Michael to take The Beatles Catalog away from Paul McCartney?

NatureCriminal7896 said:
I didn't know come together was actually an chuck berry song. this really doesn't surprise me due to the fact a lot white artists stole songs from black artists back then. Elvis was one of them as well.
Click to expand...

It wasn't. I think it's pretty unfair to say that John Lennon stole You Can't Catch Me. What he did with Come Together is more of a tribute rather than a rip-off imo. He basically only took that one line from Chuck's song. John Lennon was actually a pretty big Chuck Berry fan, in case you didn't know.


Elvis stole music from black artists? No....he just sang a lot of songs that were written by black artists....he never claimed they were written by him. If you do a cover of someone's song, that doesn't mean that you steal it.
Elvis grew up in a largely black neighbourhood and that was the music that he grew up listening to. Singers in the 40s, 50s and early 60s weren't necessarily also great songwriters. It was a pretty common thing back then to record a cover of someone's song and make it a hit. And let's not overlook Elvis' talent....the guy had a great singing voice and a whole lot of charisma.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top