However, I contacted them about 7 months ago, trying to gain permission before I released my last CD. I left phone messages, emails, flowers, a singing telegram, and they never called me back. You would think they would welcome people doing covers so they can get more royalties, but nope. They never called back.

I found I needed to send to each publisher what's referred to as a Notice of Intention to Obtain Compulsory License for Making and Distributing Sound Recordings. After more cyber searching, I finally found out what the heck that was—at the overwhelmingly incomprehensible (to my neophyte self) U.S. Copyright Office web site. Reading that document was almost enough to make me toss in the towel (and my cookies). But then, much to my satisfaction, I came across this totally "pre-fab" (RTF) letter, designed by a friendly webmaster—"fill-in-the-blanks" style—for submission to artists' publishers. This letter appeared to adhere to the specifications (PDF) prescribed by the US Copyright Office.

From here, the Billy Joel licensing process went off without a hitch. I sent in the above letter (certified mail, return receipt); upon receipt, they asked me via e-mail to specify the number of copies I intended to sell (information omitted from the "pre-fab" letter I used). They then sent a written agreement for my signature, additionally asking for an $85 check covering the sum of advance royalties paid on 1,000 units. (My research revealed that you could try to negotiate a lower royalty rate with each publisher. However, I happily agreed to pay the "compulsory"—or "standard mandatory"—rate.) This agreement also provided me with the exact wording for the "publisher/writer credit" I needed to include in my CD's liner notes, and stipulated that the publisher receive two copies of the disc "as released." (Individual writer/publisher credits for every song you cover need to be included in your CD's liner notes, by the way.) Upon execution of the agreement, they granted me the license and quickly sent me a hard copy for my records.

As i said before Bart started his rant, The Staples Singers used the said piece of music long before The Stones did.
I heard Richard Ashcroft talking about it in a radio 2 interview.He was very perplexed about the whole affair because it had been told to him that it wasnt clear if anyone owned it.

Another ex-manager of the Rolling Stones has sued for royalties from The Verve's hit single "Bitter Sweet Symphony."

This time, the aggrieved party is Andrew Loog Oldham, who managed the Stones from 1963-67 and produced several Stones albums. In a suit filed last week in England, Oldham contends he owns the orchestral recording of the Stones' "The Last Time" that The Verve sampled on "Bitter Sweet Symphony" (RealAudio excerpt) and therefore is owed up to 1 million pounds (about $1.7 million) in mechanical royalties.

In late 1997, The Verve settled a suit filed by Allen Klein, who managed the Stones from 1967-70. Klein still controls the songwriting copyright to "The Last Time" -- and all other songs the Stones wrote through 1970.

The Verve agreed to give the Stones' Mick Jagger and Keith Richards writing credit on "Bitter Sweet Symphony" and to turn over publishing royalties to Klein and his company, Abkco.

[...]

The recording The Verve sampled is a version of the Stones' 1965 hit "The Last Time" that Oldham recorded for an album called The Rolling Stones Songbook, a collection of symphonic remakes released under the moniker the Andrew Oldham Orchestra.

It became a crucial part of the arrangement of "Bitter Sweet Symphony," the lead track from The Verve's 1997 album Urban Hymns.

Oldham said he tried negotiating with representatives from Virgin Records and lawyers for The Verve before he filed the suit.

"Efforts to deal out of court fell through in November," he said, without offering specifics.

MartyMcFly said:

So? Save your anger for those who spread lies, bullshit and hype.

[Let's not ruin it for others ok? - luv4u]

BartVanHemelen said:

If I call someone a doofus, it gets snipped, yet someone calling me an asshole is perfectly okay. Gotcha.

I lurk way more than I post, but I have to share...

..this makes a few months short of a FULL DECADE of watching BVH rant. A tear comes to my eye.

Some people just love to be miserable.

beauhall said:

you make it sound like the Rolling Stones were wrong for defending their rights.
the song by the Verve was a rewrite of the Stones song no question about it.
Same thing happened to George Harrison in the late 70's..the judge deemed "my sweet lord" to be an unconsious rewrite of "He's so fine" and lost $$$..Artists have a right to decide who does what with their music

..this makes a few months short of a FULL DECADE of watching BVH rant. A tear comes to my eye.

muirdo said:

Of course, but this also involved a very specific version of the song.

http://www.vh1.com/artist...erve.jhtml



In any case, the Stones got ZILCH and had nothing to do with these lawsuits, yet over and over again people blame them for Ashcroft's idiocy. Yes idiocy: basing an entire song around a sample and then not clearing the rights before releasing it? Did he really think he was getting away with that, especially when it involves Allen Klein?

alright, which one of ya'll brought bart outta hiding?

did U hear that song. The stones sample was almost undistinguishable.

The recording The Verve sampled is a version of the Stones' 1965 hit "The Last Time" that Oldham recorded for an album called The Rolling Stones Songbook, a collection of symphonic remakes released under the moniker the Andrew Oldham Orchestra.

It became a crucial part of the arrangement of "Bitter Sweet Symphony," the lead track from The Verve's 1997 album Urban Hymns.

Not that they didn't have the right to be compensated....

Some people just love to be miserable.

...I simply entertain myself by abusing lazy people.

I'm not miserable at all, I simply entertain myself by abusing lazy people.

I want to put my cover of IWD4U on my next record.

I've checked Harry Fox Agency and CALLED Warner Brothers and left messages. is there ANYBODY on this site who has connections or KNOWS somebody who has connections to get me some kind of clearance on this song?

Surely it can be done, I think there's already two covers of it floating around. My version is way better, but, you know, art is blind or something.

I love your version of IWD4U!! The slowed tempo actually adds something to the song. It was a welcome change to what is now being played on the radio.

rhylan said:

I'm not miserable at all, I simply entertain myself by abusing lazy people.

Those covers are cool. I want to buy your cd now.

BartVanHemelen said:

Then at least don't complain if you're called an asshole.

BTW, you know your Prince Nazi act is tired as hell. That's why you don't post in this section much.

I want to put my cover of IWD4U on my next record.

I've checked Harry Fox Agency and CALLED Warner Brothers and left messages. is there ANYBODY on this site who has connections or KNOWS somebody who has connections to get me some kind of clearance on this song?

Surely it can be done, I think there's already two covers of it floating around. My version is way better, but, you know, art is blind or something.

Learn to read: I complain about the hipocrisy. The same hipocrisy that keeps Rhino's upcoming "Ultimate" release from the frontpage while Barney Hoskins' latest fluff piece makes the headlines. The same hipocrisy that has a moderator DELETE comments from a thread because he/she disagrees with them -- and when you complain to another editor it's "we don't debate editor decisions".

I don't give a damn if anyone calls me an asshole, I just point out the hipocrisy -- it's that exact hipocrisy that shows the worth of the opinions of that particular editor (and by extension The Org).

And once again the nazi comment.

The reason I don't post in this forum anymore is because I can't be arsed. But it is funny to read the "Prince is back" comments every other year.