prince live las vegas 99
"janet jackson was at the concert last nite...she didnt stick around though....i wanted to ask her about sly and the family stones music-you know her brother owns it-i dont mean nobody no harm but the family stone is up in here-wassup with that

what is up with that-why would MJ buy back catologues just to make money from them and sell the rights to commercials.

it just doesnt seem right to me-

what do you all think..I KNOW WHAT I THINK OF MR.FACTORY PRODUCED POPSHIT-(after thriller) but lets not stray.....

nest egg.

we wont even mention the beatles.....

nestegg???

that is one bigass nest-i wouldnt mind a twig from that nestegg

greed by any other name

It's called GOOD business.

good business-prostituting music for adverts?

A) Aren't you supposed to be packing for a trip to nz...?..if so, leave the Prince box behind..i'll pick it up

B) Paul McCartney owns a very large music catalogue of songs not his own..Buddy Holly for one. I'm not sure if he's sold the rights for adverts or not, but it is not only to own the music, it is a good $$ investment

C) Yoko Ono has hooked up John Lennon's songs in advertz

d) Hopefully MJ will be broke so Paul can buy back the Beatles catalogue

jonylawson said:

I think you answered your own qustion "just to make money"

fat chance of him going broke, his sony/atv catalogue is tipped to merge with the bmg catalogue, giving him even more earning potential. This catalogue just keeps growing, and with this merger could be worth over $5billion. Paul McCartney could never afford to buy it back now!

jonylawson said:

The object of investing is to make a profit.....or am I mistaken?

FunkyBrotha said:

it's a pity, because it's almost the same issue Prince fought...the Beatles were forced to sign away the rights to their music..most artists were

PurpleRein said:

That's not gonna happen even if MJ would lose or sell the catalog it would go to Sony or his creditors. It would cost Paul at least a Billion.
[Edited 3/31/06 14:10pm]

PurpleRein said:

I always thought Paul was just immature and egotistical about things, he had nerve to criticize michael for it when he did it and told him about it. He just don't want some black guy owning his songs.

mozfonky said:

not to go over this again, but just so everyone is clear, Michael didn't buy them from under paul, their were 2 or 3 investors who were ahead of Macca before Michael stepped in. Paul was never gonna get his songs back.
[Edited 3/31/06 14:56pm]

mike aint got no soul

money money money-always got to be the biggest

Paul McCartney GAVE Michael the idea by showing off HIS catalogue of publishing and Michael said to him "I'm gonna buy The Beatles". I think it's fucking poetic justice. Paul has no interest in buying them back and had an opprtunity before MJ bought them for a third of what Michael paid and he said no "because they came to me for free"

I do wonder how much Michael made out the 1's collection for example, that sold over 20million. I'm surprised more hasn't been done because their CD catalogue should definitely be updated, it's been over 15 years.

Anyone else see that The Beatles corp has sued Apple because they had an agreement which prevented Apple from having an association with music. Sure they'd love a slice of itunes.

maybe I'm misinformed, but doesn't owning the rights and such to catalogs entitle you to more than solely selling songs for commercials? I wouldn't think that's the only reason to shell out that much dough for them, and thus not the only way to get some returns.

I thought that this subject had died in the 80's!
When The Beatles catalog came up for sale, Paul said it was too much money and refused to bid on it. We know he's a great musician but a business man....NOT!So Michael had more faith in Paul's songs to generate future revenue than Paul did. Go figure! As the club owner told The Kid in Purple Rain... But Michael has borrowed against his catalog for money up front. And the syndicate can use the songs how they see fit to get a return on their investment. Which is why for the last few years we have seen an increase in Beatle related commercials.

FAST FORWARD TO 2006 PLEASE.....

FUCK THIS BS!!

I've had enough of this BS. Michael doesn't owe nobody shit. He was smart enough to buy music rights, if Paul McCartney or Sly Stone wanna bitch about it, go the fuck ahead because you aint gettin the shit back! Fuck it up with this BS. Stop being so damn obsessed with Michael Jackson. America is obsessed with Michael Jackson. Get over it allready. If you hate the mofo so much, stop talking about the SOB.

And how dare you tell me to hang my head in shame because I'm an MJ fan. Don't you ever fucking dare to say that BS again. Hang your head in shame for telling other people to do so because of what music they listen to.

Also, do some research and see how much music rights McCartney owns. He owns music of other bands/artists and then bithces that MJ owns his music. He was the dumbass that signed his music away. MJ was the smart one who bought the shit. MJ doesn't own his masters either may I add. He owns his publishing rights, but Sony still own his masters. So don't be so damn quick to judge. Everyone is so quick to throw words like bizarre, freak and whacko at MJ. Stop talking about a mofo u hate so damn much!
[Edited 4/1/06 16:17pm]

DarlingDiana said:

Adisa said:

Well it gets a bit much when every mofo is dissing MJ for shit themselves would do if they had the chance. Don't tell me you wouldn't buy the Beatles catalogue if you had the money. People obviously hate MJ. So why keep discussing him? Just STFU and let the fans enjoy his music. MJ is a human being and yall treat him like an object that has to obey all your orders and do exactly what you want, what is acceptable in society. The mofo doesn't want to do what you want him to do. He wants to change his appearance, he wants to live in a fantasy world, he wants to be a kid, and I think it's admirable that he is self-confident enough with himself to be different. That's fucking noble!

lilgish said:

Futhermore, Michael didn't steal the songs. He outbid Paul. There is a difference. Am I going to call someone who outbids me for a Michael Jackson CD a stealer? Nope. Michael never took it directly from Paul. He bought it fairly. End of story. Back to listening to "What More Can I Give" for me.

Would U all be happy if Paul oned Mike's shit? Grow up this is a business & U ain't 2 far gone to C that.

DANG DIANA!
girl you need to chill!
come round to mine tonight-ill pour you some nice cherry wine and mebbes cook you a nice bit of tea
ive got a lovely bit of gammon in the fridge-with pineapple?

cmon now lifes too short for all this nasty talk!

*whispers* erm but cmon diana-being a child when one is an adult-is that noble?
is is noble to sleep with ch....OKAY SORRY

look im uncorking the wine now

jonylawson said:

It's noble to be different when the whole world expects you to be normal and perfect.

Who gets the royalties from The Beatles back catalogue?

muirdo said:

http://www.sonyatv.com//languages.php

or just gooogle up 'sony/atv michael jackson' etc.

basically michael aint broke, but Sony would like him to be. hang on in there mike!

Marrk said:

i cant view it cos of cookies..plus i use the computer at work..but i take it you are telling me MJ gets all the royalties?

So what happens when all their copyright licences expire?

mynameisnotsusan said:

I recall an article that said MJ made around $10 million from the Beatles "1s" compilation.Truthfully,this catalog is a goldmine for Michael.Without it,he probably would have gone broke by now.