im going to say yes

prince never had a fixed outlook on anything in life

yeah he cared about his masters, but only cos they were money generators

he didnt care about the music

history to him wasnt of much interest

this is a guy who never wanted to reissue his old albums, prob wouldnt have played his old hits if he had new ones people wanted to hear, and in general, had very little interest in what he did decades ago.

so i think he would have sold his rights just like dylan.

the music business isnt how it was when prince started attacking warners in the early 90s

he would see where things were going, where the money was, and sell up pronto.

i think he would have relished it in fact.

dylan knows where things are going for heritage artists, plus hes getting old, so has little interest in this stuff anymore most probably, so is happy to give the authority to someone else.

pretty sure prince would do the same.

The most important thing to note here, is that Dylan hasn't sold 'all rights' to his music. He's only sold the rights to the publishing.

The rights to the recordings of his music and the masters remain with him/Columbia Records.

Makes a massive difference.

I know Prince said 'sell my publishing? What a laugh!' in White Mansion, but yes, things are very different these days, and he may well have sold the publishing rights as a way of guaranteeing income in a very uncertain market...

?? I thought he struck a deal with Universal for his publishing some years before 2016.

thedoorkeeper said:

Yes he would have sold the music rights. And then spent the next 20 years complaining that he got ripped off.

We miss our litigious Gemini.

1. Doubtful he would have gotten that much money.

.

2. Considering that Prince left the excellent Warner-Chappell, he already proved he was a lousy businessman. Sure, he signed up with another great company, but there was really no reason to leave WC. Of course, some years before his death he left the other company, and set up... his own. Considering that Prince's business ventures were all miserable failures, and considering that he had zero experience with handling such complicated things as Publishing, who knows what blunders have been made in those few years NPG Publishing was in charge. Of course, after his death his Estate quickly signed a deal with Universal.

.

On a side note: Dylan's catalog goes back to 1962. IMHO the copyrights on such old songs should have ended looong ago. I find it absurd that a company is now paying him $300 million to exploit these songs, becasue they're still under copyright until 70 years after Dylan's death. That is IMHO absurd.

.

https://www.futurelearn.c...eps/105723

.

For example, the British writer Sir Arthur Conan Doyle died on 7 July 1930, more than 85 years ago. All of Conan Doyle’s published work is now in the public domain, including his stories from The Strand Magazine featuring perhaps the most famous literary detective the world has ever known – Sherlock Holmes. This means his work can be re-used by anyone for free, without having to ask for permission. If you wanted to publish and sell Conan Doyle’s stories, you are free to do so. If you want to make use of his stories in the creation of new, derivative works – such as the lyrics of a song – you are free to do that too. The copyright has expired. The work is in the public domain.

.

A YT video on copyright I saw recently argued that a much more sensible time would be 50 years max, and preferably less. That would mean we could now get really creative with the earlier work of The Beatles for instance, or tons of other songs. Instead, we're still massively constrained. And all because a handful of major companies have bought off politicans to change these rules to our detriment, all so they could make money. The joint efforts of Disney and Sonny Bono means works from 1924 (!) only entered the public domain this year. That is ridiculous.

JorisE73 said:

?? I thought he struck a deal with Universal for his publishing some years before 2016.

When the publishing rights previously assigned to Warmers reverted to Prince, he entered into an assignment deal with Universal, which was later renewed.

According to Billboard, that deal finally expired in 2013, with Prince and staff reported to be administering his publishing rights - but with admnistrative support from Peermusic (wwhich might have been tantamount to another assignment deal).

The Prince Estate subsequently entered into a publishing deal with Universal.

https://www.billboard.com...publishing

The reporting of the Dylan deal suggests that the publishing rights have been sold rather than assigned for a limited period.

Copyright will last for as long as the Disney Corporation wants to make money off Mickey Mouse.

Musze said:

thedoorkeeper said:

Yes he would have sold the music rights. And then spent the next 20 years complaining that he got ripped off.

We miss our litigious Gemini.

LOL

Well what went on with Van Jones and that assistant? He apprently did make a publishing deal. He announced publishing deals too, probably for a rights managed situation.

Most of these publishing deals are big advances so artists don't have to work on the road or in the studio when they're burnt out. Could be Prince would do that, but he had the Vault too.

He had pretty unique views on the industry, and living off credit.

funkbabyandthebabysitters said:

im going to say yes

prince never had a fixed outlook on anything in life

yeah he cared about his masters, but only cos they were money generators

he didnt care about the music

history to him wasnt of much interest

this is a guy who never wanted to reissue his old albums, prob wouldnt have played his old hits if he had new ones people wanted to hear, and in general, had very little interest in what he did decades ago.

so i think he would have sold his rights just like dylan.

the music business isnt how it was when prince started attacking warners in the early 90s

he would see where things were going, where the money was, and sell up pronto.

i think he would have relished it in fact.

dylan knows where things are going for heritage artists, plus hes getting old, so has little interest in this stuff anymore most probably, so is happy to give the authority to someone else.

pretty sure prince would do the same.

you're crazy as hell if you think Prince would've sold the rights to his music. After ALL of that are you really a fan? were you ever paying attention? From the beginning of the WB fight he was all about that and it continued til the end when he's talking about warner's on twitter. Just because he didn't like to look back (which in my opinion is smart cause it can stunt your growth as an artist, especially when it's bad enough you aren't having exciting or new things happen like when you're young and hungry) doesn't mean he didn't care about the music. He just wasn't much of a dweller or a reminicer like so many of us are; almost to a fault. Even the way you view the WB situation as him attacking them, says all that needs to be said. Why would he be concerned about reissuing old shit if he's still actively making new shit? regardless of whether or not you liked it.

BartVanHemelen said:

1. Doubtful he would have gotten that much money.

.

2. Considering that Prince left the excellent Warner-Chappell, he already proved he was a lousy businessman. Sure, he signed up with another great company, but there was really no reason to leave WC. Of course, some years before his death he left the other company, and set up... his own. Considering that Prince's business ventures were all miserable failures, and considering that he had zero experience with handling such complicated things as Publishing, who knows what blunders have been made in those few years NPG Publishing was in charge. Of course, after his death his Estate quickly signed a deal with Universal.

.

On a side note: Dylan's catalog goes back to 1962. IMHO the copyrights on such old songs should have ended looong ago. I find it absurd that a company is now paying him $300 million to exploit these songs, becasue they're still under copyright until 70 years after Dylan's death. That is IMHO absurd.

.

https://www.futurelearn.c...eps/105723

.

For example, the British writer Sir Arthur Conan Doyle died on 7 July 1930, more than 85 years ago. All of Conan Doyle’s published work is now in the public domain, including his stories from The Strand Magazine featuring perhaps the most famous literary detective the world has ever known – Sherlock Holmes. This means his work can be re-used by anyone for free, without having to ask for permission. If you wanted to publish and sell Conan Doyle’s stories, you are free to do so. If you want to make use of his stories in the creation of new, derivative works – such as the lyrics of a song – you are free to do that too. The copyright has expired. The work is in the public domain.

.

A YT video on copyright I saw recently argued that a much more sensible time would be 50 years max, and preferably less. That would mean we could now get really creative with the earlier work of The Beatles for instance, or tons of other songs. Instead, we're still massively constrained. And all because a handful of major companies have bought off politicans to change these rules to our detriment, all so they could make money. The joint efforts of Disney and Sonny Bono means works from 1924 (!) only entered the public domain this year. That is ridiculous.

jesus christ. why are you even here anymore? do you even like the man? lol i've never seen a positive post from you in the 15 years or so i've been on this site.

tab32792 said:

langebleu said:

JorisE73 said:

?? I thought he struck a deal with Universal for his publishing some years before 2016.

When the publishing rights previously assigned to Warmers reverted to Prince, he entered into an assignment deal with Universal, which was later renewed.

According to Billboard, that deal finally expired in 2013, with Prince and staff reported to be administering his publishing rights - but with admnistrative support from Peermusic (wwhich might have been tantamount to another assignment deal).

The Prince Estate subsequently entered into a publishing deal with Universal.

https://www.billboard.com...publishing

The reporting of the Dylan deal suggests that the publishing rights have been sold rather than assigned for a limited period.

BartVanHemelen said:

1. Doubtful he would have gotten that much money.

.

2. Considering that Prince left the excellent Warner-Chappell, he already proved he was a lousy businessman. Sure, he signed up with another great company, but there was really no reason to leave WC. Of course, some years before his death he left the other company, and set up... his own. Considering that Prince's business ventures were all miserable failures, and considering that he had zero experience with handling such complicated things as Publishing, who knows what blunders have been made in those few years NPG Publishing was in charge. Of course, after his death his Estate quickly signed a deal with Universal.

.

On a side note: Dylan's catalog goes back to 1962. IMHO the copyrights on such old songs should have ended looong ago. I find it absurd that a company is now paying him $300 million to exploit these songs, becasue they're still under copyright until 70 years after Dylan's death. That is IMHO absurd.

.

https://www.futurelearn.c...eps/105723

.

For example, the British writer Sir Arthur Conan Doyle died on 7 July 1930, more than 85 years ago. All of Conan Doyle’s published work is now in the public domain, including his stories from The Strand Magazine featuring perhaps the most famous literary detective the world has ever known – Sherlock Holmes. This means his work can be re-used by anyone for free, without having to ask for permission. If you wanted to publish and sell Conan Doyle’s stories, you are free to do so. If you want to make use of his stories in the creation of new, derivative works – such as the lyrics of a song – you are free to do that too. The copyright has expired. The work is in the public domain.

.

A YT video on copyright I saw recently argued that a much more sensible time would be 50 years max, and preferably less. That would mean we could now get really creative with the earlier work of The Beatles for instance, or tons of other songs. Instead, we're still massively constrained. And all because a handful of major companies have bought off politicans to change these rules to our detriment, all so they could make money. The joint efforts of Disney and Sonny Bono means works from 1924 (!) only entered the public domain this year. That is ridiculous.

in my opinion the copyright should stay intact and should only revert to the public domain if there aren't anyone left who have a legal right to the material.
Imagine all these no talent assholes raping great music for a buck

-

I think Prince wasn't the kind of guy to sell his own stuff.

He was way too untrustfull and stubborn.

He had no good reason.

He was financialy somewhat safe, no kids, no family.

You can say for his (half) siters and brothers, but I seriously doubt that.

Like Bart said, imagine if he wanted to sell it, it sure wasn't going to be worth all that much

in the last years of his life.

-

[Edited 12/10/20 4:06am]

jaawwnn said:

Copyright will last for as long as the Disney Corporation wants to make money off Mickey Mouse.

Even Disney failed to make copyright last forever. The original, 1928 incarnation of Mickey will fall into public domain in 3 years (i.e. you can make Mickey action figuers that look the way he looked in 1928, but not the way he looks in later incarnations). Every subsequent Disney property, in their incarnation at any given time, will fall into public domain after 95 years. The only restriction will be not to make it look like your product is a Disney product (which would violate trademark law, for which there's no time limit).

Doesn't it make sense to time out copyright based on:

A. On the status of the holder / owner / director being alive. In other words if they are alive, they can still actively hold the copyright if it a an individual that it is registered to.

B. A time period if not. Like 50 years, or 75, or whatever.

ufoclub said:

Doesn't it make sense to time out copyright based on:

A. On the status of the holder / owner / director being alive. In other words if they are alive, they can still actively hold the copyright if it a an individual that it is registered to.

B. A time period if not. Like 50 years, or 75, or whatever.

I used to think public domain is a good thing, but in this age, not so much. People have no boundaries. It's one thing to see the Black Album circulate largely in pirated form, and another for people to be able to just do anything they want with Prince's music, likeness, etc. Imagine a musical porn with deep fakes revolving around the idea Prince wrote all his songs about Vanity, or was the actual devil using Black Album songs. My imagination can't even come up with the worst scenarios we would see.

[Edited 12/9/20 14:00pm]

I've never been much of a Dylan fan (mostly I don't care for his singing voice) but I have to admit that he writes some VERY good songs!

I'm happy for him that he's able to achieve a deal this large. Bowie did something similar too.

I don't think Prince would have sold his publishing rights, especially since at the very end he created NPG Publishing in the hopes of monetizing his music for commercials, movies, etc.

thedoorkeeper said:

thedoorkeeper said:

Yes he would have sold the music rights. And then spent the next 20 years complaining that he got ripped off.

I had to laugh when I read that one. I loved the guy, but you're probably right.

He may have considered it but I can't see him giving up 'his children.'

prince wasnt always as romantic as some like to think.

he was shrewd as anything.

Margot said:

He may have considered it but I can't see him giving up 'his children.'

For the right price he would sell his "children" in a heartbeat.