Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

ApplCmptrDood · Apr 21, 2006, 02:45 PM

Found it by reading a Decoy Muscle article - I guess Sony is going to have them on their music store (this must be what the journalists meant when they said the beatles were "soon to be downloaded?) http://www.decoymusic.com/vb/showthread.php?t=10809 - the Michael Jackson linked text in the post leads to MJ's website - you have bee warned!

Dakar · Apr 21, 2006, 02:52 PM

I can't understand why Paul & Ringo wouldn't have attempted to recoup it.

::maroma:: · Apr 21, 2006, 02:57 PM

Great, so the catalog (or at least half) went from a psycho to a greedy corporation. If a greedy corporation had to get it I would at least like it to be Apple. At least then they'd have another hook for iTunes Music Store.

Oh well.

Doofy · Apr 21, 2006, 02:58 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar

I can't understand why Paul & Ringo wouldn't have attempted to recoup it.

Because they probably still get a cut every time a song is played anyways.

goMac · Apr 21, 2006, 03:10 PM

(Image from his site) This has to be the most ironic picture of Michael Jackson ever.

ReggieX · Apr 21, 2006, 03:27 PM

Originally Posted by Dakar

I can't understand why Paul & Ringo wouldn't have attempted to recoup it.

They (& George at the time) couldn't afford it when it first went on the block, and the value has only gone up.

sabrejim · Apr 21, 2006, 03:54 PM

Maybe we'll get the entire beetles catalogue on bluray mmmmmmm in lossless highres audio. Maybe this will kill of sacd?

Dakar · Apr 21, 2006, 04:07 PM

Originally Posted by ReggieX

They (& George at the time) couldn't afford it when it first went on the block, and the value has only gone up.

I knew the first part, but you figure they'd have some more cash now.

Paco500 · Apr 21, 2006, 04:13 PM

Originally Posted by ReggieX

They (& George at the time) couldn't afford it when it first went on the block, and the value has only gone up.

Nonsense. Of course they could have afforded it. It was an open bid and they (I believe Paul was they only one that tried) didn't bid enough. I'm sure Paul could have afforded 10 times the amount it sold for, add George and Ringo to the mix, who knows how much they could have paid. They just decided it wasn't worth that much.

I've lost lots of auctions on eBay where I could have "afforded" the final selling price, I just didn't want to or misjudged the competition. No different that what happened here.

Paul McCartney couldn't afford it? Are you daft?

ironknee · Apr 21, 2006, 11:42 PM

^^ yep maccartney couldn't afford it. he went to yoko for help and YOKO said no.

i question if the sale was open to all? is there a lawsuit there? why didn't we hear paul try for a bid? could steve jobs bid for it?

and doofy, none of the beatles get anything...the owner of the rights do...sony

Paco500 · Apr 21, 2006, 11:59 PM

Originally Posted by ironknee

^^ yep maccartney couldn't afford it. he went to yoko for help and YOKO said no.

i question if the sale was open to all? is there a lawsuit there? why didn't we hear paul try for a bid? could steve jobs bid for it?

and doofy, none of the beatles get anything...the owner of the rights do...sony

Of course they get something. They get residuals. They just don't own the publishing rights, meaning they don't control how the music is used.

And I really, REALLY can't believe he could not afford it. I've seen no reference to this online and Sir Paul is constantly making lists of wealthiness entertainers. Who knows, maybe I'm wrong, but everything I've read just said he got out-bid.

ironknee · Apr 22, 2006, 12:07 AM

Originally Posted by Paco500

Of course they get something. They get residuals. They just don't own the publishing rights, meaning they don't control how the music is used.

And I really, REALLY can't believe he could not afford it. I've seen no reference to this online and Sir Paul is constantly making lists of wealthiness entertainers. Who knows, maybe I'm wrong, but everything I've read just said he got out-bid.

ok you may be right about the moneys

"Jackson, 46, acquired the Beatles song catalog in 1985 for $47.5 million, outbidding ex-Beatle Paul McCartney"

http://www.cnn.com/2005/BUSINESS/06/...kson.finances/

JoshuaZ · Apr 22, 2006, 02:12 AM

Thats too bad. Now Sony can muck this deal up as much as they muck up so many other things.

lavar78 · Apr 22, 2006, 02:46 AM

FWIW, these are the publishing rights, not the recording rights. AFAIK, the publisher has no say in making songs available for download. The recording rights to most of the songs still lies with Capitol in the U.S.