Sony & The Beatles Catalogue vs. Michael Jackson - IMPORTANT QUESTION

People,

I need your help to tie a few things that I’m working on together. I talked today with a mega music store manager about The Beatles music re.release and it got me thinking about a few things...

Does anybody know how involved was MJ in the decision making concerning his ownership of 50% of “The Beatles” catalogue?

I mean, did he just own the catalogue as an investment or did he have actual saying on what could be done with The Beatles’ songs in terms of re-launches, digitalization, unreleased songs, etc.?

Any information (from the past or recent) you remember / know / can provide me the link to will be greatly appreciated.

Thank you!

PS: I'm not posting my thoughts yet because I don't want to taint/lead your answers.

I don't know if this will help but after a quick google this is what I found out:

No. Jackson wasn't involved in the decision to license the 45 Beatles songs in Rock Band. That negotiation was handled by Sony/ATV Publishing, the company created to manage the Beatles' catalog after Jackson sold half of his stake to Sony in 1995. While it's conceivable that Jackson could have personally nixed the licensing, he was largely a silent partner in Sony/ATV, leaving the day-to-day operations up to company executives. The fact that Jackson had already heavily mortgaged his stake in the company to pay off debts would have made any effort to kill such a lucrative deal improbable.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/browbeat/archive/2009/08/14/did-michael-jackson-have-to-approve-the-beatles-rockband.aspx

Rach wrote:I don't know if this will help but after a quick google this is what I found out:

No. Jackson wasn't involved in the decision to license the 45 Beatles songs in Rock Band. That negotiation was handled by Sony/ATV Publishing, the company created to manage the Beatles' catalog after Jackson sold half of his stake to Sony in 1995. While it's conceivable that Jackson could have personally nixed the licensing, he was largely a silent partner in Sony/ATV, leaving the day-to-day operations up to company executives. The fact that Jackson had already heavily mortgaged his stake in the company to pay off debts would have made any effort to kill such a lucrative deal improbable.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/browbeat/archive/2009/08/14/did-michael-jackson-have-to-approve-the-beatles-rockband.aspx

It is helpful.
Don't you find it odd that even when you own half the catalogue, you are not involved at all in the decision making?

100%.

Michael is a shrewd businessman and I in no doubt that he wanted to be heavily involved in an investment that would have secured his financial future.

I think I can see where you're going with this one.......

I'm going to try to find you information while I go through my sources (blogs and other sites) and I'll keep posting what I find on here.

I found this guardian.co.uk article (from The Guardian) which has some info towards the end of the article on some of the legal stuff that went into the process: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/sep/12/beatles-rock-band-reissue

And here's a Variety article detailing some of the people who worked on it? Or just the catalog itself?
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118007644.html?categoryId=3703&cs=1

Rach wrote:100%.

Michael is a shrewd businessman and I in no doubt that he wanted to be heavily involved in an investment that would have secured his financial future.

I think I can see where you're going with this one.......

And the plot thickens!

annieisnotokey wrote:And the plot thickens!

It does indeed

Oh, you are good Agent A!

Holler at me if you need any help with this one!

mysticallymagestically wrote:And here's a Variety article detailing some of the people who worked on it? Or just the catalog itself?
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118007644.html?categoryId=3703&cs=1

Everything is helpful but I'm aiming more towards the terms of the agreement between MJ & Sony.
Was MJ's 50% just an investment or did he have any "administration" rights over what was done with the music?
It doesn't have to be recent news, it can be something from a few years back.

This one is more on target. CNN addresses the rumors about the McCartney and Jackson rift.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Music/07/09/jackson.mccartney/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Rach wrote:

annieisnotokey wrote:And the plot thickens!

It does indeed

Oh, you are good Agent A!

Holler at me if you need any help with this one!

I surely will!

annieisnotokey wrote:

mysticallymagestically wrote:And here's a Variety article detailing some of the people who worked on it? Or just the catalog itself?
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118007644.html?categoryId=3703&cs=1

Everything is helpful but I'm aiming more towards the terms of the agreement between MJ & Sony.
Was MJ's 50% just an investment or did he have any "administration" rights over what was done with the music?
It doesn't have to be recent news, it can be something from a few years back.

Okay, I'll try to narrow down what I find then, lol.

http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/jackson.asp

http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2009/07/01/michael-jackson-and-the-beatles-copyrights/id=4363/

this is what i found untill now

Annie, I will keep looking for information, but what I find funny is that a lot of articles I come across keep saying "Michael's death won't affect how the Beatle's music is distributed or used" which is setting the wheels in my head in motion

Rach wrote:Annie, I will keep looking for information, but what I find funny is that a lot of articles I come across keep saying "Michael's death won't affect how the Beatle's music is distributed or used" which is setting the wheels in my head in motion

Ding, ding, ding!

annieisnotokey wrote:Ding, ding, ding!

Give the girl a cookie!!

You (and me of course!!) are just too good

OMG, look what I found:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article2028494.ece

This article is from July 5th, 2007.

Check this paragraph out:
Sony is in talks with Michael Jackson to renegotiate the terms of their music publishing joint-venture, which would allow Sony BMG, the sister company, to sign songwriters for the first time.
A clause in the existing agreement between the Thriller singer and the Japanese electronics giant prevents Sony backing a music publisher to rival their Sony/ATV venture, which has the copyrights to all 252 Beatles songs in its catalogue.
If Sony can persuade its volatile and cash-strapped business partner to relax or even erase the clause as part of the negotiations, that would allow Sony BMG, the recorded music concern, to become a part-competitor.
Sony BMG is desperate to enter the music publishing market because it would help to offset the collapse in recorded music and would allow the record label behind Justin Timberlake and Bob Dylan to sign up songwriters in tandem with acts.

It's clear MJ was a nuisance for Sony and that MJ had input in the way Sony carried out its business.

Great find Annie! It is looking like it does all tie in together.

I think that Sony doubted that Michael could do anything more than sing and dance and he proved to them just how shrewd of a businessman he could be. I love it that he was a thorn in their side and didn't just let them run all over him.

kdkennedy74 wrote:I think that Sony doubted that Michael could do anything more than sing and dance and he proved to them just how shrewd of a businessman he could be. I love it that he was a thorn in their side and didn't just let them run all over him.

Yes.
And I don't think he was bluffing when he said "They never thought this performer would out think them"

Gotta figure out how everything ties in together, though.

From reading randy's book michael did have say at the time over the catalog. He used a lot of the songs for commercials. For example the nike commercials. I have to go find the passage in the book. I will try to type it out when i find it.

CaptainJaneway wrote:From reading randy's book michael did have say at the time over the catalog. He used a lot of the songs for commercials. For example the nike commercials. I have to go find the passage in the book. I will try to type it out when i find it.

That would be greatly appreciated!!

Thank you!!!

Could well be the reason he was afraid for his life.

mjssoulmate wrote:Could well be the reason he was afraid for his life.

That's one of the things I'm focusing my research on now.

Rumors rumors rumors...so I'll let you know in advance.

On another site, the following rumors were discussed:

1) Sony/Tommy Mottolla went charging after MJ once he exposed them in 2001 and created bad PR for them. Reportedly Motola has ties to organized crime.
2)They felt he had too muuch power/influence over an entire industry as the owner of the catalogues and that the bad people involved would not get their fair share of the millions to be earned.
3)They may have instigated the 2003 abuse charges to distract his attention from business and hopefully "break" him. .
4) Dismissal of Tommy by Sony was just a smokescreen to make MJ let his guard down and think that he had won a victory

Who knows...some may be remotely true.

annieisnotokey wrote:

mjssoulmate wrote:Could well be the reason he was afraid for his life.

That's one of the things I'm focusing my research on now.

annieisnotokey wrote:OMG, look what I found:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article2028494.ece

This article is from July 5th, 2007.

Check this paragraph out:
Sony is in talks with Michael Jackson to renegotiate the terms of their music publishing joint-venture, which would allow Sony BMG, the sister company, to sign songwriters for the first time.
A clause in the existing agreement between the Thriller singer and the Japanese electronics giant prevents Sony backing a music publisher to rival their Sony/ATV venture, which has the copyrights to all 252 Beatles songs in its catalogue.
If Sony can persuade its volatile and cash-strapped business partner to relax or even erase the clause as part of the negotiations, that would allow Sony BMG, the recorded music concern, to become a part-competitor.
Sony BMG is desperate to enter the music publishing market because it would help to offset the collapse in recorded music and would allow the record label behind Justin Timberlake and Bob Dylan to sign up songwriters in tandem with acts.

It's clear MJ was a nuisance for Sony and that MJ had input in the way Sony carried out its business.

OMG

Somewhere I heard that the charges against Michael came the day after he declined to sell the catalogue. Coincidence? I think not!

That is why I'm inclined to consider this string of rumors. They made him an offer and he declined. They may have then decided to "put him in his place" by tossing some money around to greedy families. Another round of abuse charges would cause a blow to his reputation. It would be an area where he would be vulnerable, distracted and potentially at risk for a knockout. That would have satisfied them in two ways: regain custody of the catalogue and destroy MJ.

mjssoulmate wrote:Somewhere I heard that the charges against Michael came the day after he declined to sell the catalogue. Coincidence? I think not!

LOL

GirlSaturday wrote:Rumors rumors rumors...so I'll let you know in advance.

On another site, the following rumors were discussed:

1) Sony/Tommy Mottolla went charging after MJ once he exposed them in 2001 and created bad PR for them. Reportedly Motola has ties to organized crime.
2)They felt he had too muuch power/influence over an entire industry as the owner of the catalogues and that the bad people involved would not get their fair share of the millions to be earned.
3)They may have instigated the 2003 abuse charges to distract his attention from business and hopefully "break" him. .
4) Dismissal of Tommy by Sony was just a smokescreen to make MJ let his guard down and think that he had won a victory

Who knows...some may be remotely true.

annieisnotokey wrote:

mjssoulmate wrote:Could well be the reason he was afraid for his life.

That's one of the things I'm focusing my research on now.

OMG!! He can be in danger!!! That would make sence for him to get away, if someone was threatning him, like they obvious was. Oh, Lord, I hope he is safe now.

GirlSaturday wrote:That is why I'm inclined to consider this string of rumors. They made him an offer and he declined. They may have then decided to "put him in his place" by tossing some money around to greedy families. Another round of abuse charges would cause a blow to his reputation. It would be an area where he would be vulnerable, distracted and potentially at risk for a knockout. That would have satisfied them in two ways: regain custody of the catalogue and destroy MJ.

mjssoulmate wrote:Somewhere I heard that the charges against Michael came the day after he declined to sell the catalogue. Coincidence? I think not!

I agree with you both, there is more than meets the eye with Sony. I dismissed it at first, but the more we uncover and the more things that get discussed the more I wonder how much Sony is involved.

WOW, now am inclined to think he had to hoax his "death" as he was in danger or maybe as some sugessted is witness protection. Heavy stuff!! The only thing that bothers me now is why wait so long? A few years have passed now. It definately needs considering though and looking onto more.

Breathe and Relax sweetie. Michael was at-risk from a variety of evil-doers throughout his life. He surrounded himself with trusted security who would risk their own lives to save his. IF he were in danger by Sony, Motolla or others, he was wise enough to know it and deal with it accordingly. He is wiser than they are. Believe that.

MyBelovedMJ wrote:

GirlSaturday wrote:Rumors rumors rumors...so I'll let you know in advance.

On another site, the following rumors were discussed:

1) Sony/Tommy Mottolla went charging after MJ once he exposed them in 2001 and created bad PR for them. Reportedly Motola has ties to organized crime.
2)They felt he had too muuch power/influence over an entire industry as the owner of the catalogues and that the bad people involved would not get their fair share of the millions to be earned.
3)They may have instigated the 2003 abuse charges to distract his attention from business and hopefully "break" him. .
4) Dismissal of Tommy by Sony was just a smokescreen to make MJ let his guard down and think that he had won a victory

Who knows...some may be remotely true.

annieisnotokey wrote:

mjssoulmate wrote:Could well be the reason he was afraid for his life.

That's one of the things I'm focusing my research on now.

OMG!! He can be in danger!!! That would make sence for him to get away, if someone was threatning him, like they obvious was. Oh, Lord, I hope he is safe now.

O God all the webs all the webs!!!!!!!!!!!!!

GirlSaturday wrote:Rumors rumors rumors...so I'll let you know in advance.

On another site, the following rumors were discussed:

1) Sony/Tommy Mottolla went charging after MJ once he exposed them in 2001 and created bad PR for them. Reportedly Motola has ties to organized crime.
2)They felt he had too muuch power/influence over an entire industry as the owner of the catalogues and that the bad people involved would not get their fair share of the millions to be earned.
3)They may have instigated the 2003 abuse charges to distract his attention from business and hopefully "break" him. .
4) Dismissal of Tommy by Sony was just a smokescreen to make MJ let his guard down and think that he had won a victory

Who knows...some may be remotely true.

I know it's just rumours, but I read a lot about this lately and it all sounds very possible.

GirlInTheMirror1 wrote:LOL

I really don't know what you find funny about this.

nlb wrote:
I agree with you both, there is more than meets the eye with Sony. I dismissed it at first, but the more we uncover and the more things that get discussed the more I wonder how much Sony is involved.

Ditto.

I considered it at first, then I dismissed thinking I was being too paranoid about the whole thing and now -after a lot of research on different issues- I'm inclined to believe the Sony affair had something to do with his disappearance.

annieisnotokey wrote:

GirlInTheMirror1 wrote:LOL

I really don't know what you find funny about this.

I'm LOL-ing because she LOLed at this

GirlSaturday wrote:Breathe and Relax sweetie. Michael was at-risk from a variety of evil-doers throughout his life. He surrounded himself with trusted security who would risk their own lives to save his. IF he were in danger by Sony, Motolla or others, he was wise enough to know it and deal with it accordingly. He is wiser than they are. Believe that.

We'll see who rides who at the end of the race.

Plus in Michael's case, I believe that some record executives constantly underestimated his wisdom and maturity. They saw Neverland, Disney vacations and his love for cartoons and believed that they were dealing with a child. Michael was supposed to entertain, earn the record company millions and nothing more. "Leave the important stuff to the adults, kid".

GirlSaturday wrote:Plus in Michael's case, I believe that some record executives constantly underestimated his wisdom and maturity. They saw Neverland, Disney viists and his love for cartoons and believed that they were dealing with a child. Michael was supposed to entertain, earn the record company millions and nothing more. "Leave the important stuff to the adults, kid".

Yes, I totally agree with this! They thought Michael's head was only filled with thoughts of music, lyrics and cut childlike things.
Boy, were they wrong.

GirlSaturday wrote:Breathe and Relax sweetie. Michael was at-risk from a variety of evil-doers throughout his life. He surrounded himself with trusted security who would risk their own lives to save his. IF he were in danger by Sony, Motolla or others, he was wise enough to know it and deal with it accordingly. He is wiser than they are. Believe that.

MyBelovedMJ wrote:

GirlSaturday wrote:Rumors rumors rumors...so I'll let you know in advance.

On another site, the following rumors were discussed:

1) Sony/Tommy Mottolla went charging after MJ once he exposed them in 2001 and created bad PR for them. Reportedly Motola has ties to organized crime.
2)They felt he had too muuch power/influence over an entire industry as the owner of the catalogues and that the bad people involved would not get their fair share of the millions to be earned.
3)They may have instigated the 2003 abuse charges to distract his attention from business and hopefully "break" him. .
4) Dismissal of Tommy by Sony was just a smokescreen to make MJ let his guard down and think that he had won a victory

Who knows...some may be remotely true.

annieisnotokey wrote:

mjssoulmate wrote:Could well be the reason he was afraid for his life.

That's one of the things I'm focusing my research on now.

OMG!! He can be in danger!!! That would make sence for him to get away, if someone was threatning him, like they obvious was. Oh, Lord, I hope he is safe now.

Ohh, I do hope so.. The thought of someone wants to harm him, is killing me .. Im haveing a panik attack. OMG!! Ive been able to keep every down I ate today. This is the first time at home, since this thing with Mike, that ive been able to keep my food down under pressure..

Im proud of myself

I'm proud of you too.

A visit to the gold pants thread should remove all pressure and make you feel very relaxed.

MyBelovedMJ wrote:

GirlSaturday wrote:Breathe and Relax sweetie. Michael was at-risk from a variety of evil-doers throughout his life. He surrounded himself with trusted security who would risk their own lives to save his. IF he were in danger by Sony, Motolla or others, he was wise enough to know it and deal with it accordingly. He is wiser than they are. Believe that.

MyBelovedMJ wrote:

GirlSaturday wrote:Rumors rumors rumors...so I'll let you know in advance.

On another site, the following rumors were discussed:

1) Sony/Tommy Mottolla went charging after MJ once he exposed them in 2001 and created bad PR for them. Reportedly Motola has ties to organized crime.
2)They felt he had too muuch power/influence over an entire industry as the owner of the catalogues and that the bad people involved would not get their fair share of the millions to be earned.
3)They may have instigated the 2003 abuse charges to distract his attention from business and hopefully "break" him. .
4) Dismissal of Tommy by Sony was just a smokescreen to make MJ let his guard down and think that he had won a victory

Who knows...some may be remotely true.

annieisnotokey wrote:

mjssoulmate wrote:Could well be the reason he was afraid for his life.

That's one of the things I'm focusing my research on now.

OMG!! He can be in danger!!! That would make sence for him to get away, if someone was threatning him, like they obvious was. Oh, Lord, I hope he is safe now.

Ohh, I do hope so.. The thought of someone wants to harm him, is killing me .. Im haveing a panik attack. OMG!! Ive been able to keep every down I ate today. This is the first time at home, since this thing with Mike, that ive been able to keep my food down under pressure..

Im proud of myself

@ Annie

I don't know if this will help you or not, most of what I have come across states the trust. I have read a few from a few years ago and this is what I've run across so far or something close to this:

Sony and Michael Jackson venture to buy Acuff-Rose

Pop superstar Michael Jackson and his partners at Sony Music Entertainment have agreed to buy

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200207/s597380.htm

The above is from July 2002. So it was after Sony/ATV was created. Most of the things that I have read that don't say the trust, list Sony and MJ separate.

nlb wrote:@ Annie

I don't know if this will help you or not, most of what I have come across states the trust. I have read a few from a few years ago and this is what I've run across so far or something close to this:

Sony and Michael Jackson venture to buy Acuff-Rose

Pop superstar Michael Jackson and his partners at Sony Music Entertainment have agreed to buy

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200207/s597380.htm

The above is from July 2002. So it was after Sony/ATV was created. Most of the things that I have read that don't say the trust, list Sony and MJ separate.

Very interesting.
I think I'm going to start a time line of Sony/ATV related events since MJ buying The Beatles catalogue.
Does anybody know how to get by without any sleep?

GirlSaturday wrote:I'm proud of you too.

A visit to the gold pants thread should remove all pressure and make you feel very relaxed.

MyBelovedMJ wrote:

GirlSaturday wrote:Breathe and Relax sweetie. Michael was at-risk from a variety of evil-doers throughout his life. He surrounded himself with trusted security who would risk their own lives to save his. IF he were in danger by Sony, Motolla or others, he was wise enough to know it and deal with it accordingly. He is wiser than they are. Believe that.

MyBelovedMJ wrote:

GirlSaturday wrote:Rumors rumors rumors...so I'll let you know in advance.

On another site, the following rumors were discussed:

1) Sony/Tommy Mottolla went charging after MJ once he exposed them in 2001 and created bad PR for them. Reportedly Motola has ties to organized crime.
2)They felt he had too muuch power/influence over an entire industry as the owner of the catalogues and that the bad people involved would not get their fair share of the millions to be earned.
3)They may have instigated the 2003 abuse charges to distract his attention from business and hopefully "break" him. .
4) Dismissal of Tommy by Sony was just a smokescreen to make MJ let his guard down and think that he had won a victory

Who knows...some may be remotely true.

annieisnotokey wrote:

mjssoulmate wrote:Could well be the reason he was afraid for his life.

That's one of the things I'm focusing my research on now.

OMG!! He can be in danger!!! That would make sence for him to get away, if someone was threatning him, like they obvious was. Oh, Lord, I hope he is safe now.

Ohh, I do hope so.. The thought of someone wants to harm him, is killing me .. Im haveing a panik attack. OMG!! Ive been able to keep every down I ate today. This is the first time at home, since this thing with Mike, that ive been able to keep my food down under pressure..

Im proud of myself

Are you kidding me.. relaxed lol.. My heart will start beating like crazy again.. hehe.. okey darn it, im gonna take a visit to it anyway. If I die, atleast I will die happy rofl

annieisnotokey wrote:

nlb wrote:@ Annie

I don't know if this will help you or not, most of what I have come across states the trust. I have read a few from a few years ago and this is what I've run across so far or something close to this:

Sony and Michael Jackson venture to buy Acuff-Rose

Pop superstar Michael Jackson and his partners at Sony Music Entertainment have agreed to buy

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200207/s597380.htm

The above is from July 2002. So it was after Sony/ATV was created. Most of the things that I have read that don't say the trust, list Sony and MJ separate.

Very interesting.
I think I'm going to start a time line of Sony/ATV related events since MJ buying The Beatles catalogue.
Does anybody know how to get by without any sleep?

you mean you haven't learned how to do that yet? You've had almost three months .

nlb wrote:

annieisnotokey wrote:
Does anybody know how to get by without any sleep?

you mean you haven't learned how to do that yet? You've had almost three months .

Y'all are HOT, Smokin' hot. Red Bull. Lots of coffee. That may help delay sleep for a few hours a night. Bill Clinton got by on 4 hours a night, and that has been about my average since June 25th. This Sony thread is making my head spin. What if those rumors are true? My god what Michael had to go through. His genius...his greatest blessing...his greatest curse. Annie, aren't you also working on a general timeline from March 09 to present? I hope you will post it all here. Seriously though, you should make time for sleep 'cause you will stay sharp that way. Things seem to be speeding up again.