Copyright Consultant Reveals Little-Known Fact About the Future of Michael Jackson's Estate

Pascal09

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
208
Points
0
http://www.blacknews.com/news/deeann_mathews101.shtml


-- Music businesswoman Deeann D. Mathews shares how copyright law details worth billions for Jackson's heirs can be used by all musicians to better control the use of their music. --

San Francisco, CA (BlackNews.com) - Giving insight into why the struggle over Michael Jackson's estate may have been so fierce, Deeann D. Mathews, copyright consultant and author of The Freedom Guide for Music Creators, reveals a secret to the value of the estate of the late "King of Pop" -- recapture rights.

Most musicians believe that once they assign their copyright to a publishing company, they give up control for all time. But U.S. Copyright law includes a provision in which a songwriter or their heirs can "recapture," or regain full administrative control of their songs. Mathews says, "35 years after your work has been published, or 40 years after you've assigned your work to a publisher if publication has not happened, a five-year period begins in which you or your heirs can demand full control of your copyrights back. There is nothing a publisher can do but give you what you want, if you do it right."


The only catch: You must formalize your demand in writing two years before you want your song back. In other words, the latest you could file your demand is the 38th year after your work has been published, or the 43rd year after your work went to a publisher but was not published.

In the case of Michael Jackson, many of his early solo hits are now in the recapture period, including "Got to Be There" (1972) and "Ben." (1972). Jackson 5 hits in the recapture period include "Sugar Daddy" (1972), and the huge hit "Dancing Machine" (1973, re-released as a single in 1974). Next year, the Jackson 5's "All I Do is Think of You" and the solo "Take Me Back" will enter the recapture period (both released in 1975, 34 years ago). In five years, Jackson's hit "Don't Stop 'Til You Get Enough" (1979) will enter the recapture period, and in eight years, everything on Jackson's mega-hit album Thriller (1982) will also enter the recapture period.

"The control of millions of not billions of dollars in assets would go from the music industry back to Jackson's heirs if they were to pursue these rights," says Mathews. "The takeaway for every musician should be this: you also can exercise similar control. If you're not happy with what your publisher is doing, or if you are happy but you think you can do better, get those letters of demand ready for that 35th year."


About Deeann D. Mathews
Deeann D. Mathews, award-winning composer, copyright consultant and author of The Freedom Guide for Music Creators, has helped a number of songwriters register and protect their copyrights, researched copyright status for songs in major projects, and educated music students on the basics of the music industry. For more information, visit Mathews' "Music Business a Go-Go" site at http://www.squidoo.com/freedomguide



Using the same analogy, does it mean that the beatles can gain control of their songs.
 
the kids will have billions each of them unless ofcourse one of their uncles becomes executor
 
the kids will have billions each of them unless ofcourse one of their uncles becomes executor

Their money will more than likely be put into a trust. Remember, they have a lawyer looking out for them.
 
Using the same analogy, does it mean that the beatles can gain control of their songs.


Michael bought the catalogue in the late eighties, so I think the beatles can regain their music rights in the late twenties.
 
Paul already regained some rights and reached an agreement with sony/atv not long time ago , MJ owns the rights to 750.000 songs the beatles songs are only 251 songs out of 750.000 song .

Legrande the lawyer testified during the trial that Sony approached MJ with a deal to buy the rights for one song not a beatles song to use it in Christmas , they offered to pay him 10 MILLIONS $ for ONE song , and guess what HE REFUSED to sell the rights , could you believe it ?
 
Most musicians believe that once they assign their copyright to a publishing company, they give up control for all time. But U.S. Copyright law includes a provision in which a songwriter or their heirs can "recapture," or regain full administrative control of their songs. Mathews says, "35 years after your work has been published, or 40 years after you've assigned your work to a publisher if publication has not happened, a five-year period begins in which you or your heirs can demand full control of your copyrights back. There is nothing a publisher can do but give you what you want, if you do it right."

Does that mean that songs that were recorded, but never published or released can go back to the performers?
 
Paul already regained some rights and reached an agreement with sony/atv not long time ago , MJ owns the rights to 750.000 songs the beatles songs are only 251 songs out of 750.000 song .

Legrande the lawyer testified during the trial that Sony approached MJ with a deal to buy the rights for one song not a beatles song to use it in Christmas , they offered to pay him 10 MILLIONS $ for ONE song , and guess what HE REFUSED to sell the rights , could you believe it ?
wow. i guess it wasn't an MJ song either.Anyway that's alot of cash for one song.
thanks for the info
 
it was an example of how rich mj was and how ridiculous were the claims about him being broke , you do people remember that sneddon wanted everybody to believe MJ was broke as hell and had no money .
 
it was an example of how rich mj was and how ridiculous were the claims about him being broke , you do people remember that sneddon wanted everybody to believe MJ was broke as hell and had no money .
yea; i rememnber that
 
yea; i rememnber that

But what would they have gotten out of it?.

About The Beatles songs, yes, Paul will get the rights back, beginning in a few years. He has said so in many interviews, how he doesn't have nay interest in buying them now because they will revert back to him anyway. I believe Yoko already has the rights to many of the songs (since john died, the waiting period is shorter...). That is actually something that bothers Paul... he has said that she actually makes more money out of Yesterday than he does...
 
paul also regained many rights already and he REACHED an agreement with Sony/ATV , I read it somewhere , the article was posted after mj's death, I don't know what was the agreement , but the songs are still under the Sony/ATV umbrella.
 
I guess that is why Beatles remasters and monos were released in 2009?

I wonder how many copyrighted, unreleased songs written by MJ exist. Also, in case of songs which were written by other songwriters, were they "work-for-fire"? Otherwise the songwriters may get the copyrights back? I only hope kids have savvy lawyers and finance managers on their side...

BTW MJ did defalut on $23 million loans from Fotress back in 2007, right?. And Colony came in...he just did not have enough cash on hand to service the debt, but he was never "poor". He could have avoided the event by selling a portion of his assets.
 
The ones mention in the michael jackson family trust are they heirs they will have milllions or maybe billions." katherin the kid's"
 
Paul already regained some rights and reached an agreement with sony/atv not long time ago , MJ owns the rights to 750.000 songs the beatles songs are only 251 songs out of 750.000 song .

Legrande the lawyer testified during the trial that Sony approached MJ with a deal to buy the rights for one song not a beatles song to use it in Christmas , they offered to pay him 10 MILLIONS $ for ONE song , and guess what HE REFUSED to sell the rights , could you believe it ?

yeah..i can believe it. big picture. that's the business savvy of MJ.
 
But what would they have gotten out of it?.

About The Beatles songs, yes, Paul will get the rights back, beginning in a few years. He has said so in many interviews, how he doesn't have nay interest in buying them now because they will revert back to him anyway. I believe Yoko already has the rights to many of the songs (since john died, the waiting period is shorter...). That is actually something that bothers Paul... he has said that she actually makes more money out of Yesterday than he does...

yeah, but that's not good thinking. there's no guarantee Paul will be around that long.

Anakin
I will be there

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Posts: 22
My Mood:
Tired.gif

reputation_pos.gif



icon1.gif
Re: Copyright Consultant Reveals Little-Known Fact About the Future of Michael Jackson's Estate
I guess that is why Beatles remasters and monos were released in 2009?

I wonder how many copyrighted, unreleased songs written by MJ exist. Also, in case of songs which were written by other songwriters, were they "work-for-fire"? Otherwise the songwriters may get the copyrights back? I only hope kids have savvy lawyers and finance managers on their side...

BTW MJ did defalut on $23 million loans from Fotress back in 2007, right?. And Colony came in...he just did not have enough cash on hand to service the debt, but he was never "poor". He could have avoided the event by selling a portion of his assets.

if so, willing to save the empire by not saving face. smart move. in the end, loud lying mouths and press can't destroy his finances, but liquifying investments can financially wipe his assets out. in the end, they couldn't claim anything from his finances, because of his wisdom, and willingness to endure humiliating lies in the press.
 
Last edited:
yeah, but that's not good thinking. there's no guarantee Paul will be around that long.

NO, no guarantee... but I guess he thinks if he isn't around by then, then qhat'd be the use of spending that much money in the songs?. Why would he really?. In that case he'd be byuing them for his children, and that is not necessary 'cause they will revert to them anyway.
 
Back
Top