Paul McCartney on Beatles catalog & Michael Jackson
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ต.ค. 2024
- In this 1989 interview, Paul McCartney discusses the Lennon/McCartney song publishing catalog and Michael Jackson's purchase of ATV Music Publishing in 1985. He also talks about the use of Beatles songs in commercials.
Why are people saying Paul is whining? I didn't hear him whine, in fact he clearly stated that he couldn't blame Jackson for buying the catalog because it was a business decision that was on the table. You all need to stop taking things out of context.
When a person says "I couldn't blame him" he's kind of implying that there's something wrong in the first place.
taliwakka27 Totally agree. They were friends (or so Paul thought.) He naturally felt betrayed at the time, but here in the video he is just trying to be magnanimous by saying that he didn't blame him.
taliwakka27 MJ is no pedo. also Paul is being polite about it, but obviously who wouldn’t want to own their own creation. he kinda aknowledge how naive he was at the time
I don't think he's happy about it though… He just doesn't let it show in the interview... But I think the hate from the British media has allot to do with this… But GENIUS business-move of Michael XX
@@Talisman09 Of course you moron's don't realize you are swallowing whole a one-sided story. Do you think PM was the only one vying for Buddy Holly's catalog? You don't think he stepped on some toes of people who may have had an actual connection to him, or any of the other catalogs PM owned. PM is full of shit, feigning some innocent child thinking music falls from the sky, when he'd purchased catalogs himself. And you should know, if you don't already, that PM was on Geffin's boat when Oprah was approached to support the recent mockumentary on MJ. They are a den of snakes.
His MJ impression lol
He had the chance on numerous occasions to buy his songs but he refused to pay the $. Can't feel resentment now.
Condescending pri##!
his Paul McCartney impression lol
lionheart11381 Paul Loves to kiss Ass, without JOHN they would have NEVER made it. John had the Ball's, simple and clear.
lionheart11381 Michael would have NEVER tried to STEAL the BEATLES song's while John was alive, why? he was SCARED that John(who NEVER minced words) would have VERBALLY, Legally, and Intellectually put a foot Up the poor little SICK guys ASS!!!
"I'm gonna get your records ya know...I'm gonna get your songs, I'm gonna buy your songs." Hahaha he says it just like Michael. Oh, I love you Paul! :)
I read it in MJ voice
Paul is simply sharing his feelings. Yet people judge him and say he is whining.
Whining or not MJ won on the deal
He Is not Paul first of all
@@Wayne_Schlagel what? What do you mean
@@marples8453 Paul is dead.
i_am_a_phoney 2 no he’s not Paul is alive and doing well
I love how he cares so much what the music means to fans, and didn't want to dilute its significance by being used on cola adverts.
Soo many ppl underestimated Michael. He told Paul that he would own that catalog one day and he stayed true to his word.
Don’t think that’s underestimating so much as mistakenly assuming your friend and collaborator was capable of acting with decency.
Not doing him much good now
@@deckerdoesitdiy lol you sound hurt. Good for Mike for outbidding the overrated PM. In the words of Quincy Jones, “the Beatles couldn’t play for shit. “
How god didn't smite Jackson down when he secured that business venture is beyond me. So unjustly
@@L_Martin Michael Jackson did act with decency. Paul was offered the songs but wanted to include Yoko and Yoko didn’t like the price. Then the songs were put on the market, Michael told Paul he would buy them upfront and did. He did nothing dishonest, nothing in secret and nothing illegal. And Paul wasn’t angry at Michael for buying the songs. He was angry because he wanted a higher percentage of the profits and didn’t like that the songs were being used in commercials.
Jackson bought ATV for a price of $47.5 million. Today, Sony/ATV is worth about $2 billion; through Jackson's estate, his heirs still own his half of the joint venture.
Well, if Paul knew then how much those songs would be worth now, he'd've bought them. Even then, $50 million would not have been out of his reach. But that's business and investing: coulda, woulda, shoulda.
ATV was not just the Beatles songs. And MJ kept on buying publishing rights. They say the most valuable part of the catalogue is which was handpicked by MJ himself. So it's not just the Beatles songs that's worth that much. But its value surely went up over the years.
Its a shame because the Jackson estate is parasitic at best.
@@adayinthelife5772 no that’s what companies do to each other they buy each other to grow, when Disney bought Star Wars it was a smart business decision just to make an example
Paul is a intelligent logical man with a clear view of what he wanted his music to be. I would have been much more emotional about the whole situation then he was. He was composed and calm. He was Worked over by MJ and still didn’t lose his shit! Well done Sir.... well done
Paul's big mistake was giving the idea of music publishing to the one person who could actually pull it off.
Right
Lol
Bingo
But Paul was worth close to $500 Million at the time... he tried to haggle for a cheaper price and excluded the other Beatles and Yoko and ended up playing himself.
@@user-zy2ck1ob5x Exactly. People forget Michael Jackson wasn't an idiot. He was a businessman. Better at business than majority of musicians. The man owned 50% of Sony.
This just proves that Mj was not some little boy trapped in a grown mans body. He was a fully functional adult and a cutthroat businessman
I have been saying this forever 🤷♀️
He was a Virgo, of course he was
He was sly.
EthnicEve Exactly
@@yoya4766 just like the white man, and...
It wasnt just the beatles publishing that Michael bought, there were a lot black artists publishing in that catalogue, like Lil Richards, that was stolen from them, and when Michael found that out, he set out to right a wrong, and he even told Paul his intentions, thats a stand up Business Man, and he gave Lil Richard his publishing back.
Yes he did.
Why didn't he do the same for Paul then, give them back?
KrisJM1234 Because he bought it... Paul had his chance to buy it and he didn’t. He should have purchased it if he really wanted it.
@@phcsophcso7526 - What about the other artists Michael bought from that couldn't afford to buy them back?
KrisJM1234 What about them? That’s just business. It was for sale and Michael Jackson purchased them. He doesn’t owe anyone any favors.
When Paul approached Yoko about paying half the cost, she said she would try to negotiate the price down. She ended up causing the price to go up because she's such a bad negotiator. Paul then refused to pay the full cost out of principal because he didn't think it should be so high. That's when Michael came in and purchased the catalogue out right.
In-N-Out lol what I don't understand is that wouldn't Paul know that the Beatles catalogue is priceless? That any amount of money would be worth it?
Of course MJ would! He had the money! That's doing business like a genius!
Camron Wafer: Exactly!
+mj ''doing business like a genius'' lol and he died all alone, his business wasn't there to help him. The Beatles are older than MJ and still remembered to this day and talked about in major music colleges.
Betrays, but Paul wouldn't wanna pay that much. So Michael bought it
Moral of the story is : don't show the trigger if you don't wanna be shot
Am I the only one here who loves both Michael and Paul and just tries to understand both sides of the story?
The way I understood it was that Paul didnt want to pay that much for the Beatles catalogue.He wanted Yoko to pay half but she wouldnt do it.He could have easily afforded 42 million for his own songs .
+Ron Slack Exactly correct!
Thats exactly it. Paul McCartney is well known to be a tight bastard. And no way was he prepared to pay 47.5 million in 1985.
He didn't wanna pay for something that belonged to him.
It was a bad decision, but I get being pissed about it all.
@@fender1000100 paying that ridiculous amount for something that you feel is yours, and you got screwed in the first place by greedy people, and now more greedy people want to get rich of of something you feel should be yours to begin with and you think that is being a tight bastard? Try stop being so judgemental and put yourself in another's place. He already lost millions when he was naive and didn't secure the rights in the beginning, and now people are asking him for millions more for something he feels is rightfully his. Just stop and think for a moment before casting a self righteous judgement on another person.
MJ lawyer didn't tell McCartney that it was going to be auctioned. For one reason or another McCartney got outbid/outsmarted. The whole saga and negotiation process took a year. Maybe he didn't have enough money back then (and Yoko wouldn't cooperate), or maybe he didn't want to have a pissing money contest. But one way or another, MJ definetely sneaking on him.
Going into a pissing money contest with your friend who already know longing and after his own song for decades? That does feel right to you? How do you feel if it was you?
Mind you, back then somewhere in late 60's early 70's, both McCartney and Lennon already tried to buy back their song, but they didn't have enough money because for much part it tied to an asset or still hold on legality yet to be resolved, not to mention the very high tax which cut their income hugely (hence the song taxman).
It's still sneaky IMO though to do that to your friend no matter which way it being spinned, especially who you know perfectly well trying to get back his song for decades.
Anyway, Paul already got it back now after confidential settlement with Sony ATV who bought the rest of the song catalog from MJ estates.
Paul McCartney impersonation of Michael Jackson. So funny
He Is man of 1000 voices .. Billy ..ehm Paul .
Michael Jackson is the easiest person to impersonate, tbh
Just like Michael said : "If he didn't want to invest $47.5 million in his own songs, then he shouldn't come crying to me now." If Paul can use Buddy Holly songs in commercials how can he get mad at Michael doing it??
Bud holly was dead and why the fuck should he pay for HIS songs?
double standards
What kind of friend buys his buddies catalogue?
@@rhinestoneeyes5304 Plus wasn’t his family and estate cool with it?
When Michael spoke everybody thought he was joking, hahaha Michael was so smart... i think Paul is right about commercials and music...
Well hearing a song multiple times is like saying a word multiple times, they both lose their meaning.
At the end of video. "...but the main reason is I just love doing it." It is really clear for all to see, what McCartney says here is undeniable. The guy loves what he does - making music and performing for his fans. Simply stated, Paul McCartney -the most successful singer/songwriter/musician ever.
McCartney's music first with The Beatles and then solo has outsold all other artists. He is at the very top as far as greatest number of songs ever sold in the music business. His music has outsold all others, including Michael Jackson. Actually, Elvis Presley follows The Beatles then Michael Jackson as far as music sold. However, Michael Jackson will likely pass Elvis sometime in the future. Here is the link with stats on music sold.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_music_artists
Juan Sebastian Trujillo G. McCartney is a member of The Beatles which is why he is listed as the most successful recording artist ever. Again, his songs (those he wrote and performed) have outsold all other recording artists. As far as concerts and playing in front of crowds go, then I would certainly agree Michael Jackson would be at the top of that list. I also think MJ is very likely the most well known and recognizable recording artist ever.
Juan Sebastian Trujillo G. That is because they are not including McCartney's work with The Beatles. I have provided the link proving McCartney's music (w/The Beatles and solo) has outsold all other Beatles as well Michael Jackson's, McCartney's music has outsold everybody.
Juan Sebastian Trujillo G. McCartney's songs have outsold all other recording artists. There is no denying this fact.
+nycinstyle As a solo artist McCartney does not compare to Michael Jackson. SORRY
Greatest man in the world and not just because of his music. Long live Paul
According to research, Paul was contacted about buying the catalog in advance. The claim is his attorney responsed saying it was too expensive and passed up the deal. Then in came Mike...can't blame the man, he was a huge fan of the Beatles.
They are both talented artists so who cares. They are both winners in my opinion. Like apples and oranges. Different styles, different genre.
No I totally understand paul expounding on music commercials and the Beatles resisting commercial offers..
I also see the money aspect of Michael buying the catalog but I have been motivated by pauls sharing his ideals on where music comes from as a artist and respect that and also he's a multimillionaire without saying the least.
Are people actually watching the same interview as I am?
Nowhere in this interview does McCartney 'bitch' about Jackson buying the songs.
He believes using the songs for commercial purposes is wrong as it cheapens the song. That is what he is annoyed about.
The Beatles had problems with their publishing company back in the late 60s where Paul and John were devastated that they lost rights to some of their songs. It's just get's messy. I mean, Jackson even had to sell part of the catalog back because he was getting himself into debt.
McCartney also said "...in a way it's good for publicity."
Paul literally said he can't complain about it, he's doesn't seem particularly upset about it, just don't think he liked the songs being commercialized tbh
Paul is rich, and its been reported that he could have bought the catalog back but he never even tried, so don't start bitching Paul. The industry is a business, MJ was shrewd and knew, the fact is The Beatles had shitty deals. Don't hate MJ cause he was not only talented BUT business savvy. "Its just business"
barnesfam Paul was really the one hounding MJ for decades because they were selling off the catalog in pieces for commercial jingles - that devalues the catalog. And Paul complained because he beliveed he should be getting a better royalty rate for all the money the catalog was generating for MJ and Sony.
SixLips93 Under the agreement set forth in the final lawsuits to settle the partnership of Apple - ALL partners had to agree to acquisitions and sales of Beatles related materials. That included buying their own publishing. Paul didn't buy them when first offered because he couldn't just buy the Beatles portion of the catalog; he had to buy the whole catalog which included a lot of junk songs which would have devalued the publishing archive he already owned.
When they came for sale again, he couldn't buy them outright because of the terms of the Apple settlement.
Rock the Stage NYC
That's what you say (& it may be true for all I know) but it's *not* what PMc has said regarding the ATV/Beatles/Northern Songs catalogue over the years.
The link I've left below is the most common story about how MJ acquired the catalogue. I've read a lot about The Beatles & their business interests over the years but I've never seen any agreement that doesn't allow PMc to buy Beatles songs because the remaining Beatles had some sort of hold on him. There is no doubt The Beatles got some lousy business advice in their early days particularly in regard to merchandising. Do you have a link to an article that supports your take on the "Apple settlement"?
www.celebritynetworth.com/articles/entertainment-articles/how-michael-jackson-bought-the-beatles-catalogue-and-turned-it-into-a-billion-dollar-music-empire/
No article - Paul said it on the Howard Stern show.
***** Actually you are wrong... He wanted to buy them with Yoko, given that he wrote them with John. She thought she could get a better deal, but she went behind his back and allowed MJ to buy the catalog. After 25 years the catalog would go to John's children. She screwed him.
A good interview by Paul. (rare). He's not crying over spilled milk. He says he doesn't blame MJ for buying the catalog as they were on the market. I'm not sure he could've shelled out 42M back in 1985.
Lol when people use the term ‘crying over spilt milk’ it usually refers to the insignificant or trivial loss - not hundreds of million dollars.
I think Paul should get his and johns music back I'm a Beatles fan and have been for a long time now that fact is never changed and it will never change yours Ziggy Nesta Marley from Leicestershire in the countryside in England respect to all the Beatles along be and passed on
Homes á Court offered Macca the rights twice. He didn't want them. MJ also asked him before going into negotiations w/ Holmes á Court, Macca wasn't interested. Yeah, Macca sure made a mistake.
why not george's music too?
Paul isn't and never was smart enough to own his own music, when you smoke dope and think your music just floats in the air, and nobody can really "OWN IT", (like they really believed, true story),..then you will never own your own music, or have the business sense that a Michael Jackson would have. As why they call those people = "Dead Heads"
So many of you need to read the description on this video before you comment with things like "Stop whining" or "Don't start bitching". This interview was in 1989, 26 years ago! The sale of ATV Publishing, along with The Beatles catalog had happened in 1985, only 4 years before this interview. What you also don't see in this edited video clip is the interviewer asking Paul to tell the story of what happened between himself and Michael Jackson over the ownership of The Beatles catalog. So it's not McCartney whining, he's giving an interview and answering a question and even then he's not coming across as whining or bitching in this video.
Spot on w/ the impersonation! Nicely done, Paul! lol!
His mj impression was hilarious
MJ did great cover Come together :)
The world will never witness a artist like MJ again. RIP
Sir Paul, You gave Micheal the Idea when you told him how the money is in Publishing !
I often think Paul was born a shrewd business man. Watching this made me realise that he learned the hard way too.
The Beatles as individuals didn't get a fraction of what they should have. Instead the vultures did.
How was Paul whining? He was jot even complaining. He said “I can’t blame him” and his Michael Jackson impression was amazing
Now that Sony owns the Beatles music, how come Paul and his fans aren't shading them? Or were they offended only when it was Michael?
Hypocricy at its best... isn't it?
You're right!
I am absolutely an MJ fan but I think it's well past time Paul gets the Beatles catalog back.
why? its not charity week.
Should have bought it when he had a chance. He can kiss off!
Michael Jackson was boss man!!!!
He inspired me..
I didn't watch this because I knew I would get too upset. Paul McCartney is the one who told Michael Jackson he should get into Music Publishing -- buying people's music. Paul had already been doing this and knew it was lucrative. That's how Michael found out about it. So Michael LISTENED to Paul and because Paul was too dumb or too cheap to buy the BEATLES music, Michael bought it. Very smart business decision. Paul is SOUR GRAPES.
You're absolutely right, and it is one of those unfathomable mysteries why McCartney didn't bite the bullet and cough up the dough to acquire the ATV catalog (on his own, when Yoko demurred participating) when he had a CHANCE, even if the asking price was rather steep. Sure it would rankle to pony up a huge sum to buy what was "his" in the first place, but missing that opportunity was incredibly short-sighted. Now it's highly unlikely he'll ever own his own songs....very sad.
exactly and said himself he didn't blame him if he bought it because it was on the market for sale mj did nothing wrong but because it's mj ppl want to be mad they need to get over it if Paul wanted it he should of bought it in the first place but he didn't so he just needs to stop
ann landers it wasn't Paul.who taught MJ about publishing rights. For God's sake he already made Peacock Publishing for the Jacksons songs' rights when he was 19. He met while doing this his lawyer, John Branca. MJ already bought Sly and the Family Stone catalogue before that story w/ Macca happened...
You should read about John Lennon and Paul McCartney before commenting. Paul and John wrote a majority of their songs by themselves. They became a songwriting team because they made an agreement before they were famous to share their songwriting credits .Also they wanted to be a team similar to "Rodgers and Hammerstein". If you count all the "number 1" songs written by McCartney - with the Beatles and as a solo artist - he has more than anyone else in history.
Thank you paul for treading the ground never tread before you a true inspiration thank you thank you thank you x
I wonder how he felt when the Beatles Rock Band game came out
He was alright with it as of course he and along with Ringo Starr, Olivia Harrison and Yoko Ono had endorsed the video game. There are videos of him and Ringo at the E3 conference in 2009.
Sir Paul is an international treasure
I lived in the time of the Beatles.
if you mean you were young when beatles came out, sir you certainly may feel glad
I love how he tells this story every now and then
It's not true the Paul not even tried to get the catalog back. He is doing what he can and already had some victories. It seems, so I read somwhere, he will get ti all in a few years time. MJ made a mistake, not doubt about that. But Paul never lost hope. I can't insert links here. But it's on Mail on line. Headline is:Get Back To Where You Once Belonged: Sir Paul McCartney set to regain rights to Beatles back catalogue
.
+Virginia Abreu de Paula ......Paul and yoko Ono lennon were offered the Beatles catalog long before Michael Jackson scoffed it up. As I remember Paul & Yoko simply agreed that the seller of the catalog wanted way too much money for it and they wouldn't buy it at that price.........bad move in retrospect.....the value skyrocketed
What mistake did MJ commit? MJ is a businessman, entrepreneur, and a genius. He bought the catalog at $47,000,000.00+. Now it is worth $500,000,000.00!
For the record: Michael died with a tarnished reputation in financial straits. His music is rarely played on radio and while good it hasn't aged well.
Paul is financially and personally a fulfilled man. His reputation intact. All his music is still fresh and poignant. He's a classic genius like Mozart, etc.
Finally someone said it
Shreedhar Jajoo his music has not aged well listen to it
yes that's true, there wouldn't be michael jackson if The Beatles never exist
I hear people playing MJ music all around the world. Beatles are unknown figure outside USA&UK.
@@jamesanderson-qp3fm nope not really. no disrespect to king of pop but in asia and other country around asia, The Beatles are still considered a huge band...they play their music everywhere (hey jude, i wanna hold your hand, all u need is love, etc). Paul McCartney still doing concert before this pandemic in some places in asia and south america, and the numbers of audiences are still insane considered he's a 70-years old musicians.
Read Michael Jackson Inc. A part of it talks about the Beatles catalog and how Michael's lawyer asked Yoko and Paul before purchasing it. They didn't have interest to buy it because of the hefty price. And actually Paul was more at peace that it will go to MJ's possession, rather than some random billionaire. MJ bought it for $47M outbidding i think two rich people because he bought it from A Court while offering a charity concert at the same time and MJ offered to dis include Penny Lane from the catalog so that A Court can give this song as a gift to his daughter. 🙂
I know this video it's old, but I just see now and I surprised that some people say they know Beatles because Michael's cover. I'm the biggest Michael's fan, but Beatles are legend like him, we can't deny.
It doesn't pay being evil, as we had seen on MJ's example.
I think the reason pm felt betrayed is because he talked to michael about another artist did this to him and was teaching him that these types of things happen so it's important to own the rights to other people's songs when mj told him that he was going to own them PM thought he was joking.. based on what paul said in this video he didnt take it seriously when he was warned he didnt want to own them himself and he couldn't blaim michael for purchasing them. Paul McCartney and michael were friends and this is why he was telling him to watch out for people who purchase your music from underneath you fast forward the song is on the market you dont want it how selfish of you as a friend to be mad a me because I want to purchase them knowing I am a fan... mj loved the beatles and it was a great investment... I can't say for sure if it was a selfish move or one that was grimy but based upon what I know about MJ it seems like he may have wanted to celebrate the beatles music and thought PM would be happy about it---- lost friendship but I sounds like paul also said mj knew he was trying gain control of his music I guess at point it be on whoever's bids the most but it sounds like paul didn't bid whose faults is that
I know it’s all business but I don’t get the logic of that someone other than the writer himself should own it.
I have learned to like Paul and other members all the more because they want their music independent of any association with TV commercial. They were artists in a truth sense.
They (Beatles) are true artists because they didn't want their songs associated with commercials. Uhhh, where's the logic there? What's wrong with commercials? Paul, himself said in another interview, "well, in a way that was publicity for us."
alysonai, that's why Paul gives permission to use Buddly Holly's songs in ads? (You know he owns the publishing rights to his catalogue, right?)
"Im gonna get your songs" the voice was funny
I imagined him saying it😂
Respect and salute Sir Paul for being a true blue musician at heart. 😍
1:14 his MJ impression 😂
"I saw a Velveeta commercial, and it was playing,
I think, 'Burning Love.' He had approved it.
that's something we can't control.
He can do whatever he wants with the songs he owns to make money,
and that got under my skin."
--- Lisa Marie Presley August 8, 2003 ---
It's funny how Paul doesn't mention the fact that HE WAS TOO CHEAP to buy ATV catalogue (with his own songs in it) for 20 million dollars in 1985 and instead Michael bought it for 47 million. Also at that time, Paul had an income of 40 million a year just from song royalties. The fact that he was too cheap to spend his 1-year 'salary' on his own songs makes me smile...
I understand Paul's point but...their music shouldn't have been on the market to sale. I wasn't a Beatles fan until I started searching for the catchy tunes in commercials.
eddie angel the beatles were horrible buisness men to be honest great entertainers but they were really bad business men
@@cimarronhopper4605
In their early years of naive 20 years young men, yes.
They screwed right, left, and centre.
They learned their lesson after that though, Hard way!
That last sentence has got to be the stupidest shit I’ve ever read sir
I love Michael and Paul, they're inspirations for me, they're irreplaceable legends. Michael and Paul are legends, not that random singer called Justin Bieber
Many forgot that
MJ was very smart he knows what he is doing
I love Paul AND Michael. & I loved their collaborations. & Taking your OWN advice would be wise as well. Take care & have a good day.
Paul helped Micheal out with his career; so, that gives Micheal justification to buy The Beatles' catalogues? No matter who tries to explain it, Micheal stabbed Paul in the back. Paul explained to Michael about the purchasing of music catalogues, and such; so Micheal bought it after. Paul wasn't cheap, he asked Yoko to go halves with him, in turn making Yoko cheap because she only wanted to spend 5 mil. If Micheal was such a wonderful guy, like all his fans say; he would sold the Beatles songs
Chris Briault Why would he sell them if he got them fair and square?
You're Gay To give it back to his friend? Isn’t Michael a nice guy like you said?
Paul and Michael were acquaintance,the relationship was business associated...not friend.I dont get when some ppl say he betrayed him.I respected Michael for informing Paul that he will purchase the catalog.His mistake was he undermine and underestimated MJ.
That should be the attitude of all musical artists - to not cheapen the music by allowing it to be used for selling things. Very smart.
his Michael Jackson impression is awesome
Beatles music should be public domain.
Nancy Allery Because ... ?
Nancy Allery No. You'd hear every fucking Beatles song on every fucking commercial ever. You'd hear Hey Jude playing on every station on XM at all times.
Watch this youtube video: Michael Jackson - Perth Australia 1985 (Beatles/ATV Publishing Rights) *Rare Footage*
Paul is full of it....he chose not to bid on the catalog because Yoko would not go in half with him, she thought it cost too much money. He had enough money to buy the catalog himself but CHOSE NOT TO.
So he gives an interview and tells half truths about what happened, leaving out that he was given first right of refusal on bidding on the catalog. He also made commercials out of his own songs......
Sr Handel fuck yeah , MJ in Perth ! when he came here in 1985 he even visited a kola park around the corner from me , I went there 10 years ago when I was 6.
Both not revealed the full truth.Paul indeed got offered, MJ told him (sort of), but via Branca his Lawyer.
Only his Lawyer did not told the full story that there would be a bidding, so in effect McCartney got outsmarted.
So, i don't think MJ is quite as innocence too.
It's still kinda shrewd move anyway, especially to your friend who give you the very own advice.
Dalfi Fran If it was his lawyer who didnt tell the rest how is that mj's fault
@@lordangel9553
I don't think it's anybody fault.
It was just bussiness in the end.
It was still a shrewd move though.
But all fair in love and war (bussiness).
Dalfi Fran yeah i get that he was his friend but it was business
Seriously? There's absolutely no other way you'd have discovered Beatles? I doubt that. They are everywhere, even today.
MJ did not stab him in the back. He just outbid him. IMO it is somehow wrong to have to bid on your own music but he has no right to whine. Michael bought his own music and since he could well afford it, Paul could have bought ATV. I am a MJ fan but on the other hand, I get sick of hearing fans and Karen Faye complaining because Jeep is using a MJ song for a commercial like it is such a cruel and horrible thing. Mike was a businessman who would understand. He bought Beatles music and used it for commercials. So what's the difference?
Go, Lucy Cat.
The micheal voice is so cute!
Michael Jackson is the King of Pop, Rock & Soul. The Beatles are the king of Rock. You see the Beatles are a group of 4 where as Michael is the one man army who built his empire on his own &Michael owning the Catalogue should never be perceived as a bad thing. He is a successfull Businessman & he was famous enough to own them. I still dont understand why people talk nonsense about the man who left us. Stop hating Michael and look at the good deeds he has done. Rest in peace King of Pop.
Paul ownes the publishing of Buddy Hollys music, he told Micheal about it and Micheal bought the Beatles publishing. Your fault man.
@yosraz1
I'm with you. We all have our opinions and preferences, and both of these guys are legends. THEY recognized each other as legendary and respect(ed) each other and they've both respected people in general all their lives. As their fans, why aren't we all doing the same?
@rayfur4 From what I read somewhere, you're correct. Additionally, I also read that since part of the catalogue comprised of John Lennon's songs, Paul was uncomfortable owning it all outright and had asked Yoko Ono to join with him in the bidding that was going on at the time. But she refused. Eventually Paul dropped out of the bid. Clearly he must have had his reasons, given what he reveals in this piece, and lots more we won't ever know about.
1:15 great haha
The cleverest of the Beatles, by far.
MJ did not outbid Paul McCartney for the catalogue. Yoko turned down Paul's request to bid on it because it was too expensive. MJ bought it after his lawyer told him Paul wasn't bidding on it. Do the research.
All music copyright agencies AROUND THE WORLD should put classic rock music COMPLETELY OFF LIMITS TO ALL ADVERTISING AGENCIES! Classic rock music that we grew up with MUST NEVER BE PROSTITUTED by their use in TV adverts!
I don't understand how and why was his music up for sale in the first place ?
Had a lot to do with John's passing, and a lot of other legal bullshit record companies are known for. You don't own your music, unless you sign with your own record & producing company, otherwise everyone else gets a big cut along with the rights to your music~
A good example would be U2's decision to give Apple most of their music because they're making $$$. Bono was richer than Paul at one point, and could of been richer, if his deal with Apple was successful... Though, that's why you don't make deals like that, anyway, unless you like getting screwed over~
@@Brandon-cs8gw Thanks
LOL It's funny when Paul does his voice at 1:13
I just saw a commercial for Party City that used "Thriller". Eye for an eye, baby.
Paul were upset because Michael Jackson took control over Beatles Songs.
I don't think it was just Paul. My personal belief is that the "insult" and the move to get the catalogs back reached into British gov't and royalty. Remember, Paul was knighted by the queen herself. Also, Paul was on Geffin's boat when Oprah was approached to support the recent mockumentary about MJ. IMO, they slandered him, then killed him, then slandered him some more, all so they could get the catalogs back, which MJ obtained fair and square.
@@ayejay8862 very truth your explanation.is confusing who is in control of Beatles songs.I personally would hate see them used on commercials
@@lunes-1 _I personally would hate see them used on commercials_
I know what you mean. I was never a big MJ fan, actually. I didn't dislike him, and I liked some of his music. But I thought he was an incredible stage performer. I was more of a Prince fan (haha!), and I actually felt offended when I heard his music playing on some lame TV commercial. The business side of the industry is really gross. It's ironic considering musical art comes from the soul of these great entertainers, but the corporate movers and shakers seem to be soulless snakes.
is truth at the end the artist lost control of their creations.MJ had good human qualities and helped a lot of people,some great songs too,Prince was iconic, very sad is gone.
I think after 50 years the original writer can get rights back without buying them. Does anyone know about this ? I think I saw an article on this lately as many of the Lennon/McCartney songs are now over 50 years old, and soon they all will be. I think it totally sucks they had their songs stolen. That should never happen.
@RandyHeathEllenberg, how about reversed your statement? Without Michael Jackson, Quincy Jones would not have been so big? He also produced music for other artists later, anything came closer than any of MJ's albums? Neither of them could work along, both Q Jones & MJ's collaborated on three distinguished albums in 80s. A lots of songs were written by MJ not QJ.
Be fair!
@heathbradford Paul's publishing company (MPL) acquired 'Love Me Do', 'P.S. I Love You', 'Please Please Me' and 'Ask Me Why' several years ago. Those 4 songs were not part of the Northern Songs catalog.
Another point re MJ bidding for that catalogue, is that pple forget that these matters are handled by a squad of legal teams & advisors who represent their clients.
Paul's voice is AMAZING!! He sounded just like Michael!
Stop Crying Paul!!! Don't be mad at Mike, he just did good business!!! Damn Mike was a true genius!!! I love him!!!
Thx
Lara M But earning from licensing is the whole point of owning publishing rights. It's a business decision for profit. If Paul was so sensitive about it, he should've bought the catalogue and not have been so stingy. Michael bought it for business reasons.. 42 million is too big an amount to spend for sentimental reasons, though he was a true Beatles fan. He has to earn it back right?
Sounds like something a Michael Jackson fan would say say say.
He wasn't even wining. Were you paying attention to the video? Paul said that he didn't blame Michael. No hard feelings.
Wow, you are really bad at researching.... The Beatles is without a doubt the best selling musical act of all time. It's written everywhere.
What more could have they accomplished? They were only around for ten years and in those ten years they made iconic tunes.
Business got in the way and it tore them apart.
Relevant to many other generations
50M was like a lot back in the 80's
It’s still a lot mate😂
PAUL FOREVERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Whateverrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
Diego Pratesi Paullll foreverrrrrrrrrrrr
McCartney was privately offered first dibs on those songs twice and passed on them both times before Jackson bought them. He had the money and could have easily bought them but he went ahead and listened to Yoko Ono who told him that the price was too high and that they could buy them cheaper and he foolishly agreed and left it in her hands. A very unwise move on his part-the catalog is currently worth a billion dollars.
That time Michael told on his face he gonna get their song,he gonna buy song,it's not stealing like what I'd read.Mj was too young and he was starting to be in a business,poor MJ he didn't know there was a lot of evil coming on his way😓🤦🏿♀️
Be careful with drink commercials
I'm a huge mj fan. Beatles too. Let me say though that's fucked up with the selling rights to commercials. He should of just said Michael don't sell my stuff to commercials. Even though it was his right I'm sure mj would of said ok I understand
MJ never sold Beatles' "stuff" (Revolution) to commercials, it was Capitol Records. Without the permission of ATV. NIKE even had to pay ATV (MJ) $250.000 for using the song without the publisher's permission. MJ didn't own the rights to masters, that was Capitol Records. I wish ppl would check facts before commenting... That would be sg new.
@stonegrooved
are you a beatles fan?