Michael Jackson (left) and Paul McCartney
According to information reported in the UK's Daily Mirror and In Entertainment, Michael Jackson recently changed his will, returning his remaining publishing rights to some 200 Beatles' songs to the man many consider to be their rightful owner—Sir Paul McCartney.
Jackson, who passed away in his southern California home yesterday at the age of 50, originally outbid the knighted musician for publishing rights to his own catalog of music in 1985, to the tune of over $577 million. Prior to that, the two men had been friends, collaborating on the hit songs "Say, Say, Say" and "The Girl Is Mine." Subsequently, the two had not spoken to each other because of the hard feelings that arose from the publishing auction.
According to a source, the 66-year-old McCartney disliked the fact that he had to pay to perform his own songs. Since 1995, when Jackson sold 50% of his publishing rights to Sony, the King of Pop was still earning approximately $66 million annually from the catalog.
Another source said of Jackson, "Most of his estate has been divided up between his three children. But Michael told his lawyers he was sad he no longer talks to Sir Paul and said he wanted to make things right."
It appears, even in passing, that Jackson has found a way to make things right with his former friend.
Comments
Check your facts. Michael Jackson merged ATV with Sony back in 1995, selling them a 50% share of the publishing rights to all of the Lennon/McCartney songs. It is impossible for Jackson to leave McCartney any more than his remaining 50% share.
Josh, you're absolutely right. I had included the dollar amount Jackson was earning post-sale to Sony, but didn't clarify that fact in the article. I have now corrected it. Good catch!
Even if this is true (that he changed his will to give McCartney his share of the catalog rights), will it necessarily happen? I don't know what the estate laws are, but if you have $500 million in debt, would the people Jackson owes money to not have higher priority than McCartney on the value of the catalog? I really don't know, just asking. Seems to me that if somebody owes me money, and he dies, I should be first in line at his estate over somebody that he mentions in his will. But again, I don't know what the estate laws are.
Other reports indicate that Michael paid 47.5 million to acquire the entire ATV catalog...not $577 million. The catalog consisted of appx. 4000 songs....not just Beatles' songs...which was why Paul was unable to outbid him...the price was VERY high and wasn't just for Beatles' music.
Hi Jeff,
Michael Jackson cast his video after 9/11 in San Francisco. It's called "Cry" and he sings Change the World. It's on my Examiner page for SF Opera Examiner.
So who will run Michael's estate and handle his own catalog? What are the recent sales and what was the loss from the concerts this summer?
Half of the rights should have been given to Paul, and the other half to Yoko, out of respect for John's contribution to the music
Cindy,
That's very cool. Here's the link to your page (since you didn't include it yourself!): bit.ly/FjNiU
According to Allison Reitz of TicketNews.com, "Ticket sales were estimated at a total $85 million, but ticket refunds for Jackson's concerts are just the tip of the iceberg for AEG Live, which has not yet issued an official statement on the matter. Production costs for the residency were originally estimated at more than $20 million, but a recent report from Billboard's senior touring editor Ray Waddell placed actual production expenses closer to $30 million.
"The production costs don't even take into account the reported $10 million advance given to Jackson, nor the scheduling hole left at the company's O2 Arena in London, ENG. The venue will suffer a loss of revenue for merchandise and concessions if another act doesn't fill Jackson's summer and fall 2009 performance slots."
This is an absolutely false story. The Daily Mirror is wrong (the will(s) hasn't even been read yet!). I found stories from Bloomberg dot com, Reuters news service, and the NY Times contradicting it. You should have mentioned that. This is the problem w/internet "journalism," you aren't expected to do real research. And you're never accountable because you're not paid. Yes, I know theoretically you get $$ due to whatever "clicks" you get, but that doesn't add up to anything meaningful.
NYTimes: Mystery now surrounds the beneficial ownership of Jackson's stake. According to a lawsuit filed in 2002 by a creditor, he secured bank loans totaling $270 million two years earlier using both his Sony/ATV stake and the copyrights to his own songs as collateral. His stakes in both Sony/ATV and in Mijac, which holds his own copyrights, were owned by trusts. It was not clear if they were irrevocable or not. If they are revocable, then they could be dismantled to satisfy creditors.
Diane, while there is still some debate as to whether those remaining publishing rights will eventually end up with Sir Paul McCartney, I think it is equally incorrect for you to say "this is an absolutely false story." There is definitely more to this story in the coming weeks and months, and I will report on it when it all comes to light, but I appreciate you keeping the conversation going. It's an interesting topic that could have repercussions for others in the music industry that want to appropriate publishing rights in their wills.
Yoko gets squat ! John wrote those songs with Paul when married to Cynthia .Yoko is out of the picture Sorry Try again !
Yoko is a home wrecking cow....don't give her a cent...
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!