[ricksome]

Does anyone know in legal terms that Joe Six Pack (me) could understand, what is holding up the release of the Beatles Catalog for LEGAL downloading?

 

[WalkGood]

Just a guess … Paul McCartney wants more money

 

[deadhead12]

Quote:

Originally Posted by WalkGood /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just a guess … Paul McCartney wants more money

That's not legal terms. Should be something like "inadequate consideration."

 

[ricksome]

Does Apple Corp, the record label have something to do with this?

 

[deadhead12]

Well, as far as selling the Beatles on itunes, yeah, I think apple and apple have always butted heads but I'm not sure why they can't sell digital copies either through some other service or on their own. It might be too that by not putting any digital Beatles up for download they have a better case against online file-sharing, but I really don't know the full rationale.

 

[tintin47]

I don't think that Mccartney owns the songs, unless he bought them recently. I think that the Michael Jackson estate owns all of the beatles material.

 

[deadhead12]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tintin47 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't think that Mccartney owns the songs, unless he bought them recently. I think that the Michael Jackson estate owns all of the beatles material.

no I think he sold all the rights back cause he was going bankrupt.

 

[ricksome]

I also beleive that he sold them...but to who?

 

[craiglester]

Barclays Bank was the main creditor on the loan MJ took out on behalf of Sony/ATV. So it's a little up in the air.. Basically the bank/Sony own the publishing rights, and EMI & Apple Corps the recordings.

 

[Arainach]

Content owners are under no obligation to make the content available for download.

 

[ricksome]

Arainach: I would agree with that statement... but that may not be the reason the catalog is not available.