InvestorsHub Logo
Post# of 147246
Next 10
Followers 9
Posts 835
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/04/2003

Re: Tex post# 43773

Monday, 10/10/2005 6:55:08 PM

Monday, October 10, 2005 6:55:08 PM

Post# of 147246
Tex, Best check those facts:

"even an in-house label, like Madonna's self-owned Maverick Records, would be "competition" to a record label with noncompete/exclusive dealing language in its contract"


Maverick isn't self owned by Madonna. Majority ownership is still with Warner Bros. Maverick was a "vanity" label deal set up to give Madonna the ability to "sign" other artists, & have a boutique imprint on which to release her material. Beyond Madonna's catalog & Alanis Morissette's " Jagged Little Pill" , hits have been few & far between for Maverick.

The part where you refer to "selling their sheet music" is where you've come closest. THAT is the publishing rights that MJ & Sony own of the Beatles catalog. Not any of the actual recordings. Merely a control of how a particular song may be used & presented, beyond the actual sale of recordings. A perfect example of this is the Beatles song REVOLUTION, which Jackson ticked off the living Beatles by licensing to Nissan & Nike for a car commercial and a sneaker commercial. Neither commercial used the actual recordings made by the Beatles.


Volume:
Day Range:
Bid:
Ask:
Last Trade Time:
Total Trades:
  • 1D
  • 1M
  • 3M
  • 6M
  • 1Y
  • 5Y
Recent AAPL News