I have had it up to here waiting for the Beatles catalogue to be remastered

Song publishing/copyright holder of the recording/licensing are all different things.

Gomez did a cover of 'Getting Better' for some ad... I can't remember who for! I want to say Philips, but...

So Nike used the original recording under license by the owner of the recording. What did Michael Jackson have to do with that then? (Serious question!)

He allowed them to use the actual song. After the Beatles had EMI block use of the original recording, he licensed other songs for use via covers.

Here's the original ad, for the curious...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAI8eUtwJzo

Michael Jackson owned the publishing, not the copyright of the original recording itself? Surely, that means that Jackson would have said yes to use of the song, and EMI would have had to have given permission to use that particular recording?

Yeah, EMI signed off on the recording. The Beatles then went to EMI and told them not to do that anymore without THEIR permission.

Also for the curious, here's one of those Philips ads that used a cover of "Getting Better" as a tag

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GldUw89Yc8Y

Nortel Networks used a cover of "Come Together" in 2000.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5HCo2a5CEU

From what I remember (I think there was a passage about this in The Book of Rock Lists) MJ and his people had a master list of about 20-30 Beatles songs they felt were suitable for commercial licensing, pending that the licensee could meet their price.

I seem to remember Nike using 'Instant Karma!' as well?

no way!

That seems unlikely. Yoko would've been the sole person to sign off on it, and I can't imagine her doing so (unless that part of John's catalog was controlled by Allen Klein).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmmpbSlr8UQ

Seems like other companies have used it too.

haha welp

wow

just... why

A quick Google confirms that I wasn't dreaming it and it did happen... and Yoko signed off on it, which I didn't realise. A couple of early solo tracks were published through Northern Songs, and I thought that may have been one of 'em.

(x-post)

Yup, that's the one!

Well, I'll be

In 1988,[129] Ono allowed the footwear and apparel company Nike to feature "Instant Karma!" in an advertising campaign, after a public outcry the previous year had forced her to withdraw permission for the use of Lennon's Beatles composition "Revolution".[130]

So she was basically like, "Oh, you hated it when a beloved song was used in an ad? I hear you. We'll license a different beloved song."

It seems her justification for it was to "bring (John's) music to a new audience", which I would understand if he wasn't one of the most well known popular music figures ever, even in the early '90s where The Beatles were considered "old hat" in the UK (The popularity of mid '90s UK indie changed that - of course in the US it was a different story)

She should have made them use 'Why' instead.

i think that nike commercial was the first time i heard "instant karma" -- mission accomplished, yoko!

yeah tbf, I think it had pretty much vanished from "classic rock" radio by that time.

Really? What solo Lennon stuff was getting airplay on "classic rock" radio then? I assume 'Imagine' and 'Jealous Guy' were the two big ones?

When I was a kid ('90s), it was "Instant Karma!", "Watching The Wheels", and "Imagine".

I remember quite a fair bit of Lennon on VH-1 UK circa 1994-1996, but next to none on radio, apart from 'Imagine' ...

Only solo Lennon I remember hearing on the radio in the '90s and later was "Imagine," and maybe "Jealous Guy" once or twice. But solo Beatles in general seemed to disappear from that radio format around '91-'92.

That's interesting - what about McCartney's newer material?

I've never heard any solo McCartney song recorded after 2001 (that awful "Freedom" thing) on the radio. The last time I remember a new McCartney song getting regular airplay was "My Brave Face" in 1989.

'Hope of Deliverance' was the last McCartney track I remember being heavily played on UK radio. The video to 'Young Boy' got some play on VH-1, but not a lot, and it remains the most recent music video I've seen on TV of his. After that, I don't remember any new McCartney track really being played on radio, aside from 'Dance Tonight' ...

Classic Rock Macca as I recall is: "Maybe I'm Amazed" (live); "Jet" and the other BOTR hits; "Uncle Albert/Admiral Halsey"; "Let 'Em In"; "Silly Love Songs"; and "With A Little Luck". Nothing post-'78 unless it was on "Breakfast With The Beatles".

"live and let die" is the one i seem to hear the most on my local classicke rocke station

Oh yeah, that one too! Can't believe I forgot it.

I don't remember hearing any Harrison on the radio at all, apart from when 'Got My Mind Set On You' was out and it was getting the shit played out of it. Not even 'My Sweet Lord'!

Yeah, I hear L&LD from time to time. But my local "classic rock" station -- one of the worst I've heard, I should point out -- is more likely to play the GnR version.

xp

Heh, "All Those Years Ago" got play.

I'm talking about UK radio from the late '80s/early '90s onwards - I appreciate that it'd be a different story in the US.

Those differences would be cool to count.

I mean, it's the Beatles. You wouldn't think there'd be much leeway between what CR stations were playing, but who knows? Maybe the UK is jamming out to Blow Away while Americans swear by Dark Horse.

Well, the UK didn't really start getting "Classic Rock" oriented stations until very late in the day - perhaps late '90s/early '00s.

Pre-digital, generally you had BBC Radio One for "current" music, BBC Radio Two for older music, yer regional stations (which tended to be as mainstream/"current" as Radio One) and stuff like LW Radio Atlantic 252.

never heard any solo McCartney song recorded after 2001

fourfiveseconds?

Collaborations are a different thing entirely. I've managed somehow to successfully avoid that track on radio, but I'm sure it got a fair bit of play on mainstream stations here - it does have Rihanna and Kanye West's names on it, after all.

I’m surprised I haven’t heard fourfiveseconds on the radio, since the “hip-hop and hits!” station otherwise plays tons of Rihanna and Kanye.

Get the impression that MJ was so rich and spendthrift and impulsive it was more about accumulating/collecting things, spending money over making money.

can't find a source right now but vaguely recall reading that Michael actually got into the publishing business for sound financial reasons, namely that it was necessary that he invest his Thriller money in something and at the time publishing rights seemed a solid investment

Wasn't it Paul who told him that?

During this time, McCartney reportedly explained to Jackson about the lucrative nature of music publishing. For complex legal reasons, the Beatle had lost his stake in Northern Songs, the publishing company that he and John Lennon set up, in the late 1960s. Because he wasn’t profiting from his own songs’ publishing rights, McCartney told Jackson about how he had been purchasing other artists’ catalogues (such as Buddy Holly’s) as a business investment. McCartney explained to the future King of Pop that whoever owns the rights to a song’s lyrics and composition earns royalties every time that song plays on film, TV, the radio, in a commercial, or in a concert. According to McCartney, Jackson then jokingly told him "one day, I’ll own your songs."

http://mentalfloss.com/article/85007/how-michael-jackson-bought-publishing-rights-beatles-catalogue

So there's a fancy 'Imagine' box set on it's way.

http://www.superdeluxeedition.com/news/john-lennons-imagine-album-2018-reissue-campaign-explained/

Speaking of the era when they were considered 'old hat' as Turrican says above, this is a great piece from 2004

https://www.theguardian.com/music/2004/jan/16/thebeatles.popandrock

"We put the Beatles on the cover of Q in 1987 for the 20th anniversary of Sergeant Pepper, and it was seen as a real risk," remembers Mark Ellen, then editor of Q, now editor of Word. "They were just seen as an old group who had split up - and there were plenty of old groups who were still about."

I assume Mark Ellen is thinking primarily of Fleetwood Mac and Pink Floyd when talking about old groups still around in '87, the Stones were kinda still around but going through a bit of a rough patch at the time.

The way people perceived long-running acts was a lot different then. Nowadays, you've got Depeche Mode still selling out massive venues worldwide after almost 40 years together and nobody bats an eyelid.

Whereas back then, because everything seemed to be a lot faster (artists releasing an album a year being the norm etc.) and trends tended to turn over a lot faster, '60s acts felt they belonged to a different universe entirely in the '80s.

Well, I'm not sure that artists who started in the '80s don't still usually belong to different worlds than young, contemporary artists, but I agree that the context by which age seems to be framed nowadays has changed a lot. In a way, I think this reflects well on the older artists who have done their part to remain aesthetically interesting in the current world.

Like I was just thinking about the fact that Jonathan Richman has recently sort of become a singles artist now with his Bandcamp page. I think it's working nicely.