# Jacko is broke. What about the Beatles' songs? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [February 12, 2004, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jacko-is-broke-what-about-the-beatles-songs/228875 "2004-02-12T16:55:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![beajerry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@beajerry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beajerry)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2004, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jacko-is-broke-what-about-the-beatles-songs/228875/1 "2004-02-12T16:55:42Z")
Why doesn’t Paul make an offer and buy them back before someone else gets them? It seems they are in dire straits at the moment. Or do the widows, Paul, and Ringo have legal say in their use? ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2004, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jacko-is-broke-what-about-the-beatles-songs/228875/2 "2004-02-12T17:15:13Z")
Jackson probably couldn’t sell the catalog if he wanted to (which he doesn’t) because it’s mortgaged to the hilt. It’s worth between $500 million and $900 million depending on the source, it’s owned jointly with SONY, and there are liens against it from Sony and numerous other creditors who have advanced Jackson money. Since Sony would probably never sell their share of the catalog (the Beatles are huge in Japan and of course probably the single best investment in musical properties) the most that Paul et al could purchase is Jackson’s share, and since there are so many claims to it due to Jackson’s abysmal financial management (evidently he hired the firm of Burt Reynolds & M.C. Hammer as his chief business advisors) Jackson would have to get major releases from creditors to sell, which means that the creditors have a vested interest in how much it sells for and could drive the price up to one that even Sir Paul and the She-Wolf-of-the-Dakota have a hard time coughing up the cash to buy. Plus, Paul and Yoko ain’t hurtin’ as it is, and Paul has the new baby to look out for so it’s not a time to be liquidating hundreds of millions. ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2004, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jacko-is-broke-what-about-the-beatles-songs/228875/3 "2004-02-12T20:26:15Z")
Jacko On His Backo! ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2004, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jacko-is-broke-what-about-the-beatles-songs/228875/4 "2004-02-12T20:34:49Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > Jackson probably couldn’t sell the catalog if he wanted to (which he doesn’t) because it’s mortgaged to the hilt. It’s worth between $500 million and $900 million depending on the source, it’s owned jointly with SONY, and there are liens against it from Sony and numerous other creditors who have advanced Jackson money. Since Sony would probably never sell their share of the catalog (the Beatles are huge in Japan and of course probably the single best investment in musical properties) the most that Paul et al could purchase is Jackson’s share, and since there are so many claims to it due to Jackson’s abysmal financial management (evidently he hired the firm of Burt Reynolds & M.C. Hammer as his chief business advisors) Jackson would have to get major releases from creditors to sell, which means that the creditors have a vested interest in how much it sells for and could drive the price up to one that even Sir Paul and the She-Wolf-of-the-Dakota have a hard time coughing up the cash to buy. > > Plus, Paul and Yoko ain’t hurtin’ as it is, and Paul has the new baby to look out for so it’s not a time to be liquidating hundreds of millions. Damn! You’re good! I agree that Paul and Yoko don’t need the cash, but I’ll bet they’d like to have it back anyhoo. I think Michael should have a garage sale and dump some of that stuff he purchased on his televised shopping spree. Some of it was pretty ugly, even if it WAS expensive. ---
**Author:** ![panamajack](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/47e85d/32.png) [@panamajack](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/panamajack)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2004, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jacko-is-broke-what-about-the-beatles-songs/228875/5 "2004-02-12T21:20:43Z")
For a second I was worried; I thought we might have to pitch in to help [this guy](http://www.brigittehandley.com/jacko.html) out. ---
**Author:** ![DMark](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e68b1a/32.png) [@DMark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DMark)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2004, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jacko-is-broke-what-about-the-beatles-songs/228875/6 "2004-02-13T01:05:06Z")
I believe Jackson stupidly signed away a lot of his rights to the Beatles library while he was recording his last (bomb) of an album, assuming he would just pay off those debts when the royalties came rolling in. Sony gladly handed Michael all the money and perks he wanted, which was a lot, knowing they couldn’t lose. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2004, 8:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jacko-is-broke-what-about-the-beatles-songs/228875/7 "2004-02-13T08:54:51Z")
> [@](#): > > Or do the widows, Paul, and Ringo have legal say in their use? Yes, they do. What Michael owns, I think, is the _publishing_ rights. Which is worth an enormous amount, but that doesn’t mean he dictates how their songs get used and when. ---
**Author:** ![Lochdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/edb3f5/32.png) [@Lochdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lochdale)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2004, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jacko-is-broke-what-about-the-beatles-songs/228875/8 "2004-02-13T22:49:36Z")
I think Jackson’s "Ownership"of the catalogue has a finite term and I would imagine that his rights will be foreclosed either privately or in court. Also, I would think that the Elvis catalogue would be up there in value as well. Evidently he is still RCA’s biggest selling artist. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2004, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jacko-is-broke-what-about-the-beatles-songs/228875/9 "2004-02-14T04:22:42Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Yes, they do. What Michael owns, I think, is the _publishing_ rights. Which is worth an enormous amount, but that doesn’t mean he dictates how their songs get used and when. Apparently any rights they have are limited. Paul became very famously furious when, shortly after purchasing the catalog, Jackson licensed the song _Revolution_ for use in a Nike commercial and I’ve no doubt he’d have stopped it if he could have. (True, it was a John song, but all of their Beatles songs were officially Lennon-McCartney collaborations so they had equal rights.)