Robert Plant on his Led Zeppelin royalties...

[SteveAJones]

Were they actually ever for sale in stores does anyone know? I see these on eBay all the time. They sell between 40 and a 100 bucks depending...a lot of the listings claim that it was never released but used as a promo item for radio stations and record stores and such.

It was strictly a promotional release as opposed to a commercial release. They were not intended to be sold in stores.

Here's mine (still sealed). For anyone interesting in buying one note the letter should be included.

Edited to add: The color shade of this photo is correct and true to the item. That other image I posted was a stock photo. There are no cover variations.

Edited February 23, 2010 by SteveAJones

[Trapper]

Don't forget that RP has got some bad memories of his Zep-time too: he lost his son and his longtime friend Bonzo. Page was addicted and I don't think he could stand losing him too.

I think this could have been a big motivation for RP to distance himself from Zeppelin. For some years after the break-up he even refused to sing any Zeppelin song.

[SteveAJones]

Don't forget that RP has got some bad memories of his Zep-time too: he lost his son and his longtime friend Bonzo. Page was addicted and I don't think he could stand losing him too. I think this could have been a big motivation for RP to distance himself from Zeppelin. For some years after the break-up he even refused to sing any Zeppelin song.

All true to some extent, but the bottom line is it was a business decision to launch his solo career and possibly to shelter that income from what was ultimately an imminent divorce (1983).

[dalsh327]

I remember reading something about Page and Plant selling something off (not their souls) in the early 80s and it had to do with the lawsuits they were getting hammered with over the song credits. I don't know if that also had to do with RP's divorce.

As far as I know, the publishing is still theirs and administered by Warner-Chapell, but that's usually for a ton of cash and has a date for extension, renewal, etc and can shop it around, or be independent of a big publisher. Warners will probably have it until it becomes public domain.

[SteveAJones]

I remember reading something about Page and Plant selling something off (not their souls) in the early 80s and it had to do with the lawsuits they were getting hammered with over the song credits.

Well, the first high-profile lawsuit wasn't brought until 1985 (by Willie Dixon over the lyrical content of Whole Lotta Love) so Robert's decision preceded that by a few years. Besides, they were hardly getting hammered...some complainants settled out of court, others (the estate of Richie Havens, for example) settled for songwriting credit (and thus a cut of the royalties pie).

[ANONYMOUS]

Do you mean Richie Valens? Or is there a Richie Havens story to be told as well?

[SteveAJones]

Do you mean Richie Valens? Or is there a Richie Havens story to be told as well?

Yeah, Richie Valens. It's 2:30am. Obviously I'm too tired to continue tonight.

[andrew r]

I think when the fog of drugs cleared after 77 for RP he looked at it all

and thought "I am not interested in this life any more" This has developed down the years into a distaste

for all things Zeppelin and yet he knows subconsciously his career is built on it.

Thus a love /hate ,constant tongue in cheek pisstake evolves any time Led Zeppelin

is brought up. Personally i used to find it amusing but lately it just grates.

The alleged selling of any royalty payouts probably lessens his interests in Zeppelin further!

[SteveAJones]

The alleged selling of any royalty payouts probably lessens his interests in Zeppelin further!

It's not alleged, it's a fact. Robert has stated for the record he did sell his rights to receive royalties on sales of the back catalog. I'm sure someone will post the quote(s) if I haven't already done so.

[1973fan]

Do you know if Jimmy bought Robert's rights?

Edit: Sorry, I just saw in one of your posts above from 2010 that you say RP has never divulged publicly who acquired his rights.

It's not alleged, it's a fact. Robert has stated for the record he did sell his rights to receive royalties on sales of the back catalog. I'm sure someone will post the quote(s) if I haven't already done so.

Edited March 15, 2014 by 1973fan

[LSpencer]

^^^ wouldn't surprise me a bit if Page bought Plant out!

Edited March 17, 2014 by LSpencer

[andrew r]

I said alleged because no one is fully sure how much he gave away.

Rather than make a statement of fact that I was unsure of I used

"alleged". Snappy people round these parts eh?

[nirvana]

Robert's life was a mess at the time. And his choice to sell his share of the Zeppelin royalties while his life was

basically spinning out of orbit - was a poor one. And he probably had enough of the Zeppelin "monster" by then -

He had lost a child, lost his best friend, saw the band spiral out of control due to various abuses, lost contact with

Jimmy as a friend, the Zep management team was a disaster, his marriage to Maureen was

probably on the rocks at the time, and his ego was in tatters.

To sum it up - it was not the right time to make such a major decision as to giving up royalty rights to the Zeppelin

original catalog.

[SteveAJones]

To sum it up - it was not the right time to make such a major decision as to giving up royalty rights to the Zeppelin original catalog.

I can see where he felt it was actually the best time to do so. Regardless, his intent in doing so - to secure a solo-career and begin to move forward - was noble.

[WM3]

Ah, Robert's wealthy, damn wealthy since he has a very successful solo career. So, he can say he made one fortune with Zeppelin and another on his own. Good for him, self made not once but twice!

Now for a real screw job, look up what Chis Squire did to Jon Anderson. I believe that bit of evil takes the cake.

[Bong-Man]

A debacle of a thread, but a very fitting bump considering that we have some new releases coming our way.

Are outtakes of an original previously released song covered ? Are live versions of a previously copyrighted song covered ? Does Robert receive even a dime from these new releases ? And most importantly, does that fact effect what is released in the future ? Still important questions 4 years later and further on down the road.

Here's a weird one.....Does Robert need permission from the other three parties to play Zeppelin tunes live ? Considering the vastness of the Zep catalog, It seems to me Robert has been unduly loyal to "Going to California" and "Whole Lotta Love" throughout his solo career. Is it because of his fondness for his contributions towards those songs.....or is it partly because he's limited to performing what Zep tunes he's willing to pay for ?

After re-reading this thread, I think our insights including mine are way too deep. I think he sold at the time for one reason only. The same reason that usually motivates everyone...he needed the cash to maintain his lifestyle at that time.

[SteveAJones]

A debacle of a thread, but a very fitting bump considering that we have some new releases coming our way.

Are outtakes of an original previously released song covered ? Are live versions of a previously copyrighted song covered ? Does Robert receive even a dime from these new releases ? And most importantly, does that fact effect what is released in the future ? Still important questions 4 years later and further on down the road.

Here's a weird one.....Does Robert need permission from the other three parties to play Zeppelin tunes live ? Considering the vastness of the Zep catalog, It seems to me Robert has been unduly loyal to "Going to California" and "Whole Lotta Love" throughout his solo career. Is it because of his fondness for his contributions towards those songs.....or is it partly because he's limited to performing what Zep tunes he's willing to pay for ?

After re-reading this thread, I think our insights including mine are way too deep. I think he sold at the time for one reason only. The same reason that usually motivates everyone...he needed the cash to maintain his lifestyle at that time.

It's my understanding Robert has received sales royalties on all post-Coda releases as he only sold his rights to receive sales royalties on the original back catalog comprised of ten titles. He would not receive royalties on remastered editions of those titles (the ten original albums) but releases such as Live at the BBC, HTWWW, Led Zeppelin DVD, etc. he does. He would receive sales royalties on the upcoming releases this year as those are considered (and negotiated as) new releases.

None of the members require the other member's permission to perform, record or release Led Zeppelin songs but they of course cannot market them as "Led Zeppelin" releases. All Led Zeppelin releases require the permission of the surviving three members and the Bonham estate's representatives.

Edited March 27, 2014 by SteveAJones

[Bong-Man]

He would receive sales royalties on the upcoming releases this year as those are considered (and negotiated as) new releases.

Considering the lack of evidence, I'm finding this part to be a bit unbelievable. It just doesn't make logical sense that a re-packaging of anything could get your rights back, or worse yet, eliminate someone else's. Appreciate your efforts and totally understand that most folks don't care about this issue.

[Walter]

Yes, it would seem that based on SAJ's description half of the new releases would fall into the category of "original back catalog" since those songs are being re-released in the same fashion as they were already released. The companion disc material might not, especially the live material, again based on that description....

[bluecongo]

. All Led Zeppelin releases require the permission of the surviving three members and the Bonham estate's representatives.

My understanding was while the Bonham estate shares in the proceeds, they have no artistic say so to approve or disapprove in the matters of releasing product. Only surviving members have those rights.

[SteveAJones]

Considering the lack of evidence, I'm finding this part to be a bit unbelievable. It just doesn't make logical sense that a re-packaging of anything could get your rights back, or worse yet, eliminate someone else's. Appreciate your efforts and totally understand that most folks don't care about this issue.

Mere repackaging/remastering of the back catalog would not get one's rights to sales royalties back. However, the releases on tap for this year go beyond mere repackaging/remastering and were essentially negotiated as a new deal (as was BBC Sessions, as was HTWWW, as was Led Zeppelin DVD, etc). wherein Robert could assert and insist upon pertinent stipulations such as rights to sales royalties, etc.

My understanding was while the Bonham estate shares in the proceeds, they have no artistic say so to approve or disapprove in the matters of releasing product. Only surviving members have those rights.

The artistic rights of so many other deceased artists - Jim Morrison, Jimi Hendrix and Stevie Ray Vaughan among prime examples - are still retained by their respective estates so I don't see why it would not hold true for John Bonham.

[anniemouse]

I read this thread with a great deal of interest and would ask this. Post Led Zeppelin just how successful were his solo LP's as I would hazard a guess his creative outpourings LP's; tours and business dealings post 1980 would on their own make him a successful musician creatively and financially.

Also did Zeppelin have control of merchandising back in the day. That and tour revenues must have been immense. Fascinating that he kept a creative hold on his work even if not financial.

[SteveAJones]

I read this thread with a great deal of interest and would ask this. Post Led Zeppelin just how successful were his solo LP's as I would hazard a guess his creative outpourings LP's; tours and business dealings post 1980 would on their own make him a successful musician creatively and financially.

Also did Zeppelin have control of merchandising back in the day. That and tour revenues must have been immense. Fascinating that he kept a creative hold on his work even if not financial.

You can get a fairly accurate summation of his solo album sales here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Plant_discography

Led Zeppelin did have and has retained control over merchandising, though they seldom exploited it pre-1980. In the mid-80s they signed a merchandising deal with Winterland Productions/Bravado among other licensees but again, they've never really exploited merchandising on nearly the same scale as say The Rolling Stones or The Beatles.

[anniemouse]

Thank you for that information. He seems to have toured a great deal since the early 1980's on the back of these LP's. Wonder how many he has done.

[SteveAJones]

Thank you for that information. He seems to have toured a great deal since the early 1980's on the back of these LP's. Wonder how many he has done.

Albums:

http://robertplanthomepage.com/albums/discography.htm

and

Band Of Joy (2009)

Lullaby...And The Ceaseless Roar (2014)

Performances:

http://www.royal-orleans.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=30908