Promoters offer whole lotta loot to lure Led Zeppelin

[robertkincaid96]

The band, each of whose members are separately managed, control their touring, merchandising and video rights, reflecting the historic structure of deals in the music industry. Their catalogue is owned by Warner Music, dating back to a deal signed in 1968 by the late Ahmet Ertegun, the founder of Atlantic Records. Atlantic is now owned by Warner. Monday’s gig was intended to raise money for Mr Ertegun’s charitable foundation. Tickets were sold for at least £125 each at the 20,000-seat O2 arena in London – owned by AEG – with profits from corporate hospitality and merchandising, which sold out before the show began, also going to the foundation. That means the show alone will have grossed about £3 million.

In the mid1990s, when Robert Plant and Jimmy Page last toured together with a backing band, they grossed $31.4 million from a 63-date tour, for which more than 1 million tickets were sold. If a 2008 tour attracted audiences in the same numbers, with the average ticket price matching the £125 charged for the O2 show, such a tour would gross £125 million – before any merchandising income.

Typically, promoters and venue owners pay a high proportion of the box office gross to the artist. Industry insiders say that in the UK the proportion can be as high as 95 per cent. In America, the figure can reach as much 110 per cent – the proportion is higher than the box office gross because the venue owner will make money out of food and drink and at least some of the merchandising.

Led Zeppelin could earn well over £100 million if the hard-rock band went on tour next year in the wake of Monday’s triumphant reunion gig. The band are being pursued with offers from both Live Nation and AEG, the rival concert promoters, with each structuring bids in the form of a large upfront payment to lure the band to their venues.

One source said that “AEG put a bid in on the night” - although that could not be confirmed independently – but intense demand, as already seen for Monday’s gig, would probably make a Zeppelin reunion the most sought-after ticket in 2008.

The reluctance of Robert Plant, the lead singer, still makes a tour far from certain, although the three other band members are believed to be willing to go ahead. Venues in America have been held open in the hope that Plant will say yes.

It is likely that the four-piece band would be able at least to match the estimated $212 million grossed by The Police for their reunion this year, according to figures compiled by Billboard, the industry magazine.

The cash is split between the band members, its managers and any roadies they have to pay. Robert Plant is managed by industry veteran Bill Curbishley, the brother of the West Ham manager, who was behind The Who, and whose company is now owned, after a succession of takeovers, by Universal Music. Jimmy Page is managed by Q-Prime, controlled by Peter Mensch and Cliff Burnstein, who also handle Metallica, Snow Patrol and Shania Twain.

Their record company, Warner Music, owns the entire recorded catalogue, although it is too early to establish whether catalogue sales have increased on the back of the concert. Mothership, the greatest hits album released last month, has sold 350,000 in the United States, and, given the depth of Zeppelin’s international following, worldwide sales will be approaching 1 million.

Last month, Warner also resigned their publishing rights, after an auction in which Universal Music in particular featured strongly – although it is almost certain that the band would have received even more in the wake of the gig. Warner has also agreed to release their albums digitally.

However, at the moment Led Zeppelin do not have a record deal, should they release any new music. That reflects the fact that while Plant and Page may be appearing on a stage together, they have no plans to meet in a recording studio in the foreseeable future.

Link

[PJD]

Their record company, Warner Music, owns the entire recorded catalogue, although it is too early to establish whether catalogue sales have increased on the back of the concert. Mothership, the greatest hits album released last month, has sold 350,000 in the United States, and, given the depth of Zeppelin’s international following, worldwide sales will be approaching 1 million.

Last month, Warner also resigned their publishing rights, after an auction in which Universal Music in particular featured strongly – although it is almost certain that the band would have received even more in the wake of the gig. Warner has also agreed to release their albums digitally.

Link

I know you're quoting the source here but I want to point out there is an error in this article which is typical for articles from financial magazines about the music industry. Warner does not and has never owned the Zeppelin catalog. Just like Micheal Jackson never owned the Beatles catalog; he owned a piece of the publishing. Warners is the administrator for their copyrights. The band has always owned their own master recordings which they leased to the label and this is one of Peter Grant's finest achievements as a manager (in addition to the 90/10 split) that is often overlooked. Warner Chappell handles their print administration and publishing, they may own what is commonly refered to as the 'publishers share', but the Zeppelin catalog has none of the problems the Beatles catalog does. It's nicely held by the band with the publisher keeping their tradition piece. They were signed to Warner subsidiary Atlantic and started their own label in 74 that was distributed by Atlantic. I'm pretty sure this is when they started Flames of Albion Music and stopped using their own Superhype music.

And FWIW all this talk of people offering them tours is retarded. They don't need an offer from anybody; promoters have been waiting for them to name any price since 1980. The ball remains where it has always been, in their court.

[euro]

I know you're quoting the source here but I want to point out there is an error in this article which is typical for articles from financial magazines about the music industry. Warner does not and has never owned the Zeppelin catalog. Just like Micheal Jackson never owned the Beatles catalog; he owned a piece of the publishing. Warners is the administrator for their copyrights. The band has always owned their own master recordings which they leased to the label and this is one of Peter Grant's finest achievements as a manager (in addition to the 90/10 split) that is often overlooked. Warner Chappell handles their print administration and publishing, they may own what is commonly refered to as the 'publishers share', but the Zeppelin catalog has none of the problems the Beatles catalog does. It's nicely held by the band with the publisher keeping their tradition piece. They were signed to Warner subsidiary Atlantic and started their own label in 74 that was distributed by Atlantic. I'm pretty sure this is when they started Flames of Albion Music and stopped using their own Superhype music.

And FWIW all this talk of people offering them tours is retarded. They don't need an offer from anybody; promoters have been waiting for them to name any price since 1980. The ball remains where it has always been, in their court.

You seem well verse in this area.

I was just curious of the status of Houses of the Holy in the USA. Is it true that they lost the rights to the album and may be forced to buy it back from Warner Brothers. Apparently the application to renew the rights to the albums were lost in the 9/11 tragedy

[PJD]

You seem well verse in this area.

I was just curious of the status of Houses of the Holy in the USA. Is it true that they lost the rights to the album and may be forced to buy it back from Warner Brothers. Apparently the application to renew the rights to the albums were lost in the 9/11 tragedy

Well thats a new one on me but it is completely false. The renewal rights for the publishing were secured on January 5th 2001. And there would be no reason for Copyright records to have been destroyed in 9/11.

Link to Copyright office search Where did you hear that one?

Even if there was confusion around the time of the renewal, the rights would not have been Warners to sell. If there is another story about them buying the publishers share from Warner that may be something else, but I don't know if they ever did that. They certainly have the money and I'm not sure when the reversion rights on their earlier titles goes into effect. If I get a chance I'll look into it over the weekend.

[euro]

Well thats a new one on me but it is completely false. The renewal rights for the publishing were secured on January 5th 2001. And there would be no reason for Copyright records to have been destroyed in 9/11.

Link to Copyright office search Where did you hear that one?

Even if there was confusion around the time of the renewal, the rights would not have been Warners to sell. If there is another story about them buying the publishers share from Warner that may be something else, but I don't know if they ever did that. They certainly have the money and I'm not sure when the reversion rights on their earlier titles goes into effect. If I get a chance I'll look into it over the weekend.

I dont recall the publication, not sure I have the facts completely right, In fact was hoping to jar someones memory. I am sure though that it involved Houses of the Holy and the failure to renew something as result of 911.

[PJD]

I dont recall the publication, not sure I have the facts completely right, In fact was hoping to jar someones memory. I am sure though that it involved Houses of the Holy and the failure to renew something as result of 911.

Nope, check the link I posted. properly re-newed well before 9/11.

[euro]

Nope, check the link I posted. properly re-newed well before 9/11.

Google Houses of the Holy and Copyright

Does your killer reggae band want to sample Led Zeppelin's "D'yer Maker" on your next CD-R? Well, before you write a politely worded letter to Robert Plant and Jimmy Page asking permission to use the song, you'd best know that they don't actually hold copyright on it — or anything off the Houses Of The Holy album, for that matter. The whole thing is, and always has been, under the control of the band's label, Atlantic Records.

According to Billboard.com, the U.S. Copyright Office has rejected Led Zep's request to hand the copyright over to the band. Under the copyright rules that were under affect when the band released the album in 1973, the band are allowed to apply for renewal of copyright every 30 years. That 30 years is obviously up next year, but the ruling will keep Houses Of The Holy in Atlantic's hands.

How did Led Zeppelin lose copyright of the album in the first place? Well, the current American Copyright Act was instituted in 1976, three years after HOTH was released. Up until then, recording artists were still under the 1909 Copyright Act. The Act dictated that they recorded Houses Of The Holy as workers for hire, not as artists who had control of their own artistic property. Hence, their "employers," Atlantic Records retain the rights to all recorded material.

The surviving members of Zeppelin tried to regain their rights by applying for renewal last year. Due to the aftermath of September 11, their application was lost in the mail shuffle and wasn't processed for five months. The band haven't given up hope yet — they're reportedly in talks with Atlantic, trying to come up with a amicable solution.

In other Led Zep news, lead singer Robert Plant is enjoying life as a solo artist, having recently released a brand new album, Dreamland. Planty has also signed on to be a spokesman for Cadillac and will appear in a series of print ads for the car company. A crop of ads featuring Plant were recently photographed by none other then ex-pat Canadian rock superstar Bryan Adams.

Plant also recently interviewed with Billboard magazine, telling them that another reunion with Jimmy Page was likely and that Page is currently putting together a DVD of rare early Zeppelin footage. He added that John Paul Jones is not likely to join in on any future Zep reunions. Apparently, when Page and Plant initially reunited, a reporter at a press conference asked where Jones was. "He's parking the car," Plant joked in response. Apparently Jones didn't find it funny and has barely spoken to the singer since.

[PJD]

Found a good article after googling per your recommendation HERE

and it appears this particular work for hire argument by the label is for the Masters, NOT the song publishing.

There are a few different aspects of publishing/copyrights to digest. There is the song, which is traditionally split up 50/50 between the writers and publishers, and the sound recordings which are traditionally owned by the person who pays for the recording. Usually thats the label but as was traditionally the case with Zeppelin they owned their masters which were administered by Atlantic (unless I'm mistaken on that point but I'm pretty sure I'm not).

The core of the problem comes from poor copyright registration registration of the sound recording. If the masters (sound recordings NOT the song publishing) were improperly registered as a work for hire (which if that article is to be believed is what the band maintains is what happened) then they had the rug pulled out from under them when they went to exercise their renewal. I wouldn't have expected anybody at the label to be that on the ball!

The point maintained by the band is that they never had a work for hire agreement and the recording was improperly registered as a work for hire, which is why the copyright board maintains that it is not their position to interpret contracts. This is how the label ends on less than solid ground, if they improperly registered it in the first place, who should pay? Generally speaking labels are foul and disgusting entities and these types of shenanigans are of no surprise to me.

A synopsis for those just tuning in would be:

In the early 70's Atlantic improperly registered the sound recordings with the copyright office as works for hire and nobody ever caught it.

When the band went to re-new the copyrights, Atlantic claimed ownership based on their improper registration of those recordings.

This is fascinating stuff and as a fan and a geek I'm glad you brought it up to me. The point to drive home is it is the sound recording the band would be loosing control of not the song rights. I'm curious how they have resolved this. If you come across an links please post. I'll dig over the weekend.