Log In
Register
8.13pm
18 August 2023
Offline
Never before broadcast until now, cleaned up. Art’ed up and transcribed w/ added images – new this week! From an audio tape recorded by The Eastmans, a 22+ minute dive into Apple, EMI and Beatles, a lesson in music publishing, contracts and sheer practicality. If a few minutes of vacuuming is too much, zip on through to the final 7 explosive minutes. Taking the better part of 2 months, it was extremely difficult but never a burden and I really hope you enjoy it. I will happily respond to any comment or inquiry. Thanks to everyone, especially The Beatles Bible!! rb
(246) PAUL & LINDA McCARTNEY NEW AUDIO! Beatles, Apple and lawsuits! – YouTube
The following people thank amess0stuff for this post:
Sea Belt, Ron Nasty2.50am
7 November 2022
Offline One comment by Paul is disappointing and a bit surprising, given this must have been 1969 or 1970. I didn’t realize this habit of incorrect grammar anxiously motivated by trying to sound sophisticated was that old. He should have said “…offer it to George and me.” — not “and I”.
As John Simon noted on his blog,
…“groceries” pronounced, as if it were spelled “grocieries,” as grosheries. The poor misguided souls may even think they’re being refined, just as some deviants do when they say “with Bill and I” for “with Bill and me.” Genteelism, the great Fowler called it: saying something that sounds genteel (I) rather than common (me), but happening to be incorrect.
The following people thank Sea Belt for this post:
amess0stuffNow today I find, you have changed your mind
6.14pm
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline You are so far out on the dating, Sea Belt. The very earliest this conversation could have taken place is 1982. Why? Because at one point John Eastman (?) runs through Paul’s earnings from record royalties in 1981, along with numerous events that took place in the ’70s being referenced throughout.
It’s obviously about the lawsuit Apple launched against Capitol over unpaid royalties, during the discovery period of which the others discovered Paul had negotiated himself a higher royalty rate on Beatles records in the US than they were getting when he signed with Capitol in ’75, which ended up with George, Ringo and Yoko suing Paul and Capitol.
While the extra royalties were being paid by Capitol, and were not coming from The Beatles slice of the royalties, it is easy to see why the others were annoyed that Paul was earning more from their US releases than they were.
It’s interesting how Paul seems so much more interested in keeping his extra royalties (the “over-ride”) than coming to an agreement which saw them going after Capitol as a group to lift the royalties for the group so they were all on equal royalties again.
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
amess0stuff, Richard, Sea Belt, Ahhh Girl, Rube"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
8.36pm
18 August 2023
Offline Sea Belt that’s funny as I will use “and I”.
Ron Nasty, I wasn’t sure if the “Paul got the year ’81” was a projection of future earnings but the “15 years now!” would be 1985 if Paul were referring the initial 1970 split.
The following people thank amess0stuff for this post:
Sea Belt, Rube3.51am
7 November 2022
Offline Fascinating @Ron Nasty — I never realized they were still haggling that late after the breakup.
The following people thank Sea Belt for this post:
RubeNow today I find, you have changed your mind
2 Guest(s)