Log In
Register
11.52pm
6 March 2013
Offline
Here’s a question I have. Why was Capitol allowed to release Beatles records in early 1964 if Vee Jay had the rights? I thought that legally, since Capitol had passed on EMI’s offer, Vee Jay was granted the rights. I know that eventually Capitol sued Vee Jay and in late 1964 Vee Jay gave up its rights. But before then, why was Capitol legally allowed to distribute the Beatles in the US? Or, was it not legally allowed to do so and it just threw its weight around?
I’m genuinely curious. And I don’t have access to Bruce Spizer’s books. 
So if anyone has insight, I’d appreciate it. Thanks!
12.54am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline The early US contracts were done on the basis of individual releases, and obligations related to those releases. Capitol, being owned by EMI, always had the rights to release The Beatles. However, if Capitol passed on releasing something, which they did up until the I Want To Hold Your Hand single, they were free to shop around for release. Hence, the rights to early releases going to Vee Jay, Swan and Tollie. They gained limited, and conditional, rights to release material that Capitol had passed on.
Swan only had the rights to the She Loves You single, Tollie – I think – were sub-licensed by Vee-Jay, but basically Vee-Jay had the rights to everything prior to the I Want To Hold Your Hand single and the With The Beatles album. The lawsuit, if you look into it, is actually quite interesting, in that Capitol was the defendant, not the claimant.
It revolved around their use of I Saw Her Standing There on the b-side of I Want To Hold Your Hand (replacing This Boy ), and its inclusion on Meet The Beatles! It was a song that Capitol did not have the rights to, and was a case that – in the short term – they lost, and had to pay damages to Vee Jay over.
However, because of financial muscle, and the lack of on Vee Jay’s part, the settlement drastically reduced Vee Jay’s rights, and was partially responsible for Vee Jay knocking out the songs they had the rights to in every variation they could think of during 1964, and Capitol doing the same when they got the rights in 1965 (The Early Beatles plus a whole slew of singles).
I hope this helps your understanding.
"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
3.04am
16 August 2012
Offline Damn, that’s a genuine hard-core fully informed answer! Kudos.
You’re why I love this place. This site is the last word on long-term fans welcoming new people into the Beatles fold.
E is for 'Ergent'.
3.59am
6 March 2013
Offline Wow, mja6758. Thanks for the fascinating answer!
Are the documents related to the lawsuit(s) available online? I just did a search and can’t seem to find them. (I’m actually a former lawyer and it would be interesting to read them.)
10.35am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline I’m afraid I’ve not seen the documentation, my account of what happened is based on my memory of things I have read over the years.
There were other lawsuits involved in the situation, other than the one I referred to. Those mainly came from EMI, and resulted from Vee-Jay’s inability to meet royalty payments. The irony of The Beatles success for Vee-Jay was that, ultimately, it destroyed the label. Despite selling over two-and-a-million records by them in 1964, the label did not have the financial stability to meet all the demands that level of success demanded.
Lawsuits did not only come from The Beatles direction, but also the two artists that Vee-Jay connected them to – Frank Ifield and The Four Seasons. Within two years they had to file for bankruptcy.
"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
3.02pm
6 March 2013
Offline Thanks.
I did some googling and found more info in free online excerpts of Dave Marsh’s book, The Beatles’ Second Album.
5.11am
14 December 2009
Online
mja6758 said (The Early Beatles plus a whole slew of singles).
I’m a bit of a Billboard record-charts geek, and for years I found it inexplicable that The Early Beatles only made it as high as #43 on the pop albums chart, when every one of the dozen-or-so Beatles albums Capitol released between 1964-66 hit #2 or higher. Eventually I learned that all of its material had already been released on Vee-Jay’s Introducing The Beatles, which I never even knew existed, and which itself peaked at #2. Then it made sense.
Paul: Yeah well… first of all, we’re bringing out a ‘Stamp Out Detroit’ campaign.
5.32am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline And you can’t forget, while less successful, Vee-Jay also knocked out Jolly What! The Beatles and Frank Ifield on Stage, The Beatles vs. The Four Season and Songs, Stories and Pictures of the Fabulous Beatles. All of which used the same material. Most Americans, by the time it got to The Early Beatles, who wanted the material probably had it several times over.
"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
9.51am
14 December 2009
Online Haha, I used to see a copy of that “Jolly What!” album in the dollar bin at this old used record shop where I spent half my adolescence. (Same bin where I found a barely playable MONO copy of SPLHCB ; and man was I a fool for getting rid of that! As well as for not buying the Canadian LPs Beatlemania! With The Beatles and Twist And Shout , which also made appearances in that same bin.)
Paul: Yeah well… first of all, we’re bringing out a ‘Stamp Out Detroit’ campaign.
6.45pm
10 August 2011
Offline Based on my personal experience, I’d say Von Bontee is correct. After buying Meet the Beatles, I bought Introducing the Beatles (despite the awful cover picture). And yes, by the time The Early Beatles came out, I was going to save my allowance for something else.
mja6758, I can’t believe what a treasure trove of knowledge you have tucked away in that mind of yours!
The following people thank Into the Sky with Diamonds for this post:
Von Bontee"Into the Sky with Diamonds" (the Beatles and the Race to the Moon – a history)
6.50pm
3 May 2012
Offline That’s one of the thing I love about being on here – learning so much off the older and more knowledgeable fans. Thank you all 
Moving along in our God given ways, safety is sat by the fire/Sanctuary from these feverish smiles, left with a mark on the door.
(Passover - I. Curtis)
11.45pm
15 May 2014
Offline So I am aware that Capitol originally turned down the Beatles and so a deal was made with Vee-Jay giving them the rights to the songs from Please Please Me (except Love Me Do and PS I Love You ) and the From Me To You single. Then a deal was made with Swan giving them the rights to She Loves You and I’ll Get You . So after Capitol finally started releasing the Beatles music, it was decided that Vee-Jay and Swan would keep their rights until late-1964 and then the rights would transfer to Capitol. But before Vee-Jay and Swan lost their rights, Capitol had already released I Saw Her Standing There on Meet the Beatles and Thank You Girl , She Loves You and I’ll Get You on The Beatles’ Second Album. Why were they allowed to do this?
Note by Ahhh Girl 25 May 2014: This post was the beginning of a new thread. The next post was a reply to the OP. I moved both posts to this thread. Thank you to @meanmistermustard for pointing this out.
2.31am
28 March 2014
Offline Capitol had already sent Vee-Jay Records a “cease and desist” letter to stop pressing the Beatles songs, but while it was going through the courts, they continued releasing music to make as much money as possible off of the Beatles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V…..ay_Records
Ironically Canada Capitol was first to release any Beatles music in N.A. before either US record company came around to accept Beatlemania 
BEATLES Music gives me Eargasms! 
11.42pm
28 May 2014
Offline Bongo said
Capitol had already sent Vee-Jay Records a “cease and desist” letter to stop pressing the Beatles songs, but while it was going through the courts, they continued releasing music to make as much money as possible off of the Beatles.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V…..ay_Records
Ironically Canada Capitol was first to release any Beatles music in N.A. before either US record company came around to accept Beatlemania
The Canadians are the smart ones, eh? Cashing on the Beatle boom!!!
By hook or by crook, I'll be last in this book.
12.09am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline thisbirdhasflown said
Bongo said
Capitol had already sent Vee-Jay Records a “cease and desist” letter to stop pressing the Beatles songs, but while it was going through the courts, they continued releasing music to make as much money as possible off of the Beatles.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V…..ay_Records
Ironically Canada Capitol was first to release any Beatles music in N.A. before either US record company came around to accept Beatlemania
The Canadians are the smart ones, eh? Cashing on the Beatle boom!!!
Not strictly true. The first single to feature the Beatles released in the USA was My Bonnie – credited to Tony Sheridan and the Beat Brothers. It was released on Decca (31382) on 23 April 1962. Re-released by MGM (K-13213) on 27 January 1964 as by The Beatles with Tony Sheridan. It was the first single released to feature them (Germany), the first UK single (January 1962), and the first US single.
"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
11.37pm
28 March 2014
Offline Ron Nasty said
Bongo said
Ironically Canada Capitol was first to release any Beatles music in N.A. before either US record company came around to accept Beatlemania
Not strictly true. The first single to feature the Beatles released in the USA was My Bonnie – credited to Tony Sheridan and the Beat Brothers. It was released on Decca (31382) on 23 April 1962.
Well, if you wanna be picky, it was released in USA & Canada on the same day: http://capitol6000.com/beatles45.html, but seriously, we both know this is not a Beatles release, this is a Tony Sheridan release.
The following singles on that page show more Beatles singles released in 1963. Just sayin’ 
BEATLES Music gives me Eargasms!
2.35pm
28 May 2014
Offline Picky, picky, picky! I’m not so much a fan of the record deal rubbish cause it’s confusing. I like to focus on the music.
By hook or by crook, I'll be last in this book.
1.36am
8 November 2012
Offline This seemed like the most ideal place to x-post this: Billboard article: Concord Music Group Acquires Famed Soul Label Vee-Jay Records
(if the labels sounds familiar, they released Paul’s NEW)
parlance
1 Guest(s)