View Full Version : Elvis Presley Songs Now With Imagem Music

11-16-2011, 04:10 PM
Imagem Music USA and Elvis Presley Music/Gladys Music announced today a worldwide music publishing deal for representation of the Elvis Presley catalogue, effective January 1, 2012.* The impressive Presley catalogue, co-owned by Elvis Presley Enterprises, Inc. and the families of the late, gr...

More... (http://www.elvis.com/news/detail.aspx?id=5938)

11-16-2011, 04:28 PM
Interesting. So, I guess this means that EPE has some rights to the songs pre-1973 after all. That video promo is awesome!

11-16-2011, 04:36 PM
sounds like it eh?.........thought they didn't own anything after 73

King Of The Whole World
11-17-2011, 02:33 AM
Awesome video!!!! I wish they would air these types of videos on tv. Does this mean they are slowly getting the rights back to all of his songs? Dosent the Jackson estate still own the Elvis and The Beatles catalog?

11-17-2011, 03:49 PM
Interesting. So, I guess this means that EPE has some rights to the songs pre-1973 after all. That video promo is awesome!
They have publishing rights to songs that were registered with the companies that Parker set up....the publishing companies have no effect on the RCA deal of 1973-it is Elvis's artist royaltees that are involved in the 73 deal. Elvis should have had a much higher royaltee rate from 1965 on but the Colonel never pushed it (courts found he had a conflict of interest with RCA and Elvis since he made money from both came out when the estate sued the Col. and all contracts were reviewed by the court)
Elvis and his estate after his death-do not get one cent in "artist royaltees" for any song recorded and released before the 73 deal. That would amount to millions upon million in the last 34 years.The publishing rights are split between the estate and the Auberbachs who owned 50% of the companies and those profits come from anyone who records one of the published songs......much like MJackson owning a lot of the Beatle catalogue.
Publishing royaltees and artist royaltees are 2 totally separate things.

11-17-2011, 04:28 PM
interesting Ken............if it's not too much trouble, could you explain more full please?.....always wondered about this

11-17-2011, 06:32 PM
Elvis owned half of the publishing companies, publishing companies make sure the songwriters are paid a certain amount anytime the song is used by someone..... usually the companies get half and the writer half-but sometimes the writer sells the songs outright or they give a certain percentage to the artist so he will record the song. Elvis made money from such deals thru the publishing companies. Thats why Parker pushed that Elvis only record songs which could be signed up with their companies.
RCAs deal with the Col. in 73 had nothing at all to do with the songwriter/publishing end of music-it had to do with the amount they paid Elvis each year for songs he had recorded.....his artists royalty. Most artists who record make their living from getting their share of each record sold-after 1973s deal Elvis got nothing for those records in artists royalties. But he, and today the estate, still get the songwriters/publishing percentage for all songs held from anyone who uses the song, movies, artists, radio, commercials tv-anyone.
The bigger the artist the bigger the negotiated artist royalty rate-Elvis should have been getting what the Beatles, the Stones, Elton John, etc were getting..... yet his rate was not on par with those artists.
Parker was a paid consultant for RCA, for the Hilton Hotels, for some of the movie studios during the contract years with them-and he negotiated contracts for Elvis with all these....that is a direct conflict of interest..... which was pointed out during the lawsuit in the early 80s between the estate and Parker by the presiding judge.

To get an idea of how much money in artist royalties has been lost look at Elvis 30#1s it sold around an estimated 12 million worldwide at an average of say.....$12.99 if Elvis got 10% artist royalty for each unit thats $1.29 times 12 million sales and thats around $15 million dollars lost to the estate for that one album.
But the publishing company would have been paid the songwriting royalties and that would be devided between the estate, the Auberbachs and the songwriter depending upon the agreement for each song....so its profitable but not nearly as profitable as the artist royalties.

11-18-2011, 03:52 PM
thanx Ken, that makes it much clearer.........