Reply With QuoteGoodness! $$$$! I don't know anymore????
MANHATTAN - Elvis Presley Enterprises claims Chrysalis Music Group owes it more than $5 million in licensing fees for The King's music. Presley Enterprises accuses Chrysalis of "an astonishing lack of internal controls and related failures," and "failure to properly render payment" of "substantial sums."
Co-plaintiff Belinda Aberbach is an heir of the estates of Julian and Jean Aberbach who, with Presley's manager Col. Tom Parker, set up two New York corporations in the mid-1950s to control copyrights on "certain musical compositions recorded by Presley." The corporations are Gladys Music and Elvis Presley Music.
Presley owed 25% of each corporation, Parker owned 25%, and the Aberbachs owned 50%, according to the complaint in New York County Court.
After The King died in 1977, a series of assignments left Elvis Presley Enterprises (EPE) owning 50% interest in the compositions, and the heirs of the Aberbach's owning the other 50%. After trusts were set up, EPE remained 50% owner, and co-plaintiff Aberbach owns another 25%, according to the complaint.
Under a 2002 agreement, Chrysalis was to collect revenue worldwide and deposit it correctly into accounts for EPE and Aberbach. Chrysalis also was "obligated to promote and attempt to obtain licenses with third parties for use of the compositions."
Chrysalis was to get commissions of 5% to 8%, but no more than $400,000 a year, according to the complaint. But the complaint states: "Despite repeated assurances to EPE and Aberbach that proper controls were in place for its royalty processing, in fact, Chrysalis suffered from an astonishing lack of control and related failures. As a result, Chrysalis has failed to pay EPE and Aberbach substantial sums they are owed under the agreement. Chrysalis' failure to properly render payments to EPE and Aberbach constitutes a breach of the agreement."
The plaintiffs say Chrysalis also failed to promote the licensing of the music, "resulting in innumerable lost opportunities and revenues that EPE and Aberbach would have otherwise obtained;" and failed to keep true and accurate records.
They say Chrysalis commingled funds, took more commissions that it was entitled to, miscalculated foreign currency exchange rates, "claimed, without documentation, that there were overpayments," "erroneously deducted certain advances it claims were unrecouped," "failed to properly account for revenue received," and "made numerous other errors."
The plaintiffs demand no less than $5 million, and costs. They are represented by Glen Silverstein with Leader & Berkon.
Brian
Goodness! $$$$! I don't know anymore????
Which songs dont say? EPE is all about money they want to make it off others back but want to not give nothin in return. Greed.They are opposites of what Elvis stood for when he lived.
Many imitators but only one Elvis.
seriously, isn't 5M like couch change to EPE?
_________
there is no snooze button on a cat that wants breakfast.
Nina's Elvis blogs: http://ntrygg.wordpress.com/elvis-index/
It'll probably cost them more than that in lawyers fees, court fees, etc...Originally Posted by monk37
Perhaps EPE should consider saving the money they'll spend on the lawsuit and use it towards work around the Graceland area...wouldn't that be a more prudent investment of the money?? While I am all for making sure that Elvis' name, image, likeness, legacy, music, movies, etc. are all taken care of and properly controlled, it honestly seems to me that EPE has become lawsuit happy over the years and seems to almost take on a "bully" like image when they pull things like this...in my opinion, of course.
I know EPE is owed the money, or so it seems, from what the lawsuit is claiming...but is this something that REALLY needs to be dragged out into a court room?? Couldn't something like this just be settled out of court?? Again, it just seems like EPE is trying to "show off" with something like this.
TCB!
Mike
R.I.P. Tommy
We will miss you dearest friend
My spouse works at a law firm - and some clients came in because they wanted to open an Elvis themed restaurant
when she heard the lawyer say there's no problem, she interrupted the meeting to set him straight about EPE
the lawyer didn't believe her - so called an American Lawyer - who when "Elvis" was mentioned - cut off her lawyer and said, don't mess with anything Elvis - they are barracuddas
then her boss lawyer asked how she had known that - and her reply was that I am a psycho Elvis fan.
_________
there is no snooze button on a cat that wants breakfast.
Nina's Elvis blogs: http://ntrygg.wordpress.com/elvis-index/
Gee, what a surprise...
TCB!
Mike
R.I.P. Tommy
We will miss you dearest friend
Well when Elvis died I recall bootleg merchandise was everywhere and millions were made by many with not one cent making it into the trust for Lisa.
Parker made little effort to stop it but after the probate judge ordered the estate to sue him and break the contract he signed with Vernon-the estates lawyers and probate judge saw that Elvis's image and likeness were part of the legacy left to Lisa-and they fought hard to protect and keep it exclusive to Lisa and her trust.
If the music had all been owned by Elvis, and the Colonel had been foresighted enough to realise the long term worth of the music the image and likeness question would not have been as important-but basically fot the estate that was crucial without owning the recordings or at least all the royaltees for the recordings before 73 (95% of Elvis recorded legacy)
I do not blame them for the suit, if they do not put these people at Chrysalis on record as breaking the agreements for the profits-then they continue to do so, and in effect are robbing the estate. No one can allow others to cheat them and not take action-I mean if we in are personal lives let our bosses cheat us each payday-would we sit back and go,
"Oh Well its no big deal" of course not-we would fight for what we had contracted to be paid, and rightly so.
If you let a someone get over on you, they get bolder and take more advantage, also if word gets around you are an "easy mark" everyone wants to take advantage.
This will probably end up being settled out of court-especially if the proof is pretty substantial.
Work in Progress!
All I can say is, the Colonel's spirit lives on !!!
Posting Permissions
