Bon Jovi Music Rights?

Who owns them?
Just greedy Jon? Maybe the band (lol)? Or the recordcompany?

If Jon dies, Dorothea will own the rights.
Or do you think there is a small possibility he leaves it in his will to Hugh/Richie/Tico/Dave?

What do you mean by 'music rights'? I'd presume they all get an equal share as artists/performers for a record, but then Jon and Richie get more because they get songwriting credit.

According to Lonn Friend's book "Life on Planet Rock" Richie signed a new publishing deal in the mid 90's which gave him a much larger share of the songs then he had previously/

They only last 50 years or something don't they?

Cos Cliff Richard was kicking up a fuss earlier in the year about losing the rights to his original songs..

yeah but someone must own the actual rights to the song. Like Michael Jackson owns (or owned) the right for the Beatles wich he bought 84 or something. Like Yoko-ono own the rights for John Lennon solo work.
Like 'what's her name' (edit: Courtney Love) owns the rights of Nirvana (not any of he old member). It has nothing to do with songwriting credit.
Britney Spears apparantly don't own rights to her first album and a shared right with the recordcompany & management on last record.

I asume Jon owns them as he has the contract for Bon Jovi albums, I assume (again) that's its written in there.

I (again) assume that Jon is not that stupid to let the recordcompany own them.
Anyway the one who owns the rights has final say in what happening with song, ie best of 2007.

(and renevue but that's probs divided in contracts with other parties)

i thought record companies owned all music rights except a few.

like michael jackson owns the rights to the beatles, also i remeber U2 being one of the first bands to own their own music, apparently they get less money but noone can use their songs without their permission (instead of record companies giving permission).

it's split up

the record label gets performance and mechanical royalties on everything

the band members get mechanical royalties on everything

they'll get different performance writing on every tune. tico and dave will get alot less than jon and richie as jon and richie write the majority of the songs but if tico or dave come up with something that;s pivotal to a song or a song themselves, they'll get a bigger cut.

any song writers which come in will probably get points ( point = a % of 90%) and a fee.

any other performers i.e. percussionists, orchestra members and any other session muso's will just get a fee unless they come up with an important part like tico or dave could.




all in all jon makes a shitload, richie makes slightly less of a shitload, tico and dave make considerably less of a shitload as does hugh.

publishing doesn't REALLY make a difference as far as labels are concerned as pub;lishing refers more to sheet music sales and licensing i.e. somng use in film and media as opposed to record sales but the cuts are essentially the same except bon jovi have their own publishing company now as far as i;m aware (at least jon does)

But that's all got to do with renevue's

Or do you say for instance Jon own 40%, Richie 20%, Dave 10%, Tico 10%, Recordcompany 10% of every song Bon Jovi ever published?

That sounds more to me as a contract how reneveu's are shared over the members and company and not have much to do with actual rights.

I mean bandmembers of Nirvana still get a share whenever a Nirvana song is played, same goes for the livin Beatles members tho they don't own the rights.

I don't mean who gets what but who owns the actual rights and I can not imagine those rights are split up over 4/5 persons + recordcompany

revenues are directly proportionate to percentage cuts and yes it will be split up between all members of the band and the label

plus the producer

plus anyone else who is lucky enough to get themselves a few points.

bon jovi will probably be much better off but a new band is doing well to get 20-25 points of mechanical and performance copyrights to spli tbetween themselves.

as i said before. a point is a % of 90%.

you might hear of producers or big musicians who demand $x per track plus 10 points etc...

points are worked out of 90% as back in the day of vinyal labels automatically docked 10% from everything to cover breakages as records are dpretty easy to break in transit. as the digital age came round they conveiniently forgot to rectify this discrepancy.

it migh tbe hard to believe that a songs royalties are split lots of different ways but that;s how it works. sting gets a performance royalty for his one line backing vocal on money for nothing, richie may very well have got himself more performance royalties for his hand claps on hard times come easy, steve tyler most certainly will have a few points for playing harp on if god was a woman, dave stewart will have taken a hefty cut of destination anywhere takings because he produced and performed etc...

There's a difference between publishing rights and royalties.

Ice