New Fan Club Package Updates

I have to disagree here.
During covid he did share his song with his fans and asked them for input. He is again doing a lot of charity and yes, I it is more Jon centered but the Hampton Water concert was not just to push his business but also to share a concert for free. He has been supporting Phil ' s wife' s contest and on top he was opening a food bank and even did a charity show there in May..
And even if the new fanclub isn't up to people's standards here it is an improvement to the rubbish thing it was before. Even for like 80 bucks at least you get content

So please don't tell me it is all about him all the time.
Sometimes people have to also see the other side

Do What You Can just took on a whole new meaning, if you consider Jon's dire vocal condition and the fact he still chooses to keep going so because he can't do what he use to do (vocally speaking) he's doing what he can😂

From what it sounds/feels like it's just the straight signal from the cameras to the control room the band camp takes with them on DVD to review the show with. Nothing's been touched, mastered or altered. As little work from the band camp as possible to put this out

EDIT: Listening to the mix of the Circle show, I think I'm bang on. Richie's guitar and vocals is panned pretty hard left, Bobby's panned to the right, Hugh's panned left. Pretty much matches where they are on stage too. Really weird to hear Bobby so high in the mix, dude was barely audible live.

Spot on. These would have been straight from the sound desk mixes and the videos from the screens. There won't be multi track audio to mix or multicam videos to edit. What they have is what they have, so you are always going to get limited quility on these things.

Bands generally don't pay to professionally record and film shows and keep them in the archives. Not really sure what people expected!?

That wasn't my point. I know that it's the footage from the screens and the raw capture of the audio stream. All good, nothing more expected and fully ok. My gripe is the quality in terms of what was presented. Before the Lost Highway tour, they gave some standard archive footage to a German TV station from the Giants shows in 2006 which was mixed into the tour announcement. Pristine, beautiful picture quality. They gave the same kind of footage from Giants 2003 to the Izod Center's YT channel in 2010. Again, really nice quality. Or just look at the leaked video we all know from the first night at Wembley in 1995.
With that kind of stuff, I'd be more than happy. But this is dark, kind of blurry and has hissy, dull audio. By 2010, they surely must've captured their shows digitally. I know of local bands who had their shows archived by camera mounted on the mixing desk and a raw audio capture of the line-in signal there 10 years ago. Beats this by a landslide.
It looks like they either compressed their archives to rather low resolution / low data rate files and upscaled them again or an analog capture from some source. The same impression that I had gotten from the San José 2008 clip.
There's gotta be somebody sitting there and doing this for them and with like 10 minutes of very little post production, this stuff could be so much more enjoyable.

You're answered your own point there. It's all being done as cheaply as possible. There isn't something that they are going to throw any time or money at to put out great quality material. They are doing it a cheaply as possible in order to make the most money. This is not fan service, it's purely a money making excercise. Surely that's clear by now?

My main gripe is that they clearly have the whole shows recorded, why just give people 3 songs? Just do the whole damn show. They already have the footage it would probably take less time to just put the whole thing out there, than it would to edit it down to 3 tracks. My guess would be is that more songs means more royalties/publishing to pay - so again, a way to do it as cheaply as possible...

Agreed on all points - as sad as it is. As you pointed out - if they have someone sit down and cut out three arbitrary songs without doing anything else, they might just upload the whole thing which would be the same amount of "work".
Someone speculated here that it was some on-the-fly thing to bridge the gap of non-live shows a bit financially and intended as nothing more than that. By now, I tend to agree to this.

In terms or royalties - I'm curious if they hold the copyrights to their own live shows or are these usually in the hands of the record company as well? Does anyone know how that usually works?

I don't think the record company automatically holds the rights to live shows. Bands usually sell or rather license their product to the record company (who pay for studio time) who then can do with it whatever they please. I'd assume BJ's tours have a fair share of "powered by" sponsors, but I doubt they own the live shows themselves

Of course, all of this is unless the record company specifically chipped in for a show that was set to be recorded - of course the record company owns One Wild Night Live. Since these videos were professionally recorded, who knows? I believe some previous live videos have the "Copyright the Island Def Jam company" bit at the end. With broadcasts, these parties might also hold rights.

I'm okay without it not being remixed / remastered... The raw footage is like getting a demo version of a song. They dont have a good track record with their remixes anyway....

I just have a problem with the content they are providing... If you go back and watch the initial promo for this, you'd see that we received nothing that they stated. That's where I have the problem.

And then the stuff they are giving us is just fluff... Who the **** wants a We Got It Going On from The Circle tour? LTOR or These Arms Are Open All Night from Bounce...

Another example, I really enjoy the live versions of Right Side Of Wrong way more then the album versions so we finally get a Soundboard version of it, and Jon is "Yeahing" all over it.

They just manage to **** everything up.






Sent from my SM-A015V using Tapatalk

As Alpha said, Jon almost certainly owns the rights to anything they recorded, expecially in the last 10-15 years. Some contracts will stipulate that they own anything the band (jon) does while under contract to them, but that's a very bad, very old school contract. Lots of contracts were like that in the 80s/90s (remember credits on other people's records, such a "Jon Bon Jovi appears courtesy of Mercury Records"), which could explain why we are only getting later footage - I expect Jon negotiated a new contract at some point.

Some of the stuff that was recorded for broadcast will be owned by the respective stations/channels.

What Jon doesn't own is all of the publishing to the songs that he co-wrote. He can't simply give these songs away for free without paying the appropraite royalties, which is the only reason that I can think of for only sharing 3 songs per show?