Jump to content

Single Reissues Campaign - I'll Remember + vinyl mixes - OUT NOW


New_Boy
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, PlayPause said:

? Asking questions or throwing shade ?

A music catalog is full of specific cases and contract fuckups. Many people are involved and many authorizations have to be given before putting something out. Each time a new format/music media is out, you have to do it again from the start and ask everyone if they're OK with the new thing even if they were OK for the old one.

As far as Gambler is concerned, Madonna didn't fully hold the rights of the song for 35 years and some copyright holders were blocking it for some reason. Many M songs on soundtracks have a special status because they weren't necessarily under the WB deal, but happened on the movie soundtrack label. Gambler was released by Geffen / CBS, which is now a Sony subsidiary. Why they authorized Crazy For You on TIC and streaming and not Gambler is a mystery. Maybe M wasn't particularly interested in that song before working on the re-releases.

And it doesn't have anything to do with the inclusion of the song on any tour. It was on the Virgin Tour already. Live performance and recordings don't fall under the same rights management and procedures.

 

 

How was it available for the Japan super club mix cd - that was released on Warner pioneer ? This whole thing around rights seems fishy to me - the same goes for the BA tour concerts still not being released after 32 fucking years …. If M really wants stuff out there and cares about it she will find a way … it’s not like she can’t afford to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PlayPause said:

? Asking questions or throwing shade ?

A music catalog is full of specific cases and contract fuckups. Many people are involved and many authorizations have to be given before putting something out. Each time a new format/music media is out, you have to do it again from the start and ask everyone if they're OK with the new thing even if they were OK for the old one.

As far as Gambler is concerned, Madonna didn't fully hold the rights of the song for 35 years and some copyright holders were blocking it for some reason. Many M songs on soundtracks have a special status because they weren't necessarily under the WB deal, but happened on the movie soundtrack label. Gambler was released by Geffen / CBS, which is now a Sony subsidiary. Why they authorized Crazy For You on TIC and streaming and not Gambler is a mystery. Maybe M wasn't particularly interested in that song before working on the re-releases.

And it doesn't have anything to do with the inclusion of the song on any tour. It was on the Virgin Tour already. Live performance and recordings don't fall under the same rights management and procedures.

 

 

Like i said earlier, Gambler is now under license with Warner Olive Music LLC division (So is Crazy For You) which mostly deals with soundtracks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Roland Barthes said:

Like i said earlier, Gambler is now under license with Warner Olive Music LLC division (So is Crazy For You) which mostly deals with soundtracks. 

If it's a license, the rightful owner is still Sony. Warner Olive is just an intermediary.

22 minutes ago, wtg1987 said:

This whole thing around rights seems fishy to me

It's not fishy, it's the law. It's complicated though, that's why people study it for years.

23 minutes ago, wtg1987 said:

This whole thing around rights seems fishy to me - the same goes for the BA tour concerts still not being released after 32 fucking years

BA tour is another matter. The recordings belong to M.

If it's not out, it's because she doesn't feel like releasing them or she thinks it's not good enough or something, maybe the band members didn't sign up for it.

Live performance is one thing, the commercial release of such recorded live performance is another. Rights, rights, rights : any artist has to consent to every exploitation of their work and contribution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, wtg1987 said:

Any album reissue on physical format would have been good - I can’t believe we didn’t get one this year 🥹 and No FEL doesn’t count imo …. I want something unreleased 

Well it includes some unreleased remixes just like an edit version of the Tracy Young remix of Nothing Fails and a promo remix of the Offer Nissim remix of Living for Love. 

:hallwaylaugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PlayPause said:

If it's a license, the rightful owner is still Sony. Warner Olive is just an intermediary.

It's not fishy, it's the law. It's complicated though, that's why people study it for years.

BA tour is another matter. The recordings belong to M.

If it's not out, it's because she doesn't feel like releasing them or she thinks it's not good enough or something, maybe the band members didn't sign up for it.

Live performance is one thing, the commercial release of such recorded live performance is another. Rights, rights, rights : any artist has to consent to every exploitation of their work and contribution.

I don’t know why for other artists these rights issues are very transparent while with Madonna we’re always left wondering and assuming. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, wtg1987 said:

How was it available for the Japan super club mix cd - that was released on Warner pioneer ? This whole thing around rights seems fishy to me - the same goes for the BA tour concerts still not being released after 32 fucking years …. If M really wants stuff out there and cares about it she will find a way … it’s not like she can’t afford to.

Thank you! And also it was released on the CD Single Collection in 1995 and on the RSD La Isla Bonita Supermix in 2019. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PlayPause said:

If it's a license, the rightful owner is still Sony. Warner Olive is just an intermediary.

It's not fishy, it's the law. It's complicated though, that's why people study it for years.

BA tour is another matter. The recordings belong to M.

If it's not out, it's because she doesn't feel like releasing them or she thinks it's not good enough or something, maybe the band members didn't sign up for it.

Live performance is one thing, the commercial release of such recorded live performance is another. Rights, rights, rights : any artist has to consent to every exploitation of their work and contribution.

This must be why Love don’t Live here was cut from Rebel Heart …. Bizarre … I always wondered why didn’t just pay the license it was a big part of the heartbreak city performance set … I mean it’s on an M album 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • New_Boy changed the title to Single Reissues Campaign - "Gambler" OUT NOW!
3 hours ago, DjKingBee said:

This must be why Love don’t Live here was cut from Rebel Heart …. Bizarre … I always wondered why didn’t just pay the license it was a big part of the heartbreak city performance set … I mean it’s on an M album 

Exactly. Maybe the right holders didn't approve the recorded performance, or an agreement couldn't be settled by the record label for budget reasons. Sometimes, license exclusivity on some territories will block a worldwide release. Another explanation could be that M/the label edited that final part to keep the album short enough for CD/vinyl pressing.

As I said, it's complicated...

Let's just be glad we got to hear it live.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, thegoldencalf said:

I don’t know why for other artists these rights issues are very transparent while with Madonna we’re always left wondering and assuming. 
 

That's our impression from M experts point of view. A lot of covers and samples get left out on some releases without the general public noticing.

M is also very clingy to her rights, which made her very rich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, PlayPause said:

That's our impression from M experts point of view. A lot of covers and samples get left out on some releases without the general public noticing.

M is also very clingy to her rights, which made her very rich.

That may be the case. But whenever I wondered similar things about other artists I always found the reasoning pretty easily on google. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PlayPause said:

Exactly. Maybe the right holders didn't approve the recorded performance, or an agreement couldn't be settled by the record label for budget reasons. Sometimes, license exclusivity on some territories will block a worldwide release. Another explanation could be that M/the label edited that final part to keep the album short enough for CD/vinyl pressing.

As I said, it's complicated...

Let's just be glad we got to hear it live.

The rights situation in Germany is such that one may not release unauthorized changed songs of another songwriters without their consent (except in the case of a parody) - and the LDLHA live version is strongly shortened and changed.

However, the rights holder cannot do anything against live performances as long as you pay the royalties. You can even change the song completely live - but if it's for commercial sales of cover versions, the song must be unchanged (notes and lyrics), otherwise the rights holder can prohibit the release, because one could be entitled to co-songwriter credits to that "new version".

This could also explain why Madonna's dance remixes of the song didn't appear in 1995 either - probably the rights holders refused to agree because of the major changes of the song.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Levon said:

The rights situation in Germany is such that one may not release unauthorized changed songs of another songwriters without their consent (except in the case of a parody) - and the LDLHA live version is strongly shortened and changed.

However, the rights holder cannot do anything against live performances as long as you pay the royalties. You can even change the song completely live - but if it's for commercial sales of cover versions, the song must be unchanged (notes and lyrics), otherwise the rights holder can prohibit the release, because one could be entitled to co-songwriter credits to that "new version".

This could also explain why Madonna's dance remixes of the song didn't appear in 1995 either - probably the rights holders refused to agree because of the major changes of the song.

But the Soulpower remixes got released and also used in the video, which itself was released on multiple DVDs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, clkelley39 said:

But the Soulpower remixes got released and also used in the video, which itself was released on multiple DVDs.

The Soulpower remixes are fairly faithful cover versions with no major changes to the original. The club remixes on the other hand contain significant changes (especially the new dominant background vocals). The live version is heavily abbreviated and contains elements that do not appear in the original. Ultimately, the rights holder decides whether they agree to the release of a cover version.

With I Want You there were also problems that the song didn't get an approval for the actually planned single release. But this was probably more about the fact that the rights holder feared that a standalone single release could affect the sales of their Marvin Gaye tribute album more than her ballads album.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Levon said:


With I Want You there were also problems that the song didn't get an approval for the actually planned single release. But this was probably more about the fact that the rights holder feared that a standalone single release could affect the sales of their Marvin Gaye tribute album more than her ballads album.

I remember "I want you" played in Spain as promo single.

s-l1600.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Aiwa08 said:

I remember "I want you" played in Spain as promo single.

s-l1600.jpg

Unfortunately, this is only a promo for the MG tribute, but not an independent single release by Madonna, as she would have liked to do. She didn't get permission for that. Too bad, I even liked the dance remixes, even though her vocals sounded brutally chopped up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Levon said:

Right. For Express Yourself, there are only credits to Pharrell: Contains elements from She's Not Me.

Screenshot (238).png

I remember thinking at the time that it was like a challenge - eg M dared Lady Gaga to file a lawsuit that would then expose the similarities between the songs etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, GregVsMatt said:

I remember thinking at the time that it was like a challenge - eg M dared Lady Gaga to file a lawsuit that would then expose the similarities between the songs etc

Also I remember that the Little Monsters claimed years ago that Lady Gaga and Fernando Garibay sued Madonna for singing Born This Way without Gaga's authorization or something like that and also that Madonna "lost" that demand and she paid for that sample every time she sung it on The MDNA Tour. :Madonna034:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jackie changed the title to Single Reissues Campaign - I'll Remember + vinyl mixes - OUT NOW

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Write here...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use