Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Music Talk
Reload this Page >

Bruce Springsteen Sells Music Catalogue for $500 Million

Music Talk Discuss music in all its forms: CD, MP3, DVD-A, SACD and of course live

Bruce Springsteen Sells Music Catalogue for $500 Million

Old 12-17-21, 09:14 AM
  #26  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 24,962
Received 280 Likes on 176 Posts
Re: Bruce Springsteen Sells Music Catalogue for $500 Million

It just like taking a lump sum of a lottery prize--which many people do.

Like many older musicians lately, Bruce simply took an up-front lump sum now vs smaller, annual residual checks.

Motley Crue sold their catalog a month or so ago. Value was approximated at $150 million.
Old 12-17-21, 07:42 PM
  #27  
DVD Talk Godfather & 2020 TOTY Winner
 
Decker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Vegas, Baby!
Posts: 76,493
Received 6,348 Likes on 4,341 Posts
Re: Bruce Springsteen Sells Music Catalogue for $500 Million

Originally Posted by Nick Danger
The highway's jammed with broken heroes on a last chance power drive.
Take your place on the highway in a new Ford Mustang.
BEST FOODS!
They make the world's best Mayonnaise
Made from real eggs that a chicken really laid!
Keep spreadin' it til it's understood
that your sandwich is slathered up good!
Old 12-18-21, 05:10 AM
  #28  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 8,988
Likes: 0
Received 256 Likes on 179 Posts
Re: Bruce Springsteen Sells Music Catalogue for $500 Million

The obvious ones are Cadillac Ranch and Pink Cadillac
I'm On Fire - hot and spicy chicken wings
Old 12-19-21, 02:41 PM
  #29  
DVD Talk Hero
 
PhantomStranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Phantom Zone
Posts: 27,601
Received 835 Likes on 704 Posts
Re: Bruce Springsteen Sells Music Catalogue for $500 Million

The money is nice but I imagine any songwriter at the level of Dylan or Springsteen wants their music kept relevant long after they are dead. The best way doing that is selling the rights off to one of the companies which control the music industry, because the company will then have a vested interest in maintaining said music's popularity. This was one of the reasons stated by Lucas why he sold Star Wars to Disney.

There are many incredibly famous singers/songwriters whose work has fallen into disfavor or simply been forgotten because no one competent was managing their catalogs after they passed away. Often it ends up in a family trust with no real insight into the music business. I actually think that is starting to happen to Sinatra's music.
Old 12-20-21, 12:48 AM
  #30  
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Somewhere in the boonies, MA
Posts: 10,147
Received 376 Likes on 295 Posts
Re: Bruce Springsteen Sells Music Catalogue for $500 Million

Originally Posted by PhantomStranger
The money is nice but I imagine any songwriter at the level of Dylan or Springsteen wants their music kept relevant long after they are dead. The best way doing that is selling the rights off to one of the companies which control the music industry, because the company will then have a vested interest in maintaining said music's popularity. This was one of the reasons stated by Lucas why he sold Star Wars to Disney.

There are many incredibly famous singers/songwriters whose work has fallen into disfavor or simply been forgotten because no one competent was managing their catalogs after they passed away. Often it ends up in a family trust with no real insight into the music business. I actually think that is starting to happen to Sinatra's music.
What? You've got a problem with "Born to Run" playing behind an Imodium commercial?
The following users liked this post:
Norm de Plume (12-20-21)
Old 12-20-21, 06:16 AM
  #31  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Sonny Corinthos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Port Charles, NY.
Posts: 7,385
Received 220 Likes on 167 Posts
Re: Bruce Springsteen Sells Music Catalogue for $500 Million

I can't blame him. It's better for him in the long run so he can have a say where his money goes after he's gone. I would most likely do the same thing if I were in his shoes.
Old 12-20-21, 08:52 AM
  #32  
Moderator
 
story's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Hope.
Posts: 14,066
Received 1,986 Likes on 1,170 Posts
Re: Bruce Springsteen Sells Music Catalogue for $500 Million

I think this is absolutely the right move. He's 72, and as others have said "taking the lump sum" now likely lets him create a trust or other means to provide for himself, his family, and his favorite charities in ways that royalties beyond his lifetime never could do, as the primary audience for these songs ages along with him.

Another angle on this I haven't seen mentioned much in this thread that I wonder about is whether this is also a good move given how old some of the catalog is already in relationship to its copyright lifespan. I'm not an expert in music and creative copyright, but if I read this article correctly, a song like "Born to Run" is already near it's half life in terms of copyright protection before it becomes public domain. From the article:
Works Created and Published or Registered Before January 1, 1978: These works are generally protected for 75 years from the date the work was published with a copyright notice or on the date of the registration if the work was registered in unpublished form. For such pre-1978 copyrights still subsisting on October 27, 1998, Congress extended the term by 20 years, providing for a total term of protection of 95 years.

"Born to Run" came out in 1975, or 46 years ago, and in 95 years total it will be the year 2070. His grandkids and great grandkids are still around and those royalties - provided the family has things set up well to license and use the songs all along - go away and my guess is perhaps reach the point of diminishing returns earlier than that.

Bruce Springsteen's net worth is already a healthy nine figures. Bring in this on top of it, not only is he doing well, he's doing what few artists have done and dream about: more than made a comfortable living for his family making quality art that people enjoy and will outlast their lifetime. I say good on him, it's amazing.

Last edited by story; 12-20-21 at 09:11 AM. Reason: Math.
Old 12-20-21, 09:06 AM
  #33  
DVD Talk Godfather & 2020 TOTY Winner
 
Decker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Vegas, Baby!
Posts: 76,493
Received 6,348 Likes on 4,341 Posts
Re: Bruce Springsteen Sells Music Catalogue for $500 Million

Originally Posted by story

Bruce Springsteen's net worth is already a healthy six figures. Bring in this on top of it, not only is he doing well, he's doing what few artists have done and dream about: more than made a comfortable living for his family making quality art that people enjoy and will outlast their lifetime. I say good on him, it's amazing.
He might even be worth more than a half million dollars by now if he invested wisely.
Old 12-20-21, 09:12 AM
  #34  
Moderator
 
story's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Hope.
Posts: 14,066
Received 1,986 Likes on 1,170 Posts
Re: Bruce Springsteen Sells Music Catalogue for $500 Million

Well, that's on him, not me...
Old 12-20-21, 11:16 AM
  #35  
DVD Talk Ultimate Edition
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 4,144
Received 197 Likes on 169 Posts
Re: Bruce Springsteen Sells Music Catalogue for $500 Million

Originally Posted by story
I think this is absolutely the right move. He's 72, and as others have said "taking the lump sum" now likely lets him create a trust or other means to provide for himself, his family, and his favorite charities in ways that royalties beyond his lifetime never could do, as the primary audience for these songs ages along with him.

Another angle on this I haven't seen mentioned much in this thread that I wonder about is whether this is also a good move given how old some of the catalog is already in relationship to its copyright lifespan. I'm not an expert in music and creative copyright, but if I read this article correctly, a song like "Born to Run" is already near it's half life in terms of copyright protection before it becomes public domain. From the article:
Works Created and Published or Registered Before January 1, 1978: These works are generally protected for 75 years from the date the work was published with a copyright notice or on the date of the registration if the work was registered in unpublished form. For such pre-1978 copyrights still subsisting on October 27, 1998, Congress extended the term by 20 years, providing for a total term of protection of 95 years.

"Born to Run" came out in 1975, or 46 years ago, and in 95 years total it will be the year 2070. His grandkids and great grandkids are still around and those royalties - provided the family has things set up well to license and use the songs all along - go away and my guess is perhaps reach the point of diminishing returns earlier than that.

Bruce Springsteen's net worth is already a healthy nine figures. Bring in this on top of it, not only is he doing well, he's doing what few artists have done and dream about: more than made a comfortable living for his family making quality art that people enjoy and will outlast their lifetime. I say good on him, it's amazing.
This is a good point.

In other jurisdictions such as the European Union, copyright can expire much sooner.

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/m...europe-202736/

As a prominent example, the copyright expired on some early Beatles songs back in 2013. Sir Paul has been looking at every single legal loophole at regaining copyright of his music in other jurisdictions.

https://www.billboard.com/music/rock...rship-7662519/

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/01/busin...rnd/index.html
Old 12-20-21, 09:50 PM
  #36  
Moderator
 
dex14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 45,276
Likes: 0
Received 4,678 Likes on 3,168 Posts
Re: Bruce Springsteen Sells Music Catalogue for $500 Million

From Monday's NY Times: "In Springsteen’s case, the negotiations for the Sony sale included discussions about limiting how his work could be used in the future, with particular concern about any ads featuring two of Springsteen’s most iconic songs, “Born in the U.S.A.” and “Born to Run,” according to three people briefed on the deal who declined to be named because they were not authorized to speak publicly about it."
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/20/a...talog.amp.html

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.