Young & Wild

DeeJay · August 7th, 2000, 12:26 AM

Wondering what Cherie and Marie and others thought of this Fowley CD he put out in 1998 called "Young & Wild" on Raven Records?

Can he still make money off Cherie releasing this stuff now or was this his last hurrah? Its nice to have some of BOSD and Hollywood Dream + 2 Beatles covers on CD but do we really need to read his b/s written on the CD insert?

The other version of Messing With The Boys CD on Renaissance Records is better of course as it has unreleased songs.

**rocketmaster** · August 7th, 2000, 02:41 AM

The "Young & Wild" Fowley release is a bootleg. This is Fowley ripping off and slandering the girls once again. Please support Cherie and the rest by boycotting that release.
Thank You!

**CHERIECURRIE** · August 9th, 2000, 05:59 PM

dearest deejay and others,
kim fowley is a theif and a monster. yes, he continues to rip me and the rest of the girls off. kenny laguna is helping us stop this c.d. and kim from doing this again. in my book i have 'a note to kim fowley' which addresses this problem. i hope he reads it and takes it seriously. you pay your hard earned money for these c.d.'s and you deserve better. the slanderous liner notes were the topping on the cake. xoxox cherie

**SweetieGord** · August 10th, 2000, 10:27 AM

indeed. but it's very difficult to resist since it has so many tasty cuts from 'Beauty's only...' on it. i know i could't resist even though it cost me a fortune. got it in Toronto recently on Aussie import and it was like CAN$35 or so.

a sucker is born.

g

**devilsdaughter** · August 17th, 2000, 01:31 PM

Hellooo???? I don't think DeeJay was advertising for people to buy the Fowley disc. In fact, I'd like to know the answers DeeJay brought up too. Who owns the publishing rights to the Runaways music? Why is Fowley still able release stuff? What if a bunch of musicians wanted to do a tribute album to the Runaways...who would get the royalties????? Can we have some answers please.

**rocketmaster** · August 17th, 2000, 05:08 PM

The point is, Fowley does NOT have the authority to release the material but he keeps doing it anyway. He is STEALING the royalties the girls are entitled to, even tho there have been legal judgements against him, he just doesn't give a crap, he keeps doing it.
If you want a lesson on the intracies of music publishing, you can Email Mara Fox at [email protected], she's a publisher and will take the time to answer your questions. The questions you raise are FAR too complex to answer in this forum.
Or you could just go out and buy a book on the subject...
-Cassie the Rocketmaster

**SweetieGord** · August 18th, 2000, 03:07 AM

yo devil daughter

you're on fire! good points. indeed, let's get some answers here. let's hear some hard facts - i'm going into insulin shock over the sickly posts on this board.

sweet as pie/devil's daughter is neigh,
gx

**SweetieGord** · August 20th, 2000, 11:41 AM

thank you Cassie for the information and your helpful words of advice. i have taken on board your points.

yours in a runaway world,

GG

**Mara Fox** · August 21st, 2000, 06:28 PM

Dear Friends,
Publishing is a commodity that can be bought and sold at will. The initial ownership is that of the songwriter, with equal portions being considered "Writer's Share" & "Publisher's Share".

Many young artists will trade their publishing or a portion of it for the services of a producer and the funds provided by the producer to record the masters.

A typical "Production Deal" entails the group signing to the producer as if he were a record label, and maybe signing off 50% of the publishing in the bargain. The producer usually owns the masters and is then the person who the label has to come to in order to sign the group. It is my GUESS that this might have been the arrangement between Kim Fowley & The Runaways.

The label can either buy the masters from the producer, pay for new ones, or license them (lease them) for a period of time.

If a group of musicians were to do a Runaways tribute record, the royalties would go to whomever owns the writing shares and the publishing shares at this time. The original label would not be entitled to a "master usage fee" because you would be creating new masters from scratch. This falls under what is known as a "compulsory license". Because the songs have already been released to the public, anyone can cover them. (This is not the case if you were to use the songs for a film or TV, only for an audio release). Whomever releases the recording must contact the publishers (or an agency called the Harry Fox Agency in NY) and pay them a mechanical royalty based upon number of units pressed. Additional songwriting & publishing royalties are funnelled through ASCAP, BMI etc, which are performance rights organizations and moniter airplay.

Did that answer any questions? As Cassie said, this is a very complicated area and cannot be answered with a simple 'yes or no'. The answer might be unique in the case of each and every song the Runaways ever released.

-Mara Fox
[email protected]