Gary Glitter jailed for life...

[Essex Lad]

Oasis songs or Gary Glitter songs? The album, you are right, still sells although not in the same kind of numbers. The story was that he bought a yacht with his share of royalties.

My point was that Gary Glitter's main fan base was in the UK and that's where his main income would be derived. It was said that he made a million pounds annually from each Gang Show tour.

[Peter]

JamesW wrote:


>
> The 30 second rule is widely believed in but is entirely
> mythical and has no basis in law. It comes from wishful
> thinking. It's similar to the "you won't get pregnant if you do
> it standing up" idea.

Well that's what we were taught in the Law module of my college course, but it was only mentioned in passing, as sound didn't really apply to stills photographers. (and this was 25+ years ago)

But I've certainly seen TV news crews and people in the edit suite refer to the 30 second rule.

(I did state this was in relation to news coverage, maybe that makes a difference)

Happy to be corrected though.

[JamesW]

Essex Lad wrote:

> In August 2008, The Daily Telegraph reported that he "sold
> parts of his back catalogue for a figure reported to be up to
> ?5million but still earns ?50,000 a year in royalties through
> the Performing Rights Society". To jump from ?50k to ?300k in
> four years seems as I say excessive especially as you say the
> majority in 2012 came from a greatest hits album in a country
> where he is virtually anonymous.


Yes the NME was the main source, but the ?300,000 a year they were talking about can't be directly compared to the ?50,000 a year mentioned by the Daily Telegraph. This is because the Daily Telegraph is only referring to Glitter's earnings through the Performing Rights Society and not his publishing royalties. Glitter co-wrote his songs, so would have been earning publishing royalties on top of the PRS ?50,000.

For example, the Glitter song used in an advertising campaign which brought him ?64,000 was actually performed in the advertisement by Joan Jett, so the payment for that to Glitter was as the songwriter, not as a performer. If the ?300,000 for that year is accurate I would think he earnt more of it from the publishing than from the performing.

[Essex Lad]

I can't see it being anywhere near accurate ? whether he is performing or not, you haven't heard too many Gary Glitter songs played in the last few years. Look at the fuss when Gwyneth Paltrow sang "Do You Wanna Touch" in Glee...

And you did say that he earned ?236,000 in one year from a greatest hits album in America, which simply cannot be correct.

[JamesW]

Essex Lad wrote:

> And you did say that he earned ?236,000 in one year from a
> greatest hits album in America, which simply cannot be correct.


Obviously that isn't the case. He had a song feature in the trailer for Oscar nominated movie Silver Linings Playbook that year, which would have earnt him a fair amount of the ?300,000. Not to mention that you would have to deduct the ?50,000 he earns anually through PRS anyway.

[cockneygeezer2009]

Apparently when Glitter got sent down the first thing he did when he got to prison was sing to this fellow lags "Hello Hello I'm Back Again"!!

Sad end to a 'Glittering' career.

Reworded Glitter song titles:

I Didn't Realise You Was Only 12 Years Old
I'm The Leader Of The (Paedophile) Gang I Am
Do You Wanna Touch Me? (12 Year Old Girlie)
Remember Me This Way (As A Pervert)

In 1978 Glitter released a (non charting) single called "Oh What a Fool I've Been". Very apt.

[JamesW]

Peter wrote:

> Well that's what we were taught in the Law module of my college
> course, but it was only mentioned in passing, as sound didn't
> really apply to stills photographers. (and this was 25+ years
> ago)
>
> But I've certainly seen TV news crews and people in the edit
> suite refer to the 30 second rule.
>
> (I did state this was in relation to news coverage, maybe that
> makes a difference)


Peter, the 30 second rule is widely believed. It's very common that it gets referenced, even though it has no basis in law.

You're right to say that news coverage makes a difference, because a news programme can usually get away with broadcasting more than other users can do of copyright material, because the use for news is clearly "informational" and not a directly commercial use.

[izzard eddie]

Good.

[Essex Lad]

What is good?

[Essex Lad]

In addition, apart from the Glitter Band I can't think of anyone who performs his songs still in the UK. There was a story about his songs being played regularly on an American internet station but assuming that they pay royalties and at the Radio 1 level, then 10 plays a day at ?50 a play is still only ?500 a day, ?3,500 a week ?160,000 or so ? still way short of NME's "reported" ?300k a year and that is based on the assumption as I say that they pay at a decent level. For all I know they may pay nothing or a couple of dollars.

Also, as you/I said Gary Glitter sold part of his back catalogue for about ?5m ? I'd bet that Universal bought the biggies, which would be the ones raking in the money if indeed any money is to be raked in.