Dennis Wilcock

You are right. It was played as a cover then, and then bought ? I know it has been done by countless artists (David Bowie being the fist name that comes to my mind with the Let's Dance album) but Harris has always said that he didn't want anybody exterior to the band involved in the songwrtiting process (Hooks in You being the only - partial - exception) ; in the light of this, it would rather strange to learn that they had bought a song from someone else.
 
Evidently, the guys who wrote or co-wrote the songs were in the band when no legal bindings existed, i.e. no contracts or the likes. So they had no basis on claiming they wrote the song. Hence, all the royalties could go to whoever was credited with writing it on the album.
 
jeffgt14 said:
I can't be the only one wondering why anyone would want to claim the writing credits for Sanctuary of all songs.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be at all surprised if a songwriting royalty on Sanctuary turns out to be worth a few million. In addition to the debut, it appears on 3 live albums and at least 2 home videos. Even at only a fraction of a penny per sale, that adds up.
 
I don't know the exact legislation in the UK but I have a good idea on intellectual property which makes me say that the time for opposing the registration of Sanctuary may be long passed and therefore if someone now wants to claim the ownership or pretends to have any right over the song, first must try to anull the original registration by proving a real contribution to the song (partiture, lyrics) and even in that case, it must be presented as in a matter that justifies why it wasn't done at the time the song first was registered... Only after this is done, someone can claim royalties over it, if not, no matter how much someone thinks it has proven is contribution he ain't going to receive a cent for it.
 
LooseCannon said:
I wonder if @Cornfed Hick might have an idea how this works.
Click to expand...

Under U.S. law, the songwriters of "Sanctuary" would split mechanical royalties, which are the royalties from sales of CDs, downloads, LPs, etc. Mechanical royalties have changed over time, but it is around 9 cents per song sold. Stratton [edit: Wilcock] would split that with the other cowriters based on whatever agreement they had (or a court implies, absent an express agreement).

In addition, the songwriters would get a performance royalty, which means that every time Iron Maiden performs "Sanctuary" live on stage, whether it is recorded or not, they get paid. I don't know what that formula is or how it is calculated.

The publishing company would also get a piece of both pies.

I doubt Stratton's [edit: Wilcock's] songwriting interest in "Sanctuary" (assuming he has any such interest, of which I have no opinion whatsoever) would be worth millions, but it may be in the six figures. It's impossible to calculate based on the limited info I have.
 
Last edited:
Cornfed Hick said:
Under U.S. law, the songwriters of "Sanctuary" would split mechanical royalties, which are the royalties from sales of CDs, downloads, LPs, etc. Mechanical royalties have changed over time, but it is around 9 cents per song sold. Stratton would split that with the other cowriters based on whatever agreement they had (or a court implies, absent an express agreement).

In addition, the songwriters would get a performance royalty, which means that every time Iron Maiden performs "Sanctuary" live on stage, whether it is recorded or not, they get paid. I don't know what that formula is or how it is calculated.

The publishing company would also get a piece of both pies.

I doubt Stratton's songwriting interest in "Sanctuary" (assuming he has any such interest, of which I have no opinion whatsoever) would be worth millions, but it may be in the six figures.
Click to expand...

Nice insight into how it works.

Do you mean Wilcock, not Stratton btw :)
 
I understand the royalties would be a good amount. I was more making a joke about Sanctuary. I’m not entirely certain royalties are what Dennis is after though. I would think if he was doing this for royalties only, then we would have heard about all this way before now.
 
Cornfed Hick said:
Under U.S. law, the songwriters of "Sanctuary" would split mechanical royalties, which are the royalties from sales of CDs, downloads, LPs, etc. Mechanical royalties have changed over time, but it is around 9 cents per song sold. Stratton [edit: Wilcock] would split that with the other cowriters based on whatever agreement they had (or a court implies, absent an express agreement).

In addition, the songwriters would get a performance royalty, which means that every time Iron Maiden performs "Sanctuary" live on stage, whether it is recorded or not, they get paid. I don't know what that formula is or how it is calculated.

The publishing company would also get a piece of both pies.

I doubt Stratton's [edit: Wilcock's] songwriting interest in "Sanctuary" (assuming he has any such interest, of which I have no opinion whatsoever) would be worth millions, but it may be in the six figures. It's impossible to calculate based on the limited info I have.
Click to expand...

Question: Those royalties do not depend on who has the legal rights to the song? By these I mean the one's who have registered their intellectual property over the song?
 
Of course it depends on who has the legal rights. A copyright vests at creation of the work; registration is not a prerequisite to claim the copyright to a song (but it's a very good idea). If the song was written and published prior to 1978 (it may not have been -- a bootleg probably wouldn't count), it's possible that Wilcock's right to the song expired unless he renewed it. Presumably Harris, et al., renewed their copyright in the song.

Anyone interested in a short primer on U.S. copyright law can look here: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf
 
Cornfed Hick said:
Of course it depends on who has the legal rights. A copyright vests at creation of the work; registration is not a prerequisite to claim the copyright to a song (but it's a very good idea). If the song was written and published prior to 1978 (it may not have been -- a bootleg probably wouldn't count), it's possible that Wilcock's right to the song expired unless he renewed it. Presumably Harris, et al., renewed their copyright in the song.

Anyone interested in a short primer on U.S. copyright law can look here: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf
Click to expand...

Great to know. I'm guessing you're a lawyer so let me give you thank from colleague to colleague. I will check that document you suggested.
 
Perun said:
I somehow doubt they did that back in 1977.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmm well if you consider the fact that after he received the call from (supposedly) the Bolton Iron Maiden he registered the name, he might being aware that to protect his right to a song he had to register them so he could have done it in '77
 
I remember reading (in the Running Free official biography I think) something from Steve about him him being afraid that his songs could be stolen by other bands, so he sent a cassette to himself, by Royal Mail. I didn't understand the point though.
 
harrisdevot said:
I remember reading (in the Running Free official biography I think) something from Steve about him him being afraid that his songs could be stolen by other bands, so he sent a cassette to himself, by Royal Mail. I didn't understand the point though.
Click to expand...

If he wrote a covering note, signed and dated, or signed and dated the cassette, then posted it but never opened it when he received it back.... Then the package would be date-stamped by the Royal Mail and the whole thing would be fairly solid proof that he owned the recording on the date it was stamped. If no-one contesting his ownership of the songs had any better evidence in their favour, he could claim copyright.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top