Correction/clarification: the lawsuit discussed in this video is referring to Oates’ attempt at selling his remaining portion of Whole Oats Enterprises LLP to music publishing company, Primary Wave. Whole Oats Enterprises controls Hall and Oates‘ trademarks, personal name and likeness rights, record royalty income, and social media and website properties. A court declaration by Hall shows what kind of valuable Hall & Oates materials Whole Oats Enterprises contains, though it does not describe the value, ownership percentage breakdown or sale price for those materials. The declaration cites materials such as trademarks, personal name and likeness rights, record royalty income and website and social media assets. Back in February 2007, Primary Wave announced that it had acquired a “significant interest in the song catalog of Daryl Hall & John Oates.” Soon after, the company also bought the copyrights for about 70 songs written by sisters Sara and Janna Allen, including their share of Hall and Oates smashes like “Maneater,” “You Make My Dreams” and “I Can’t Go for That (No Can Do).” But in 2021, Hall signalled he regretted doing so, telling Sky News: “Never sell your publishing - maybe if you’re, you know, 80 years old and you decided to retire, then you can sell your publishing but I wouldn’t even suggest it then. I don’t believe in that concept - it’s all you have.” It is still unclear is whether the dispute centers on the music catalog of Hall & Oates (Hollywood Reporter). - apologies, I don’t hold a law degree and I also don’t know the details and nuances of the music publishing business. So I’m not an expert by any means! The video is a hopefully simplified, digestible version of what is quite a complex case 😊 the aim of this video was to discuss the relationship between the pair, rather than the details of the lawsuit. Right, I’m off for a lie down 😊👍 -Adam
@@a_ya5555 I'd give him 2/3rds to 3/4ths, maybe, but 99%? Oh, no, not even close! Look 'em up; even their biggest hits were collaborative between them and the Allen sisters, and John always had two or more songs per album. And then there's that particular synergy between Daryl and John (at least there used to be) that might never make it to the song credits, but it makes Hall & Oates songs what they are.
Age is not like race. It will get to, you. Make fun of it now, and this will come back to haunt you. I always say, avoid ageism like the plague cos it is equal opportunity.
The Courts are not going to leave Oates trapped in an illiquid partnership interest. He has a right to leave the partnership and any restrictions on his ability to do so must be narrow and reasonable. In the end, Hall will either need to buy him out or approve the sale.
Whatever their business dealings are, I think Daryl Hall is one of the most musically talented people on earth. His "Live from Daryl's House" show really opened my eyes to his talent both as a vocalist and a guitar player. From my understanding he also plays other musical instuments to a very high standard. I was never a big fan of Hall & Oates' music. I didn't think it was bad, it just wasn't my thing.
Daryl , is great he has the ability to sing and play anything. It's ashame that the ego never allows for the talent. That they share together. Because they are great together
Be aware that the restraining order in this case is not the kind of restraining order (prohibiting physical contact or proximity) that many people will be familiar with. It's more like a temporary cease-and-desist - "restraining" Oates from taking further action to sell his shares until things are settled.
Oh I thought we might get a televised Boxing match like Tyson v That UA-cam dude.. 😂. On a serious note it is sad but I can see both sides really. Daryl has his principles while John just probably wants to cash in which is probably understandable.
@@MusicMongoose Credence Clearwater Revival vs John Fogerty, Grand Funk vs Mark Farner, The Eagles vs Don Felder, and most other bands who never really comprehended the legalities of song writing credits during their early and most creative years. "Rock & Roll is a vicious game" - April WIne.
They played in my high school gym in 1976 or “77. Oates went to the same high school and my older sister knew him a little. They were pretty big to play in a high school! This is a sad story.
It is NOT about publishing!!! They sold that TOGETHER 15 years ago to Primary Wave. That isn’t what this is about at all. So frustrating to continually see these uninformed reports. The legal documents are public. Maybe READ them?! Oates was trying to sell the right to “Oates,” as a legal entity. This would include merchandising rights, name and likeness rights, etc. Much, much deeper than “publishing.” If he had succeeded, The legal entity of Hall and Oates would be Hall and Primary Wave! He’d need to get a corporation’s approval to do anything! Do better, people! 🤬
It’s disturbing how any old yahoo can pay for and sit behind a fancy microphone, and everything they say is believed as gospel. So much of this happening, and the blind mouth breathers just lap it up.
They supposedly met while trying to avoid a gang fight. They ditched themselves in an elevator. To go from that to what's happening now is so heartbreaking. I'm from Philadelphia, and my favorite album from them is: "Voices."
"She's Gone" was a minor hit. "Sara Smile" was their breakthrough hit in 1975. Because of Sara Smile's sucess, "She's Gone" was reissued in 1976 and only then peaked at the top 10 Billboard Hot 100.
Blue collar musicians like me don't have much choice. It's easy to say don't sell your rights, but when rent is due and you kid needs health insurance, braces, etc well, sometimes you have to sacrifice possible future earnings to make ends meet in the here and now.
@@JimSuperwhite43 Your situation is probably different than theirs. They are worth 60 and 70 million...It amazes me on how these Celebs. have millions but is never enough!!
Daryl Hall is 77 years old. Cash is a pretty nice nest egg too. Personally I'd never sell, but I can see the logic. Money now, while you can still use it.
These guys are not getting any younger, I'm sure Oats wanted to sell to get some money before either Hall dies or he himself passes. If Hall dies then who knows what happens to Hall's assets, probably best to get it hashed out now while the two are still alive. Hall could actually buy Oats out, that seems like the thing that should happen but maybe price is too high. We will see.
It will become one for the attorneys and accountants, because a few of their hits contained the writing credit of sisters. Sarah Allen and Janna Allen (deceased). "Private Eyes" is credited to Allen, Allen, Hall, and Pash. "I Can't Go for That" is credited to Allen, Allen, and Oates. "Maneater" is credited to Hall, Oates, and S. Allen. "Method of Modern Love" is credited to Hall and J. Allen. So, if there is any selling of any of the catalogs, you will have upwards of 4 different legal representation arguing over their client's rightful shares.
At their age, the point is to try to see that your artistic legacy is respected and that your financial legacy gets directed toward your preferred causes.
@@africkinamerican - They are listed as co-writers. That is the reason why people have fought in court to have their names property added on as co-writers for whenever catalogs are purchased/sold or rights are leased, they can receive their just percentage. So, if the song, "Maneater" is involved with its rights being sold, Sara Allen or her estate, will receive a percentage as 1/3 song writer. And with the Hall & Oates catalog, they have a good bit of recorded songs, but very few are hits, and it's this dozen or so of hits is what this private equity group is willing to pay good money for. It's money that a mid-70 year old John Oates needs to pad his later years. Can't blame the man for wanting to liquidate while he's alive to use it.
@@NoCanDu - It shows many of you lack basic reading compression. What I made very clear is that selling the catalog is going to need time to sort out, because within that catalog are songs written by many different people, with some song a lot more valuable than others. I also said I see nothing wrong with John looking to cash out while he's alive, and for good reasons needing the money. I also said Daryl is in the right to delay the process with John selling his share to an equity group, they can then sell their share out to multiple others to where Daryl owns 1/2, with 7 other people have ownership of the other 50%, causing him legal issues, and actually lose money. Hence the reason why I advised peopke to get off of the emotional part as bout Daryl not seeing him and John as "partners". Now, move the f*ck on. 👉
From what it sounds like, one of them wants to cash out the rights to their music, and the other does not. It's too bad this will probably end their music partnership.
Philadelphia is not only famous for sandwiches and a fleet of stairs like you say , Philly was a true music hub where genres like big band , rhythm & blues , soul , funk and disco originated.
I'm not from there or don't live there, but I always associated Philly with doo-wop, street corner harmony stuff...TSOP? VSOP? Wasn't (isn't) that a 'thing'? Maybe I'm wrong.
@@carlsaganlives5112 I miss Kenny Gamble Leon Huff and Thom Bell.... the Sound of Philadelphia 🎵🎵...strings and horns...unfortunately, on the flip side, they un- knowingly started Disco...Oops!
@@throwaway6062Hi, there! Born and raised Philly native here. The breakfast item you are referring to is: Scrapple (with an S). It’s made from the leftover pork after ham, pork chops, bacon, sausage, etc. are manufactured. In other words: pig scraps, hence the name scrapple. How it’s made is not appetizing at all 😂. But SPAM is not an ingredient in any way, at least not in true Pennsylvania scrapple. As for DH & JO, i’ve been a big fan since the mid-70s; I’ve seen them in concert five times and has just about everything they’ve recorded and put out for consumption. That said, I’m not surprised this happened. I send them good vibes and hope this can somehow be worked out to everyone’s satisfaction.❤
I love Hall and Oats... been a fan sense the 70's. It breaks my heart seeing them at odds with one in other. There music is legendary... loved the world over. I pray the work things out!
@@MusicMongoose since you so easily explained that companies wanting to license the songs would still need Hall's approval I wonder why no one explained it to Oates. Bad actions bring bad results.
Saw H/O about 15 years ago live. Just as good as in their prime. It kills me to hear stuff like this because before I discovered Journey, as a kid, Hall and Oates was my favorite band. When you hear stuff like this going on with your childhood heroes, it's a gut punch. Worst thing is it's not only these two, but I mentioned Journey. They've all lost their minds. They've been suing each other for years. It's a shame.
I saw Hall and Oates in Erie PA back in the 80"s when they were in the prime of their careers. Hit after hit. They were magic together.Hall was the blue eyed soul singer and Oates was the steady musical rock of the group.They were never as good apart with their solo projects , as when they were together.Too sad a fifty year relationship has to end this way.I see both sides of their points of view. Hope they can work it out and create some of their great music again.
I saw them on their last tour as well, it was one of the best shows I’ve seen, and I’m more of a hard rock/metal fan. H2O was the first cassette I ever owned so they will always have a place in my heart.
That's what money does to people. Remember Journey's original lineup? No drama. Not much money, either. Gregg Rolie was set to rejoin the band but didn't because JC threatened to sue him.
In music law, in the case of two writers, both writers own and control 100% of the song, even if one writes the music and the other the lyrics. You don't own half. This is common knowledge in songwriting, but not to Oats apparently. You can make a deal with the other writer to sell a portion of the rights but both have to agree since the song is owned by both.
Great breakdown but missed one key point. Hall & Oates had already years ago sold off a small portion of rights. When that agreement was put in place, they also agreed ( on paper) that neither Hall nor Oates could sell their share without the other's permission. Oates knows he cannot do this, but he did it to snap back at Daryl for his comments on Bill Mahr that " Oates is not my partner" in my opinion. Hall rightfully does not want to be burdened with an unwanted partner, and as much as I have like Oates over the years, on the surface it does look like he was hurt by some of Hall's words and then did this on purpose, timed with Daryl's tour.
@flyingfluffyhockey - "Oates is not my partner" is true about their career in music, and they are the ones who made it very clear what kind of arrangement they sought dating back to the 70's. When "Hall & Oates" are performing as a song creation and song performing unit, they are a partnership. Their feelings and belief was they did not know what kind of success the music industry would grant them, but if they'd gotten the chance, they were going to explore as many opportunities they could before all those doors closed. So, the agreement was they were partners when it came to the act, "Hall & Oates", but outside of that, they were their own isolated entity. But at that time in the early 70's, there were no hits or commercial success until sisters Sarah Allen and Janna Allen came into the picture as song writing collaborators which helped create their most popular songs, "Kiss on My List", "Private Eyes", "Maneater", "Method of Modern Love, notwithstanding lesser-known songs Sarah and Janna are legally recognized as song writing partners of both John and Daryl. So, the success of Hall & Oates is actually the loose partnership of 4 people and not just 2 people.
@@thespadestable I mean I get what you're saying but on the show he said Oates was not his partner, but in his response to what John was trying to do he said it was the ultimate partnership betrayal.... So either he is or is not your partner Daryl? It's always been my opinion that Daryl has felt slighted in that so many other lead singers of groups were able to have significant solo careers while his was not. Just look at his contemporaries whether it would be Sting, Phil Collins, George Michael, Steve Perry , Jon Bon Jovi, hell even David Lee Roth and others to some extent like Rob Thomas, they all left their groups and had much more significant solo careers than he did for the most part and I think that has always bothered him. So I think some of that comes out in his comments about John. Just my opinion
@@flyingfluffyhockey - "Partner/not my partner" is about feelings. "You own 1/3 of this song and will receive $$$$" is about the business of music. This whole thing is about 2 guys who were once in a recording and performing group, "Hall & Oates" who are both a few years shy of 80 years of age, sitting on assets that has an outside venture capital entity willing to help them liquidate it into cash. John wants his cash while he's alive to enjoy it and pay off debts and desires for Daryl to take his feelings out of the equation and help get the ball rolling, because unlike the Blues Brothers....This band ain't getting back together in order to make a couple of dollars on the road.
@@thespadestable It depends on the context it was said. Was he just saying that about a particular album or what he was doing at the time? Obviously, the two have been musical partners for a very long time and are almost synonymous with each other. When people think of their music, they're thinking of the pair. All the other musicians or songwriters that have helped them were important, but came and went. Hall and Oates were the constant.
@@alukuhito - I was around before Hall &Oates really stared clicking with the Blue Eyed Soul, and that's how they presented their partnership. But this was the late 70's. Fast forward, both parties recording careers are done. Daryl has his solo accomplishments, John has his, as the group "Hall & Oates" is has it's own, and now one partner was his retirement money. It's not that complicated to understand. This is John & Daryl; not Gene & Paul.
Hall sounds greedy, like he wants to prevent Oates from cashing in on his hard work and success over the past half century. They're both going to die in the next 30 years or so. Might as well get some of that money.
Devastated,saw them in Bournemouth 1990. Took my breath away. Love them and their music At 57 grew up with their tunes through the late 1970's and 80's x
What's a "long time"? Back in the aughts, Daryl had an album that included his own (quite good) soulful solo cover of "She's Gone." The inclusion of that track would have required the two to have been in agreement at the time, no? Not long before the legal case was announced I saw a video of both performing on stage. Daryl looked a bit older than he appears in "Daryl's House" performances. (He also sounded like he had a head cold and was having trouble tracking the tune of the song, but I digress...) They've ostensibly been on good terms until recent years, as far as I can tell. 🤷
Oats is getting older (like all of us) and was just looking to cash out. Primary Wave was offering good money for the rights, so Oats pursued it for obvious reason. However, as Hall pointed out, the rights extend beyond Oats and they have a written agreement that requires the other's consent to the transfer of any rights (likely granting the opposing partner first right of refusal on the purchase as well). As the video pointed out, I don't see why Primary Wave would want the rights if they can't use the rights to generate any revenue and it obvious Hall would obstruct them as much as possible. I honestly don't know how Oats thought that this would work. Maybe Primary Wave thought that Hall would follow Oats in selling his rights.
I wouldn't call it "good business thinking". If Primary Wave actually understands their own business, I'm sure they would have demanded that both owners of the IP were in agreement. As pointed out, they can't make money if Hall says "no" (which he has every right to do). For them to have moved forward would imply that Oates misrepresented things to PW, which opens Oates to a lawsuit from PW. The court may have blocked the deal, but I have to believe that PW has already pulled out of it (assuming they know what they're doing).
Yup, my thoughts exactly (as someone who owns a Publishing Co. with 40+ years in the biz). I can understand writers hitting a point in life where they figure a lump sum cash in hand is worth more than annual royalty income but the question of artistic integrity is not entirely dead and there are many writers who require the final say on whether their song gets used in an ad for a political party or any product they deem to be 'unsanitary' in one way or another. This is standard when we clear rights from Publishers & Authors on behalf of ad or TV clients and sometimes the answer is 'No'. That said, I imagine in amongst all these 'eye watering' deals that legal on both sides are very clear on terms of usage going forward. Hall & Oates have been favourites of mine ever since 'Abandoned Luncheonette' was released back in the '70s and I still follow Darryl Hall - his 'Live at Home' YT series is magic and the quite recent 'Laughing Down Crying' album shows he is still at the top of his game. It's sad to see something like this, a great shame they couldn't have worked it all out privately before it all went ballistic.
I agree with Hall. No amount of money makes it good. Selling out your share of a pop duo's earnings and then complaining the other party wants to be exclusive just doesn't make sense to me.
Why should I hold on to something just because you want to ? It’s 50/50 so I sell my share and you do with yours as you please … you can choose to get paid for usage … why should I be stuck with something that can earn me money just cause you want to ?
I remember hearing that back in the 90's they tried to make a come-back and nobody in the entertainment business would give them a chance and Darryl got laughed at with that 70's haircut he was still sporting. The Darryl's House channel brought them back from the dead and all of a sudden they were cool again.
I'm a little fed up of reading a headline, clicking to see what it is about and then getting the full history or biography of the artist involved and NOT THE ACTUAL headline story....won't use this again..
It’s called ‘context’ my guy… If you want instant information, I’d recommend Google, not UA-cam. UA-cam is a long-form story telling platform. UA-cam incentivises creators to create long videos and keep viewers watching for as long as possible, so of course we’re going to do just that.
So, a nasty move by Oates, or good business thinking? And if you learnt anything new watching the video (anything at all!!) please do subscribe to the channel 😀
Not an entirely nasty move. Yes he should have spoke with Daryl, and who knows maybe he did and the idea was flat out refused and blown out of proportion. My guess is that John wants to retire and enjoy his time left with no worries or issues. If he sells his work he can just sit back and relax.
If both men were grownups - John could have simply told Daryl WHY he needed the influx in cash and they could have come up with a way to make it work. Daryl - my advice to you is the same as my advice to anyone in cases like this - I wouldn't trade a friendship for something as common as money or pride.
It's really sad: they were friends for 50 years. But Hall has always had the bigger ego so I'm not surprised it has gone this far. Hall, in recent years, has made several statements about their partnership not being equal (as in he was the primary songwriter, and the singer, etc.) so I understand Oates being hurt, angry, and generally over it. As I said, it's just sad. I LOVE Hall & Oates, grew up listening to them, and seen them several times on tour, including, what ended up being their last tour together. 💔
When Hall did his solo album and released Dreamtime in the mid 80s then Oates joined up with the Canadian band Parachute Club to make a solid pop hit Love is Fire, you had to know they were not tight anymore.
Oats has always had financial difficulties over decades ( lack of self control/ bad investments). Seems to be looking for a panacea. Daryl Hall has every right to protect his Assets. Remember Michael Jackson constantly hocking this and that ? Same deal,no self control and manipulated by his family to support them.
@@mckenziecolclough8547First of all, you need to park that nasty attitude, since you don't even know me. Second, to answer your question, look at any interview Daryl Hall has given in the last five years. He said John Oates was his "business partner,. not his creative partner or creative equal." That's ego all day long, never mind completely insulting to your friend of 50 years.
It is very sad from a fan perspective and for them , it has tainted their legacy to a degree, but that is the music business for you. Hall has been less than kind to Oates over the years damning his input and abilities, which begs the question , why didn't he go solo years ago ?
He tried, twice. RCA shelved his 1977 solo album Sacred Songs - and his 1986 solo Three Hearts in the Happy Ending Machine did well, but not spectacularly, coming at the end of H&O's chart run.
1) Hall actually did 4 solo records from late 70s through 90s. 2) As far as I know they had no beef back then -- this seems a more recent development. My conjecture is things worsened during the "pandemic" and accompanying political craziness as was the case for many relationships. I've seen Oates hint at being politically more conservative whereas Hall seems like a diehard liberal, and you know how polarized things have gotten between those two camps. Just my best guess with limited info.
@@africkinamerican Entirely possible. The two solo albums I referred to would have given Hall a relatively early chance to break out of Hall & Oates, and I suspect he would have done so if they'd been big hits. The later solo albums came after the H&O hitmaking period. As far as political tensions go, something similar supposedly happened in Starship, where liberal Mickey Thomas fired his apparently conservative (and more importantly, anti-vax) singer Stephanie Calvert during the pandemic. Or so it seemed.
The name "Hall and Oates" was familiar, and people had heard of them, as they'd had 3 moderate hits in the '70s, but most people didn't know who they were, and couldn't name any of their songs when Kiss on My List, which was very catchy, came out in 1980 and went to no. 1 and suddenly they became big stars and it seemed like they were having a top 10 hit every couple of months. Then, Sara Smile and Rich Girl and She's Gone all got radio revivals and when you heard it announced that those were Hall and Oates songs, you were like "Wow, I remember that song. They've been around that long?"
Hall & Oats were pretty unique when they first came out. Abandoned Luncheonette received a lot of good reviews when it was released in 1973, I bought it and then almost immediately bought their first album, Whole Oats. I saw them in concert in 1975, just as Sara Smile hit the charts, they had a great backing band and when Daryl sat at the edge of the stage to sing Sara, he had the audience eating out of his hand. It was one of the best concerts that I've seen. I lost interest after their third album but over the years, I certainly didn't mind listening to their singles when they came on the radio. After the release of their last album, Daryl has maintained a higher profile than John, his Live At Daryl's House presents some great music. Maybe John needs the money, if so, I can't fault him for trying to sell his share of the music but I don't like the idea of a corporation using an artists music to sell cereal, potato chips or whatever. Maintaining any relationship for fifty years is a fools effort. At first blush it seems that John should have discussed his intentions with his musical partner.
Did you know that celebrities have to pay a fee of almost $75,000 to have a star of their name on the Hollywood Walk of Fame? Paying to boost one's ego. LOL!
I was so sad to hear about this. I absolutely grew up listening to their music and loved seeing them live in concert. I hope they'll he able to work things out and wish them well.
It's a shame. Hall and Oats were great. I met oats in Nashville at a Namm show. He was a dud. Now on to Michael and Paul. Paul could have bought Northern songs any day of the week. Keep in mind he is BEATLE PAUL. Paul wanted a deal, like who is gonna come up with 65 million to 100 million to buy only the early Beatle songs. Also Paul and John both get paid no matter who owns them. So the real truth is Michael just came off of Thriller and he and Sony teamed up and bought the songs. Again ... Paul could have bought them any day he wanted. Those are the real Facts. Michael stold nothing. God I hate how much bad info is out there. Later
It does, two artists write, and sing a hit song. They get royalties when that song is sold (album, cd, streaming), used (tv, commercials, movies, etc), they make money. By selling your half, you agree to a one time payment, you give up your rights to any and all profit from that point on. Hall, may not want his music used for a movie, commercial, etc, but now he has to deal with a conglomerate that will want to make their money back and more. Hall may be content with his current royalty structure along with control over his music. Oates, may not make as much as Hall, may not be as successful, or as good with his money as Hall and wants a payout to ride into the future with. So you can sell your part of your music...
I think that ship sales both ways. I say if that is Darrell‘s position, then John ought to play the same hardball and say fine, no more. Any song that I am a part of and rights to you can no longer publish or use or even play without my permission. If the court rules in Darrell‘s favor, then I would say that is John’s only recourse. So throw the baby out with the bathwater and screw Darrell hard.
Oates was not thrifty with his earlier earnings. I wonder if he didn't learn his lesson and needs some cash again. I think Darryl protected his earnings and is not needing to be bought out. Just a guess though.
Plus Darryl worked when they weren't touring together doing all kinds of different things and John didn't. Now he wants to cash out. Well they are partners and BOTH have to agree. I think it was slimy that Oates did this when Hall was on tour in other countries. I also think that is part of the problem. Darryl is popular without John, but John can't even fill a bar without Darryl.
Easy, ready, willing, overtime, Where does it stop, where do you dare me to draw the line. You've got the body, now you want my soul, Don't even think about it, say no go. I-- I 'll do anything that you want me to do, And I'll do almost anything, that you want me too, ooh, But I can't go for that, (No can do) No, I can't go for that, (No can do) Oh, I can't go for that, (No can do) I can't go for that, can't go for that, can't go for that.
I remember reading on twitter about the news of Hall filing a restraining order against Oates and one guy compared it to macaroni filing a restraining order againt cheese or peanut butter filing a restraining order against jelly. My heart weeped and to this day I pray they both get their shit together. They got cookouts to attend!
The magic of any hit song involves many people. The mix man in the studio, the manager, the scheduler, the supporting musicians and on and on. I never really saw John as a big contributor to the pair so I would take Daryl's side. We still hear music today of what they did as a team in the 1970s. I'm glad that Daryl still makes new MUSIC!
🚨After you watch this, if you fancy something a bit different, give my new video a go: all about the bizarre conspiracy theory that states Paul McCartney actually died in 1966 and was replaced with a double 😲 ua-cam.com/video/2L8Q0t0CuKA/v-deo.html
The amount of talent these two artists have is incredible and it's sad to witness partnerships go bad. I've seen these two gentlemen in concert on 4 occasions and would do it again without hesitation. Thank you for sharing your gift of music. Mr. Hall & Mr. Oats....
I’m in shock I’ve been a massive fan since 1976 when I first saw them live in BIrmingham Odeon New Street , England .. I still Listen to all their music every day 🎉
@@markLawley-g8u that’s cool . I’ve seen more or less every tour since . I wasnt so keen when the tours moved to NEC as hard to get to the front 😂 I never went to last tour as I thought it was way to expensive at the NEC (I know the venue names changed ) and now they have fell out and Daryl has sued John , so I’m guessing they will never tour again. Daryl did tour London as LFDH with Todd Rundgren but wasn’t advertised.
Hall wants to be 99 and still singing those same songs? cash in and write some new songs while the old catalogue is still worth something. Oats knows he isn’t going to live forever, but hall hasn’t figured that out yet.
@Mm-sl1ik - Spoken like someone who has never written a song. Hall is a true musician. I'm sure he'd love to sing the songs he wrote till he's 99. It's stupid to sell your publishing. It's like sell ing your legacy. I'm pretty sure Oates isn't hurting for bucks .
@@margaretedwards1366 im sure that all these old bands that are selling thier catalogue for millions care that YOU think thier stupid...😄😄 btw, no I havent written a song. And , neither have you, that anyone has heard or cares about...😝😝
another great video i recently subbed to your channel you do great work. a great topic for a video would be how billy squiers video for his song rock me tonight literally destroyed his career overnight
Im with Darryl, so was Tom Petty. Its selling out to 'Primary Wave' aka Sony, but I suppose when you get old like Stevie and Bruce and likely have no more hits in you, then its a good retirement. Still selling out. Thats not what true Rockers do.
That’s net worth. Oates might be asset rich and cash poor. If he can go ahead and get himself some big cash and not have to worry, anymore, about managing the business? Just take money and ride off into the sunset.
@@leanidis300 Seems the deal. Hall is doing it, from his comments, on principle Well, I’ve come across a lot of people who are highly principled until the first billing statement from the lawyers comes in.
It could be about estate planning... Sort it out now, by selling and then heirs to the estate when Oats dies won't have to make business decisions about stuff they know nothing about and or lack interest in the business of it all which can be complicated to those not in the music business.
This is kind of a sad thing to think about as so many of Hall and Oates 80s hits were written by or with significant help from loved ones who passed away, namely the two Allen sisters.
My question would be, WHY would John Oats want to sell his portion of it?? Was he low on money, or was the offer from Primary Wave so attractive that he couldn't refuse? And why didn't he talk with Daryl Hall FIRST?! That might have helped, so that maybe it wouldn't have turned into this legal battle, and a sad unfortunate ruination of a long strong friendship/partnership. 😢
Correction/clarification: the lawsuit discussed in this video is referring to Oates’ attempt at selling his remaining portion of Whole Oats Enterprises LLP to music publishing company, Primary Wave. Whole Oats Enterprises controls Hall and Oates‘ trademarks, personal name and likeness rights, record royalty income, and social media and website properties.
A court declaration by Hall shows what kind of valuable Hall & Oates materials Whole Oats Enterprises contains, though it does not describe the value, ownership percentage breakdown or sale price for those materials. The declaration cites materials such as trademarks, personal name and likeness rights, record royalty income and website and social media assets.
Back in February 2007, Primary Wave announced that it had acquired a “significant interest in the song catalog of Daryl Hall & John Oates.” Soon after, the company also bought the copyrights for about 70 songs written by sisters Sara and Janna Allen, including their share of Hall and Oates smashes like “Maneater,” “You Make My Dreams” and “I Can’t Go for That (No Can Do).” But in 2021, Hall signalled he regretted doing so, telling Sky News: “Never sell your publishing - maybe if you’re, you know, 80 years old and you decided to retire, then you can sell your publishing but I wouldn’t even suggest it then. I don’t believe in that concept - it’s all you have.”
It is still unclear is whether the dispute centers on the music catalog of Hall & Oates (Hollywood Reporter).
- apologies, I don’t hold a law degree and I also don’t know the details and nuances of the music publishing business. So I’m not an expert by any means! The video is a hopefully simplified, digestible version of what is quite a complex case 😊 the aim of this video was to discuss the relationship between the pair, rather than the details of the lawsuit.
Right, I’m off for a lie down 😊👍
-Adam
Excellent update! Thank for looking into it further. 🤘
It's a good video, very informative 🙌
Hall wrote 99 percent of the songs. He's a musical genius in voice, keyboards, and phenomenal dancer too.
I understand when Hall found out about Oates plans, he sang "I can't go for that".😂
@@a_ya5555 I'd give him 2/3rds to 3/4ths, maybe, but 99%? Oh, no, not even close! Look 'em up; even their biggest hits were collaborative between them and the Allen sisters, and John always had two or more songs per album. And then there's that particular synergy between Daryl and John (at least there used to be) that might never make it to the song credits, but it makes Hall & Oates songs what they are.
Human nature never fails to disappoint.
Yes Human Nature are still together and performing in Las Vegas. 😊🇭🇲👍
so true. nothing is surprising to me when it comes to people - its a known fact to me that things will go wrong * can go wrong.
GREED!
Divorce rate 50% so.......
This is like your grandparents announcing they're getting divorced at age 75. 😞
best analogy ever.
Because your dentures are on my list.
Age is not like race. It will get to, you. Make fun of it now, and this will come back to haunt you. I always say, avoid ageism like the plague cos it is equal opportunity.
Get that completely 😢
Yeah right?
"Rich girl" played on every tiny little FM radio player we had in the 70's.
Huge fan of their music. I've seen them 3 times in concert. RIP Hall and Oates Partnership. Sad, Sad, Sad
They touched a lot of lives through their music, for over 3 decades! It is sad.
BEEN AN BIG FAN SINCE THE 70's. JUST DUMB!
@@onegenius6390 They only had 2 or 3 good songs in their entire career.
The soundtrack of me entering adulthood. Hall and Oates ❤
One party can't make such a move without the other's approval. It's just that simple.
The Courts are not going to leave Oates trapped in an illiquid partnership interest. He has a right to leave the partnership and any restrictions on his ability to do so must be narrow and reasonable. In the end, Hall will either need to buy him out or approve the sale.
Whatever their business dealings are, I think Daryl Hall is one of the most musically talented people on earth. His "Live from Daryl's House" show really opened my eyes to his talent both as a vocalist and a guitar player. From my understanding he also plays other musical instuments to a very high standard. I was never a big fan of Hall & Oates' music. I didn't think it was bad, it just wasn't my thing.
He’s on the same level with Fagan of Steely Dan.
Opened my eyes too.
also did backup for The Temptations
Daryl , is great he has the ability to sing and play anything. It's ashame that the ego never allows for the talent. That they share together. Because they are great together
At Darryl's house...Check out the one he did with Todd Rundgren "Can we still be friends"
awesome song performance
Be aware that the restraining order in this case is not the kind of restraining order (prohibiting physical contact or proximity) that many people will be familiar with. It's more like a temporary cease-and-desist - "restraining" Oates from taking further action to sell his shares until things are settled.
Duh
Really ? You don’t say … 😂😂😂
Oh I thought we might get a televised Boxing match like Tyson v That UA-cam dude.. 😂.
On a serious note it is sad but I can see both sides really. Daryl has his principles while John just probably wants to cash in which is probably understandable.
The history of Rock & Roll bands is littered with conflicts over song writing rights ( that reads money ) so Hall & Oates have just joined the club.
Very true! Sad really isn’t it… Can’t think of any legal battles over the selling of publishing rights like H&O though, can you?
@@MusicMongoose Credence Clearwater Revival vs John Fogerty, Grand Funk vs Mark Farner, The Eagles vs Don Felder, and most other bands who never really comprehended the legalities of song writing credits during their early and most creative years. "Rock & Roll is a vicious game" - April WIne.
You know your stuff!
This
I'm surprised Mike Love isn't suing them yet because he was once in the same building as them.
They played in my high school gym in 1976 or “77. Oates went to the same high school and my older sister knew him a little. They were pretty big to play in a high school! This is a sad story.
It is NOT about publishing!!! They sold that TOGETHER 15 years ago to Primary Wave. That isn’t what this is about at all. So frustrating to continually see these uninformed reports. The legal documents are public. Maybe READ them?! Oates was trying to sell the right to “Oates,” as a legal entity. This would include merchandising rights, name and likeness rights, etc. Much, much deeper than “publishing.” If he had succeeded, The legal entity of Hall and Oates would be Hall and Primary Wave! He’d need to get a corporation’s approval to do anything! Do better, people! 🤬
Thank you
Thank you
Where can you read these?
It’s disturbing how any old yahoo can pay for and sit behind a fancy microphone, and everything they say is believed as gospel. So much of this happening, and the blind mouth breathers just lap it up.
@@carladean0317 Sorry, I’ve posted links, names and dates of the newspaper article with links, etc. and every single post has been removed! 🤦🏼♀️
They supposedly met while trying to avoid a gang fight. They ditched themselves in an elevator. To go from that to what's happening now is so heartbreaking.
I'm from Philadelphia, and my favorite album from them is: "Voices."
She’s gone from Abandoned Lunchenett was they’re first hit
"She's Gone" was a minor hit.
"Sara Smile" was their breakthrough hit in 1975. Because of Sara Smile's sucess, "She's Gone" was reissued in 1976 and only then peaked at the top 10 Billboard Hot 100.
She's Gone
is absolutely brilliant
@@gustavomarques4097 She's Gone hit #7 when it was re-released after Sara Smile. Not minor at all.
Exactly.
She's Gone was a regional hit first in the Phila area, but Sara Smile was their first national hit.@@0mega.mechan1c.
Never sell your rights. They're your nest eggs when you're retired, and your legacies to hand your families when you're gone.
Blue collar musicians like me don't have much choice. It's easy to say don't sell your rights, but when rent is due and you kid needs health insurance, braces, etc well, sometimes you have to sacrifice possible future earnings to make ends meet in the here and now.
@@JimSuperwhite43 Your situation is probably different than theirs. They are worth 60 and 70 million...It amazes me on how these Celebs. have millions but is never enough!!
"Never sell your rights. They're your nest eggs' TO SELL! Huh? Du-uh... the dumbest collection of words to use. "Never" is a long long time.
Sadly this is very popular cashout. Major artist do this Jackson sold Weta he made $600 million.
Daryl Hall is 77 years old. Cash is a pretty nice nest egg too. Personally I'd never sell, but I can see the logic. Money now, while you can still use it.
These guys are not getting any younger, I'm sure Oats wanted to sell to get some money before either Hall dies or he himself passes. If Hall dies then who knows what happens to Hall's assets, probably best to get it hashed out now while the two are still alive. Hall could actually buy Oats out, that seems like the thing that should happen but maybe price is too high. We will see.
It will become one for the attorneys and accountants, because a few of their hits contained the writing credit of sisters. Sarah Allen and Janna Allen (deceased). "Private Eyes" is credited to Allen, Allen, Hall, and Pash. "I Can't Go for That" is credited to Allen, Allen, and Oates. "Maneater" is credited to Hall, Oates, and S. Allen. "Method of Modern Love" is credited to Hall and J. Allen.
So, if there is any selling of any of the catalogs, you will have upwards of 4 different legal representation arguing over their client's rightful shares.
At their age, the point is to try to see that your artistic legacy is respected and that your financial legacy gets directed toward your preferred causes.
@@thespadestableI wouldn't be surprised if the Allen sisters/estate shares had already been bought out by the partnership.
@@africkinamerican -
They are listed as co-writers. That is the reason why people have fought in court to have their names property added on as co-writers for whenever catalogs are purchased/sold or rights are leased, they can receive their just percentage.
So, if the song, "Maneater" is involved with its rights being sold, Sara Allen or her estate, will receive a percentage as 1/3 song writer.
And with the Hall & Oates catalog, they have a good bit of recorded songs, but very few are hits, and it's this dozen or so of hits is what this private equity group is willing to pay good money for. It's money that a mid-70 year old John Oates needs to pad his later years.
Can't blame the man for wanting to liquidate while he's alive to use it.
@@NoCanDu -
It shows many of you lack basic reading compression. What I made very clear is that selling the catalog is going to need time to sort out, because within that catalog are songs written by many different people, with some song a lot more valuable than others.
I also said I see nothing wrong with John looking to cash out while he's alive, and for good reasons needing the money. I also said Daryl is in the right to delay the process with John selling his share to an equity group, they can then sell their share out to multiple others to where Daryl owns 1/2, with 7 other people have ownership of the other 50%, causing him legal issues, and actually lose money.
Hence the reason why I advised peopke to get off of the emotional part as bout Daryl not seeing him and John as "partners".
Now, move the f*ck on. 👉
From what it sounds like, one of them wants to cash out the rights to their music, and the other does not. It's too bad this will probably end their music partnership.
Philadelphia is not only famous for sandwiches and a fleet of stairs like you say , Philly was a true music hub where genres like big band , rhythm & blues , soul , funk and disco originated.
I'm not from there or don't live there, but I always associated Philly with doo-wop, street corner harmony stuff...TSOP? VSOP? Wasn't (isn't) that a 'thing'? Maybe I'm wrong.
I believe that's a, "flight", of stairs.🤔
Not to mention being the virtual birthplace of the United States of America. But I can see how that'd be a side note. 🤪
@@carlsaganlives5112 I miss Kenny Gamble Leon Huff and Thom Bell.... the Sound of Philadelphia 🎵🎵...strings and horns...unfortunately, on the flip side, they un- knowingly started Disco...Oops!
@@throwaway6062Hi, there! Born and raised Philly native here. The breakfast item you are referring to is: Scrapple (with an S). It’s made from the leftover pork after ham, pork chops, bacon, sausage, etc. are manufactured. In other words: pig scraps, hence the name scrapple.
How it’s made is not appetizing at all 😂.
But SPAM is not an ingredient in any way, at least not in true Pennsylvania scrapple.
As for DH & JO, i’ve been a big fan since the mid-70s; I’ve seen them in concert five times and has just about everything they’ve recorded and put out for consumption. That said, I’m not surprised this happened.
I send them good vibes and hope this can somehow be worked out to everyone’s satisfaction.❤
I love Hall and Oats... been a fan sense the 70's. It breaks my heart seeing them at odds with one in other. There music is legendary... loved the world over. I pray the work things out!
Needed to speak with Daryl prior to pursuing such a proposal. Betrayal.
Have you never seen an Oates interview?? Such a low key nice guy.
GREED MAKE YOU DO STUPID STUFF.
@@onegenius6390How is wanting to sell the rights to HIS likeness GREED??
In a age where seemingly things have gone awry it makes sense and comes as no surprise.I will always be a fan Hall & Oats forever.
Saw them in Lincoln Center NYC in March 1974. They were the opening act for the (pre-disco) Bee Gees.
I was waiting for someone to make a video explaining what is going on here. Thank you.
Glad it was helpful!
@@MusicMongoose since you so easily explained that companies wanting to license the songs would still need Hall's approval I wonder why no one explained it to Oates. Bad actions bring bad results.
You better read the pinned comment. He got a lot wrong with the video.
Saw H/O about 15 years ago live. Just as good as in their prime. It kills me to hear stuff like this because before I discovered Journey, as a kid, Hall and Oates was my favorite band. When you hear stuff like this going on with your childhood heroes, it's a gut punch.
Worst thing is it's not only these two, but I mentioned Journey. They've all lost their minds. They've been suing each other for years. It's a shame.
Journey..you can thank the keyboard man who married the trump wife psycho for blowing the band chemistry and relationships up.
Like yourself, I'm a big fan of Journey, and am deeply sad about the band's rift.
I saw Hall and Oates in Erie PA back in the 80"s when they were in the prime of their careers. Hit after hit. They were magic together.Hall was the blue eyed soul singer and Oates was the steady musical rock of the group.They were never as good apart with their solo projects , as when they were together.Too sad a fifty year relationship has to end this way.I see both sides of their points of view. Hope they can work it out and create some of their great music again.
I saw them on their last tour as well, it was one of the best shows I’ve seen, and I’m more of a hard rock/metal fan. H2O was the first cassette I ever owned so they will always have a place in my heart.
That's what money does to people. Remember Journey's original lineup? No drama. Not much money, either. Gregg Rolie was set to rejoin the band but didn't because JC threatened to sue him.
In music law, in the case of two writers, both writers own and control 100% of the song, even if one writes the music and the other the lyrics. You don't own half. This is common knowledge in songwriting, but not to Oats apparently. You can make a deal with the other writer to sell a portion of the rights but both have to agree since the song is owned by both.
Damn shame.. I hope it'll all work out.
ITS TOO LATE. SO SAD.
Great breakdown but missed one key point. Hall & Oates had already years ago sold off a small portion of rights. When that agreement was put in place, they also agreed ( on paper) that neither Hall nor Oates could sell their share without the other's permission. Oates knows he cannot do this, but he did it to snap back at Daryl for his comments on Bill Mahr that " Oates is not my partner" in my opinion. Hall rightfully does not want to be burdened with an unwanted partner, and as much as I have like Oates over the years, on the surface it does look like he was hurt by some of Hall's words and then did this on purpose, timed with Daryl's tour.
@flyingfluffyhockey -
"Oates is not my partner" is true about their career in music, and they are the ones who made it very clear what kind of arrangement they sought dating back to the 70's. When "Hall & Oates" are performing as a song creation and song performing unit, they are a partnership. Their feelings and belief was they did not know what kind of success the music industry would grant them, but if they'd gotten the chance, they were going to explore as many opportunities they could before all those doors closed. So, the agreement was they were partners when it came to the act, "Hall & Oates", but outside of that, they were their own isolated entity.
But at that time in the early 70's, there were no hits or commercial success until sisters Sarah Allen and Janna Allen came into the picture as song writing collaborators which helped create their most popular songs, "Kiss on My List", "Private Eyes", "Maneater", "Method of Modern Love, notwithstanding lesser-known songs Sarah and Janna are legally recognized as song writing partners of both John and Daryl.
So, the success of Hall & Oates is actually the loose partnership of 4 people and not just 2 people.
@@thespadestable I mean I get what you're saying but on the show he said Oates was not his partner, but in his response to what John was trying to do he said it was the ultimate partnership betrayal.... So either he is or is not your partner Daryl? It's always been my opinion that Daryl has felt slighted in that so many other lead singers of groups were able to have significant solo careers while his was not. Just look at his contemporaries whether it would be Sting, Phil Collins, George Michael, Steve Perry , Jon Bon Jovi, hell even David Lee Roth and others to some extent like Rob Thomas, they all left their groups and had much more significant solo careers than he did for the most part and I think that has always bothered him. So I think some of that comes out in his comments about John. Just my opinion
@@flyingfluffyhockey -
"Partner/not my partner" is about feelings. "You own 1/3 of this song and will receive $$$$" is about the business of music.
This whole thing is about 2 guys who were once in a recording and performing group, "Hall & Oates" who are both a few years shy of 80 years of age, sitting on assets that has an outside venture capital entity willing to help them liquidate it into cash. John wants his cash while he's alive to enjoy it and pay off debts and desires for Daryl to take his feelings out of the equation and help get the ball rolling, because unlike the Blues Brothers....This band ain't getting back together in order to make a couple of dollars on the road.
@@thespadestable It depends on the context it was said. Was he just saying that about a particular album or what he was doing at the time? Obviously, the two have been musical partners for a very long time and are almost synonymous with each other. When people think of their music, they're thinking of the pair. All the other musicians or songwriters that have helped them were important, but came and went. Hall and Oates were the constant.
@@alukuhito -
I was around before Hall &Oates really stared clicking with the Blue Eyed Soul, and that's how they presented their partnership. But this was the late 70's. Fast forward, both parties recording careers are done. Daryl has his solo accomplishments, John has his, as the group "Hall & Oates" is has it's own, and now one partner was his retirement money. It's not that complicated to understand. This is John & Daryl; not Gene & Paul.
They are a partnership.
Oates should have ok'ed it with Hall first. Sorted it out.
Hall is is in the right here.
What does their agreement say? It should say whether permission is needed or not. It should also say if Hall has a right of first refusal.
Hall sounds greedy, like he wants to prevent Oates from cashing in on his hard work and success over the past half century. They're both going to die in the next 30 years or so. Might as well get some of that money.
when i eventually heard John Oates voice i was amazed at how brilliant he was.
He once humorously referred to himself as the “best paid backup singer in history”
listen to the entire Big Bam Boom album and you'll hear that Oates was in stellar form, vocally
I’m so glad you put Wallace and Gromit in there. I love W&G.
Cracking video Gromit!
@@MusicMongoose I see what you did there. 🤣
Devastated,saw them in Bournemouth 1990.
Took my breath away.
Love them and their music At 57 grew up with their tunes through the late 1970's and 80's x
Me too.
They’ve been at odds for a long time now, this is really no surprise.
What's a "long time"? Back in the aughts, Daryl had an album that included his own (quite good) soulful solo cover of "She's Gone." The inclusion of that track would have required the two to have been in agreement at the time, no? Not long before the legal case was announced I saw a video of both performing on stage. Daryl looked a bit older than he appears in "Daryl's House" performances. (He also sounded like he had a head cold and was having trouble tracking the tune of the song, but I digress...) They've ostensibly been on good terms until recent years, as far as I can tell. 🤷
"Say it isn't so." 🎶
You are perfect and I am jealous. I was just listening to this song too.
@@weloveangel509 Huge Hall & Oats fan here. That's the first thing that popped in my head. They were perfect together. 🎶
It’s the lawyers that turn people against each other
They do-I’ll never speak to my piece of shit sisters EVER
Those parasites win either way …
That's too simple. There are dynamics in play here, before the lawyers, mainly, two different belief systems towards the catalog.
Yeah it’s not the issue that causes the madness!!! And that issue is money!! 💴
@@joeybonin7691right
Oats is getting older (like all of us) and was just looking to cash out. Primary Wave was offering good money for the rights, so Oats pursued it for obvious reason. However, as Hall pointed out, the rights extend beyond Oats and they have a written agreement that requires the other's consent to the transfer of any rights (likely granting the opposing partner first right of refusal on the purchase as well). As the video pointed out, I don't see why Primary Wave would want the rights if they can't use the rights to generate any revenue and it obvious Hall would obstruct them as much as possible. I honestly don't know how Oats thought that this would work. Maybe Primary Wave thought that Hall would follow Oats in selling his rights.
So they are no longer in touch? Out of touch even?
But, are they out of time?
I wouldn't call it "good business thinking". If Primary Wave actually understands their own business, I'm sure they would have demanded that both owners of the IP were in agreement. As pointed out, they can't make money if Hall says "no" (which he has every right to do). For them to have moved forward would imply that Oates misrepresented things to PW, which opens Oates to a lawsuit from PW. The court may have blocked the deal, but I have to believe that PW has already pulled out of it (assuming they know what they're doing).
Totally agree with you there!
Yup, my thoughts exactly (as someone who owns a Publishing Co. with 40+ years in the biz). I can understand writers hitting a point in life where they figure a lump sum cash in hand is worth more than annual royalty income but the question of artistic integrity is not entirely dead and there are many writers who require the final say on whether their song gets used in an ad for a political party or any product they deem to be 'unsanitary' in one way or another. This is standard when we clear rights from Publishers & Authors on behalf of ad or TV clients and sometimes the answer is 'No'. That said, I imagine in amongst all these 'eye watering' deals that legal on both sides are very clear on terms of usage going forward. Hall & Oates have been favourites of mine ever since 'Abandoned Luncheonette' was released back in the '70s and I still follow Darryl Hall - his 'Live at Home' YT series is magic and the quite recent 'Laughing Down Crying' album shows he is still at the top of his game. It's sad to see something like this, a great shame they couldn't have worked it all out privately before it all went ballistic.
Sara smile was such a 70's banger. It still has that aethetic when you here it, I almost imagine everything transforming right before by eyes!
I agree with Hall. No amount of money makes it good. Selling out your share of a pop duo's earnings and then complaining the other party wants to be exclusive just doesn't make sense to me.
Why should I hold on to something just because you want to ? It’s 50/50 so I sell my share and you do with yours as you please … you can choose to get paid for usage … why should I be stuck with something that can earn me money just cause you want to ?
I grew up listening to Hall and Oates and it’s shocking how far their friendship has fallen.
I believe that as you get older it's smart to sell your catalog of music and live the rest of your life in comfort.
I remember hearing that back in the 90's they tried to make a come-back and nobody in the entertainment business would give them a chance and Darryl got laughed at with that 70's haircut he was still sporting. The Darryl's House channel brought them back from the dead and all of a sudden they were cool again.
I'm a little fed up of reading a headline, clicking to see what it is about and then getting the full history or biography of the artist involved and NOT THE ACTUAL headline story....won't use this again..
It’s called ‘context’ my guy… If you want instant information, I’d recommend Google, not UA-cam. UA-cam is a long-form story telling platform. UA-cam incentivises creators to create long videos and keep viewers watching for as long as possible, so of course we’re going to do just that.
Thank you!
Happy to learn the rest of the story. I’m definitely on team Hall
So, a nasty move by Oates, or good business thinking? And if you learnt anything new watching the video (anything at all!!) please do subscribe to the channel 😀
Not an entirely nasty move. Yes he should have spoke with Daryl, and who knows maybe he did and the idea was flat out refused and blown out of proportion. My guess is that John wants to retire and enjoy his time left with no worries or issues. If he sells his work he can just sit back and relax.
If both men were grownups - John could have simply told Daryl WHY he needed the influx in cash and they could have come up with a way to make it work. Daryl - my advice to you is the same as my advice to anyone in cases like this - I wouldn't trade a friendship for something as common as money or pride.
Clearly not good business thinking since it resulted in lawsuits, a blocked sale, and a very public falling out.
Loved their music in the eighties!!!
I saw John Oates perform at the Cabot a few weeks ago and it was great. These two need to bury the hatchet and get back to making music together.
It's really sad: they were friends for 50 years. But Hall has always had the bigger ego so I'm not surprised it has gone this far. Hall, in recent years, has made several statements about their partnership not being equal (as in he was the primary songwriter, and the singer, etc.) so I understand Oates being hurt, angry, and generally over it. As I said, it's just sad. I LOVE Hall & Oates, grew up listening to them, and seen them several times on tour, including, what ended up being their last tour together. 💔
When Hall did his solo album and released Dreamtime in the mid 80s then Oates joined up with the Canadian band Parachute Club to make a solid pop hit Love is Fire, you had to know they were not tight anymore.
Oats has always had financial difficulties over decades ( lack of self control/ bad investments). Seems to be looking for a panacea. Daryl Hall has every right to protect his Assets. Remember Michael Jackson constantly hocking this and that ? Same deal,no self control and manipulated by his family to support them.
How do you know that hall had the bigger ego? What is that based on?
@@mckenziecolclough8547First of all, you need to park that nasty attitude, since you don't even know me. Second, to answer your question, look at any interview Daryl Hall has given in the last five years. He said John Oates was his "business partner,. not his creative partner or creative equal." That's ego all day long, never mind completely insulting to your friend of 50 years.
John wanted to sell their catalog, I don't blame Daryl for suing him. When you sell your catalog people own you
It is very sad from a fan perspective and for them , it has tainted their legacy to a degree, but that is the music business for you. Hall has been less than kind to Oates over the years damning his input and abilities, which begs the question , why didn't he go solo years ago ?
He tried, twice. RCA shelved his 1977 solo album Sacred Songs - and his 1986 solo Three Hearts in the Happy Ending Machine did well, but not spectacularly, coming at the end of H&O's chart run.
1) Hall actually did 4 solo records from late 70s through 90s. 2) As far as I know they had no beef back then -- this seems a more recent development. My conjecture is things worsened during the "pandemic" and accompanying political craziness as was the case for many relationships. I've seen Oates hint at being politically more conservative whereas Hall seems like a diehard liberal, and you know how polarized things have gotten between those two camps.
Just my best guess with limited info.
@@africkinamerican Entirely possible. The two solo albums I referred to would have given Hall a relatively early chance to break out of Hall & Oates, and I suspect he would have done so if they'd been big hits. The later solo albums came after the H&O hitmaking period.
As far as political tensions go, something similar supposedly happened in Starship, where liberal Mickey Thomas fired his apparently conservative (and more importantly, anti-vax) singer Stephanie Calvert during the pandemic. Or so it seemed.
The name "Hall and Oates" was familiar, and people had heard of them, as they'd had 3 moderate hits in the '70s, but most people didn't know who they were, and couldn't name any of their songs when Kiss on My List, which was very catchy, came out in 1980 and went to no. 1 and suddenly they became big stars and it seemed like they were having a top 10 hit every couple of months. Then, Sara Smile and Rich Girl and She's Gone all got radio revivals and when you heard it announced that those were Hall and Oates songs, you were like "Wow, I remember that song. They've been around that long?"
But...if you have a partnership agreement whereby one partner cannot sell without the other's consent. They had an agreement.
Love watching live at darrylls place
Hall & Oats were pretty unique when they first came out. Abandoned Luncheonette received a lot of good reviews when it was released in 1973, I bought it and then almost immediately bought their first album, Whole Oats. I saw them in concert in 1975, just as Sara Smile hit the charts, they had a great backing band and when Daryl sat at the edge of the stage to sing Sara, he had the audience eating out of his hand. It was one of the best concerts that I've seen. I lost interest after their third album but over the years, I certainly didn't mind listening to their singles when they came on the radio.
After the release of their last album, Daryl has maintained a higher profile than John, his Live At Daryl's House presents some great music. Maybe John needs the money, if so, I can't fault him for trying to sell his share of the music but I don't like the idea of a corporation using an artists music to sell cereal, potato chips or whatever. Maintaining any relationship for fifty years is a fools effort. At first blush it seems that John should have discussed his intentions with his musical partner.
I Stand with Daryl Hall!🙏💕🤗🥰
Did you know that celebrities have to pay a fee of almost $75,000 to have a star of their name on the Hollywood Walk of Fame? Paying to boost one's ego. LOL!
I was so sad to hear about this. I absolutely grew up listening to their music and loved seeing them live in concert. I hope they'll he able to work things out and wish them well.
I feel bad for Daryl Hall's son he never would recognize. As his son
He Tried 🙄 His Son Is An Asshole 😒 Look It Up 🤔👌
Hall is right, it is amazing that artist who have money sell their catalogs
It's a shame. Hall and Oats were great. I met oats in Nashville at a Namm show. He was a dud. Now on to Michael and Paul. Paul could have bought Northern songs any day of the week. Keep in mind he is BEATLE PAUL. Paul wanted a deal, like who is gonna come up with 65 million to 100 million to buy only the early Beatle songs. Also Paul and John both get paid no matter who owns them. So the real truth is Michael just came off of Thriller and he and Sony teamed up and bought the songs. Again ... Paul could have bought them any day he wanted. Those are the real Facts. Michael stold nothing. God I hate how much bad info is out there.
Later
Oates is capable of better performances, I feel, but probably doesn't get enough constructive critique.
As Paul said John and I got them for free
How would Oates only sell his HALF of publishing rights....? That makes no sense.......
Happens all the time with intellectual property.
How do you figure that? They would get 50% and Hall would get 50%.
@@ralphiecifaretto8961 but Hall won't sell ... so it kind of makes that "property" useless.
It does, two artists write, and sing a hit song. They get royalties when that song is sold (album, cd, streaming), used (tv, commercials, movies, etc), they make money. By selling your half, you agree to a one time payment, you give up your rights to any and all profit from that point on. Hall, may not want his music used for a movie, commercial, etc, but now he has to deal with a conglomerate that will want to make their money back and more. Hall may be content with his current royalty structure along with control over his music. Oates, may not make as much as Hall, may not be as successful, or as good with his money as Hall and wants a payout to ride into the future with. So you can sell your part of your music...
@@RichardGutierrezRGbut if one won't sell there is NO "product"...... how will you use half a song..?
I think that ship sales both ways. I say if that is Darrell‘s position, then John ought to play the same hardball and say fine, no more. Any song that I am a part of and rights to you can no longer publish or use or even play without my permission. If the court rules in Darrell‘s favor, then I would say that is John’s only recourse. So throw the baby out with the bathwater and screw Darrell hard.
Oates was not thrifty with his earlier earnings. I wonder if he didn't learn his lesson and needs some cash again. I think Darryl protected his earnings and is not needing to be bought out. Just a guess though.
Plus Darryl worked when they weren't touring together doing all kinds of different things and John didn't. Now he wants to cash out. Well they are partners and BOTH have to agree. I think it was slimy that Oates did this when Hall was on tour in other countries. I also think that is part of the problem. Darryl is popular without John, but John can't even fill a bar without Darryl.
I can’t go for that!
No can do
Noooooooo
Hey Mongoose! You not only should do your homework and provide an update seeing how there is a 2024 Hall & Oates tour going on right now.
You left out Philly "The City of Brotherly Love!" Not that it's like that anymore!
Philadelphia sports fans are the worst and have zero class !!!!
Oates was the cute one to me. met him once in the Village, lovely man.
Hall is jealous of Oates’ mustache.
Or misses his stach
Easy, ready, willing, overtime,
Where does it stop, where do
you dare me to draw the line.
You've got the body,
now you want my soul,
Don't even think about it, say no go.
I-- I 'll do anything
that you want me to do,
And I'll do almost anything,
that you want me too, ooh,
But I can't go for that, (No can do)
No, I can't go for that, (No can do)
Oh, I can't go for that, (No can do)
I can't go for that, can't go
for that, can't go for that.
Apt, considering that song is about the music industry.
I love Darryl Hall however, It is easy to have principals when you are sitting on piles of cash. John Oates just wants some of the good life too.
I remember reading on twitter about the news of Hall filing a restraining order against Oates and one guy compared it to macaroni filing a restraining order againt cheese or peanut butter filing a restraining order against jelly. My heart weeped and to this day I pray they both get their shit together. They got cookouts to attend!
Money destroys everything
Money --destroys-- Changes Everything
(If you don't know ... see Soul Alone )
@@africkinamerican Cindy Lauper would approve of that edit...
The magic of any hit song involves many people. The mix man in the studio, the manager, the scheduler, the supporting musicians and on and on.
I never really saw John as a big contributor to the pair so I would take Daryl's side. We still hear music today of what they did as a team in the 1970s. I'm glad that Daryl still makes new MUSIC!
Dude, Oats was behind the structure of the songs. Hall was the voice and musician. Oats was the composer.
John Oates wrote the choruses to "Maneater", "She's Gone" and "Out of Touch" though. Their biggest hits.
At their age you would think they might grow up
They're musicians though.
At this age though, the money comes out of the publishing. The hit records aren't coming anymore, and the stadium sellouts are behind them.
Yep, I wonder what they want their legacy is going to be@@ms8596
They always seemed immature 😅
Oates: I wanna sell my shares
Hall: I cant go for that no noooooohhh, no can do...
🚨After you watch this, if you fancy something a bit different, give my new video a go: all about the bizarre conspiracy theory that states Paul McCartney actually died in 1966 and was replaced with a double 😲
ua-cam.com/video/2L8Q0t0CuKA/v-deo.html
The amount of talent these two artists have is incredible and it's sad to witness partnerships go bad.
I've seen these two gentlemen in concert on 4 occasions and would do it again without hesitation.
Thank you for sharing your gift of music. Mr. Hall & Mr. Oats....
At his age why wouldn’t he want to sell his rights can’t blame him
hall just needs to buy him out
I’m in shock I’ve been a massive fan since 1976 when I first saw them live in BIrmingham Odeon New Street , England .. I still
Listen to all their music every day 🎉
I went to that concert also then had a tattoo on my arm saying Hall & Oates
@@markLawley-g8u that’s cool . I’ve seen more or less every tour since .
I wasnt so keen when the tours moved to NEC as hard to get to the front 😂
I never went to last tour as I thought it was way to expensive at the NEC (I know the venue names changed ) and now they have fell out and Daryl has sued John , so I’m guessing they will never tour again. Daryl did tour London as LFDH with Todd Rundgren but wasn’t advertised.
I can’t go for that no no no can do I can’t for that😎
Bottom line he shouldn’t have tried to move ahead without Darryl’s approval…it’s sad…I see both sides….truly complicated
I am with Daryl!
No way. They have the chance to make a lot of money now. All that hard work and success. Oates deserves tons more money than he currently has.
i’m with Darrell on this one I hope Darrell and John Mend the long friendship
Hall wants to be 99 and still singing those same songs? cash in and write some new songs while the old catalogue is still worth something. Oats knows he isn’t going to live forever, but hall hasn’t figured that out yet.
@Mm-sl1ik - Spoken like someone who has never written a song. Hall is a true musician. I'm sure he'd love to sing the songs he wrote till he's 99.
It's stupid to sell your publishing. It's like sell ing your legacy. I'm pretty sure Oates isn't hurting for bucks .
@@margaretedwards1366 im sure that all these old bands that are selling thier catalogue for millions care that YOU think thier stupid...😄😄 btw, no I havent written a song. And , neither have you, that anyone has heard or cares about...😝😝
another great video i recently subbed to your channel you do great work. a great topic for a video would be how billy squiers video for his song rock me tonight literally destroyed his career overnight
I’ll look into it. Thanks for the kind words!
@@MusicMongoose if you dont know the story its unreal what happened to billy sad really he is great musician
Sheeeeshhhh!! Not since Martin and Lewis!
Funny. So who's Jerry and who's Dean?
@@marjoriepreston8546 I Don’t know, i was thinking Hall was Martin since Hall is quite a crooner😂
I love Hall and Oates!!! Great hits like Kiss On My List, Don't Hold Back Your love, So Far, I Can't Go For That, Rich Girl, out of time etc
Who cares about millionaires bitching
Celebrity gossip.
If Hall is so against this move, (understandable), he should step up and buy Oates out.
Im with Darryl, so was Tom Petty. Its selling out to 'Primary Wave' aka Sony, but I suppose when you get old like Stevie and Bruce and likely have no more hits in you, then its a good retirement. Still selling out. Thats not what true Rockers do.
As a true rocker in the biz I’m quite curious what would the TRUE ROCKERS DO?
So sad...could never imagine something like this could happen so late in people's life....
These music rights laywers are like vampires that only come out at night. You really need to watch out or they'll chew you up.
I'm divorcing my mustache too.
Baba Boohey!!! 😂😂😂
millionaires fighting over money - yawn. It is very common. They have few precious years left, they should both grow up.
Yes it’s ultimate betrayal, they still will need Hall’s OK, He could’ve sold them to Hall
I checked and it shows Oats net worth @ 60 million and Hall's @70 Million So, it seems doubtful that Oats needed the money, but who knows?
That’s net worth. Oates might be asset rich and cash poor. If he can go ahead and get himself some big cash and not have to worry, anymore, about managing the business?
Just take money and ride off into the sunset.
@@conorlaurenYeah, if he needs thecash why not sell his share but, sounds like Hall is blocking the deal?
@@leanidis300
Seems the deal. Hall is doing it, from his comments, on principle
Well, I’ve come across a lot of people who are highly principled until the first billing statement from the lawyers comes in.
It could be about estate planning... Sort it out now, by selling and then heirs to the estate when Oats dies won't have to make business decisions about stuff they know nothing about and or lack interest in the business of it all which can be complicated to those not in the music business.
@@paintmonster1I can see that, I don't see why Hall needs to block the sale of Oats's share? I say let him sell whats rightly his.
This is kind of a sad thing to think about as so many of Hall and Oates 80s hits were written by or with significant help from loved ones who passed away, namely the two Allen sisters.
Name one band that has released one record that has not sued each other. YOU CAN’T - They all do. It’s part of doing business.
Statler Brothers
The carpenters
The Beatles
Led Zeppelin
AC/DC
The Rolling Stones
Pink Floyd
U2
Rush
The Eagles
Queen
ZZ Top
We saw them in PA in 2019. It was great.
I have heard Hall did most of the writing. Hall did most of the singing and seemed to have most of the talent.
My question would be, WHY would John Oats want to sell his portion of it??
Was he low on money, or was the offer from Primary Wave so attractive that he couldn't refuse?
And why didn't he talk with Daryl Hall FIRST?!
That might have helped, so that maybe it wouldn't have turned into this legal battle, and a sad unfortunate ruination of a long strong friendship/partnership. 😢