Andy Summers And Stewart Copeland Sue Sting Over Millions In Unpaid Royalties

[Wiseacre]

Andy should get some royalties for Every Breath You Take, period. Even 5% would be substantial.

Wrong. Here is Sting playing and singing the song without Andy’s guitar parts.

https://youtu.be/H-4yodHCvu0?si=PoSbFhozogyDMQog

It’s still the same song and he wrote it. Andy would have gotten mechanical royalties for his part on the studio recording whenever a copy/stream was sold which is ALL he contributed (to THAT arrangement). There is zero reason why he should be paid for every single other version of a song he did not write.

No arpeggiated guitar part...same song...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_zDUTF ... rt_radio=1

[VinnieVincentsVag]

So he came up with a guitar part, on a formed song. They deserve performance royalties, nothing more. And they are about to kick the bucket anyways.

formed song? roflmfao

shut the fuck up, captain retard, you have no idea about music

A song with the lyrics, melody, and changes finished is a fully formed song. Legally and musically speaking.

Writing a cool guitar riff or intricate solo or bass line doesn't impact how much publishing a musician gets - they're entitled to 0%, if they didn't write the lyrics/melody/harmonic changes.

You may be able to negotiate a piece of the publishing if the songwriter agrees that your contribution is good enough to warrant giving you a cut, but they're not obligated to.

Which is why this lawsuit is stupid - Summers wasn't some kid who didn't understand publishing being taken advantage of, he was the guitarist for the biggest band in the fuckin' world. If he felt like he should have got a cut of the publishing, he should have negotiated that 40 years ago.

100%

[FreddyFender]

Just to put a pin in this: every session guitarist and bassist that ever walked into a studio “wrote” their parts - contributing something incredible to the arrangement is why people paid big money to in demand sessions guys like Steve Lukather and Abe Laboriel Sr for.

It’s what they were paid for - to come up with great parts! But they didn’t get *songwriting* credits for it because they didn’t *write the song*

[Wiseacre]

Just to put a pin in this: every session guitarist and bassist that ever walked into a studio “wrote” their parts - contributing something incredible to the arrangement is why people paid big money to in demand sessions guys like Steve Lukather and Abe Laboriel Sr for.

It’s what they were paid for - to come up with great parts! But they didn’t get *songwriting* credits for it because they didn’t *write the song*

This. They were PAID to play the parts and make the recording great in order to sell it.

IF the writer thinks their part "makes" the SONG (not just the recording) somehow, they have every RIGHT to give writing credit, but I think that is stupid and always comes back to bite the person who actually WROTE it. Why the hell do people think those studio musicians don't get SONGWRITING ROYALTIES????? If it was up to them, I could record Stairway to Heaven, change the picking pattern and say I “co-wrote” it.

When someone think of "Layla" I guarantee they think of that little lick that was added and played by Duanne Allman. He did not get a writing credit because even without it, it is still the song "Layla" as proven on Clapton's Unplugged when he did a slow shuffle/ragtime version.

I know some people LIKE it, (probably because they personally never actually wrote a song), but that doesn't change the facts. Those people should explain to us all why Duanne Allman would get a single penny for this version below since it has ZERO input from him...

THIS IS STILL "LAYLA"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kseSogu ... rt_radio=1

[veritas]

Couple observations:


1. Sting is a cunt. AND he is a great songwriter and a talented motherfucker.

2. Anyone saying Sting's solo career was insignificant or paltry compared to The Police is talking nonsense: he has had one of the longest and most successful solo careers of anyone leaving a big band. Tons of singles, album hits, arena tours, etc. AND he is a cunt.

3. It's ludicrous Copeland and Summers are alleging songwriting credit at THIS late stage? Even England must have a statute of limitations? I haven't read the lawsuit, but it MUST be something about accounting fraud vs. credit? I honestly don't see how they can prevail, on the songwriting credit theory?

4. I love Copeland's and Summers' contributions to these songs, and, in my personal world, they SHOULD have gotten partial credit because their contributions -- even if technically more on the arrangement/ embellishment side vs. actual writing the chords/melody -- are integral to the song. If I ruled the Police camp, most of the songs would have been Sting 50% and the other two 25%. BUT that's not the songwriting / publishing rules. What they did was principally arrangement, as others have mentioned above.

5. Sting -- NOT Copeland and not Summers -- was the necessary and special sauce of the Police -- and he's a cunt. But facts are facts: he wrote pretty much EVERYTHING. He is a GREAT songwriter. he sang everything (well, other than a summers one-off). His voice is iconic and instantly recognizable. He was a good looking guy that was very photo and video friendly (that doesn't make me gay). And he was a very good bass player. Come on, now. The others guys are amazing musicians, and the sum is greater than the parts -- but if anyone hit the lotto, it was the other two.

6. Copeland and Summers haven't done shit since the Police. Why? Because they aren't SONGWRITERS.

Case dismissed!

[Wiseacre]

I love Copeland's and Summers' contributions to these songs, and, in my personal world, they SHOULD have gotten partial credit because their contributions

Nope. That would only be charity.

Take away the drums and ALL of the guitar, play the songs on a piano with straight chords and sing the words over the melody and they are still the same songs. That's why they got $$$ every time THIER recordings were/are played. They didn't "write" the songs though and I'm sure they both made a boatload off of their contributions.

"Elanor Rigby" - credited as Lennon/McCartney though Lennon likely didn't write shit (see? told you it was a dumb idea sharing 50/50 in the first place). I (and many others) would argue George Martin's arrangement (which was ALL HIS) is EXTREMELY important to the original recording and song itself since it also includes melodic runs that tie the parts together. But he was paid well to produce/arrange and that's what he did. Ringo and George also would have received mechanical royalties from the original recording though neither came anywhere near the song, but that's the way it works. When someone else sells a cover version they get shit as they rightfully should. Same for George Martin, since his awesome contributions are not necessary to perform the song with another arrangement.

No judge or anyone else would ever disagree, but often bands pull this shit to make a stink hoping for an "out of court settlement" to make it all go away. Sting should let them try and go to court. 99% chance they will lose unless they get a Sting-hating judge.

[veritas]

I love Copeland's and Summers' contributions to these songs, and, in my personal world, they SHOULD have gotten partial credit because their contributions

Nope. That would only be charity.

Fuck off with your "nope." It's MY "personal world" -- I can do as I please.
You must be a joy in relationships:
"I'm feeling frustrated with your pedantic rants."
"Nope. You cannot feel that way."

(And I wouldn't see it as "charity": I would see it as fairly compensating a contribution that significantly related strongly to the song's success and longevity. I would have kicked him 25% of the songwriting, even if he was legally entitled to 0%. Because I am a decent human being.)

[Wiseacre]

I love Copeland's and Summers' contributions to these songs, and, in my personal world, they SHOULD have gotten partial credit because their contributions

Nope. That would only be charity.

Fuck off with your "nope." It's MY "personal world" -- I can do as I please.
You must be a joy in relationships:
"I'm feeling frustrated with your pedantic rants."
"Nope. You cannot feel that way."

(And I wouldn't see it as "charity": I would see it as fairly compensating a contribution that significantly related strongly to the song's success and longevity. I would have kicked him 25% of the songwriting, even if he was legally entitled to 0%. Because I am a decent human being.)

You likely never wrote a song. It's obvious.

Also, WGAF what you THINK about it? There are laws for this very reason. Law and giving credit where credit is due has nothing to do with "personal relationships".

For the thousandth time now, those guys got PLENTY of money for the millions of records that were sold with their "parts" on them. THEY are the greedy fuckers for trying to steal the creative/intellectual property of someone else.

And you are entitled to "believe they deserve credit", but you are still wrong when it comes to actual copyright/ownership/compositions and how it is and has always been understood. The "decent" thing to do is not to wait 40 years and claim you wrote something that you didn't write, so fuck off with YOUR sanctimonious bullshit. It's easy to be generous with other people's money.

[veritas]

You have poor reading comprehension.
(And I repeat: must be a joy in relationships. Scratch that: you likely have no relationships.)

[El Vampiro Blanco]

So how does this work when your songs are sampled?
A big part of this is of course that Sting made a shit load of money because that rapper sampled Every breath you take.
Would Summers and Copeland have received mechanical royalties on that since it is them playing on the sample used?

[Wiseacre]

So how does this work when your songs are sampled?
A big part of this is of course that Sting made a shit load of money because that rapper sampled Every breath you take.
Would Summers and Copeland have received mechanical royalties on that since it is them playing on the sample used?

Likely handled the same way as mechanical royalties if it is the actual recording used.

[Indy_Rob]

Veritas, how do you feel about Sting?

[veritas]

Veritas, how do you feel about Sting?

He's a cunt.

[Indy_Rob]

Veritas, how do you feel about Sting?

He's a cunt.

[El Vampiro Blanco]

There was this interview with the whole band where Summers dryly remarked he would have liked to have been able to buy a villa in Italy as well with the royalties from Every breath you take.
To which Sting replied smugly 'It's called a palazzo' ( Italian for palace)

[Lobo]

UPDATE:

https://exclaim.ca/music/article/sting- ... -royalties

(9/5, 1:13 p.m. ET): As The New York Times reports, Sting's attorneys have claimed that Summers and Copeland may have actually been "substantially overpaid." Apparently, Sting came up with an agreement with his two bandmates when they started the Police in 1977: he agreed to pay the guitarist and drummer 15 percent of "some royalties" for the songs he wrote himself to "keep things sweet" within the group dynamic.

According to Sting's legal team, all three musicians signed an agreement in 2016 to draw a line under previous disputes (based on the use of the band's music in TV and movies) about "arranger's fees," thus making Summers and Copeland's lawsuit an "illegitimate attempt" to reinterpret that document.

The guitarist and drummer have argued that the frontman hasn't paid them fully amid the "digital exploitation" of the band's music — but Sting's lawyers claim that, depending how that 2016 agreement is interpreted, the songwriter may actually owe Summer and Copeland nothing for the appearance of the Police's hits online, and consequently has actually "substantially overpaid" them.

The Song of the Year Grammy-winning track from Synchronicity is, somehow, the band's only Hot 100 No. 1 hit in the US. It was also the best-selling single the year of its release, and has been identified by BMI as "the most played song in radio history." According to The Daily Mail, Sting gets paid £550,000 ($742,918 US) annually in royalties lately, while in 2010, David Hepworth estimated that "Every Breath You Take" accounted for "between a quarter and a third of Sting's music publishing income" while writing for The Word.

Per a High Court writ. filing issued in London (viewed by People), which named Sting (born Gordon Matthew Sumner) and his publishing company, Magnetic Publishing Ltd., as defendants, Summers and Copeland claim to make absolutely nothing from the band's signature song — despite the fact that Summers came up with the arpeggiated riff, a nod to Béla Bartók, that the song is built on. Sting wrote the chord progression on an organ, as well as the lyrics, at Ian Fleming's GoldenEye estate in Jamaica in 1982, and has retained sole writing credit.

"'Every Breath You Take' was going in the trash until I played on it," Summers told podcast host Jeremy White in 2023 (via Stereogum). "It's a very contentious topic — it's very much alive at the moment. Watch the press — let's see what happens in the next year."

So, if he's really been watching as closely as the song suggests, you could certainly say that Sting would have presumably seen this coming.

[NineteenEightyFour]

Fantastic guitarist, but Summers needs to go relax on the beach and ponder where he's going to leave the millions he already has. This is not a good book-end for The Police.

[Wiseacre]

UPDATE:

https://exclaim.ca/music/article/sting- ... -royalties

(9/5, 1:13 p.m. ET): As The New York Times reports, Sting's attorneys have claimed that Summers and Copeland may have actually been "substantially overpaid."

[veritas]

Ok, I still haven't been able to see a copy of the actual lawsuit complaint, but this is starting to make more sense.
Interestingly, the rumors that have circulated for years that Sting actually gave Summers and Copeland 15% of his publishing (calling them "arranger's fees?") gratuitously to keep the harmony is true.
So, Sting may have given up 30% of his publishing on all these songs (or most of them), which is actually generous. (He is a still a cunt, though).

So, I don't think this lawsuit is an attempt by Summers and Copeland to get retroactive songwriting credits at all. I think it's a dispute over whether these "arranger's fees" were properly calculated over the years, and, critically, whether they applied to solely mechanical royalties vs. performance royalties (e.g., streaming).

I need to read the lawsuit, but I gotta say it actually is starting to sound greedy on the part of Summers and Copeland, IF they in fact were already getting, collectively, 30% of Sting's publishing.

Guess no reunion.

[El Vampiro Blanco]

Ok, I still haven't been able to see a copy of the actual lawsuit complaint, but this is starting to make more sense.
Interestingly, the rumors that have circulated for years that Sting actually gave Summers and Copeland 15% of his publishing (calling them "arranger's fees?") gratuitously to keep the harmony is true.
So, Sting may have given up 30% of his publishing on all these songs (or most of them), which is actually generous. (He is a still a cunt, though).

So, I don't think this lawsuit is an attempt by Summers and Copeland to get retroactive songwriting credits at all. I think it's a dispute over whether these "arranger's fees" were properly calculated over the years, and, critically, whether they applied to solely mechanical royalties vs. performance royalties (e.g., streaming).

I need to read the lawsuit, but I gotta say it actually is starting to sound greedy on the part of Summers and Copeland, IF they in fact were already getting, collectively, 30% of Sting's publishing.

Guess no reunion.

It sounds to me like Sting doesnt consider the 15% of the publishing to apply to streaming, since that didn't exist when the agreement was drawn up.

[veritas]

Ok, I still haven't been able to see a copy of the actual lawsuit complaint, but this is starting to make more sense.
Interestingly, the rumors that have circulated for years that Sting actually gave Summers and Copeland 15% of his publishing (calling them "arranger's fees?") gratuitously to keep the harmony is true.
So, Sting may have given up 30% of his publishing on all these songs (or most of them), which is actually generous. (He is a still a cunt, though).

So, I don't think this lawsuit is an attempt by Summers and Copeland to get retroactive songwriting credits at all. I think it's a dispute over whether these "arranger's fees" were properly calculated over the years, and, critically, whether they applied to solely mechanical royalties vs. performance royalties (e.g., streaming).

I need to read the lawsuit, but I gotta say it actually is starting to sound greedy on the part of Summers and Copeland, IF they in fact were already getting, collectively, 30% of Sting's publishing.

Guess no reunion.

It sounds to me like Sting doesnt consider the 15% of the publishing to apply to streaming, since that didn't exist when the agreement was drawn up.

yep.

[Gibsonite]

People need to keep in mind that without Andy and Stu, all those songs would've sounded like something off one of Gordo's godawful solo albums

[HottKarl777]

Guess no reunion.

Uh they did a whole reunion tour. It was kind of a big deal.

[veritas]

Guess no reunion.

Uh they did a whole reunion tour. It was kind of a big deal.

Uh... i know.

No re-reunion.

[HottKarl777]

Guess no reunion.

Uh they did a whole reunion tour. It was kind of a big deal.

Uh... i know.

No re-reunion.

No Re-reunion.

Andy Summers is 82 years old. Does it ever end with you fuckers?

[LurkingAtWork]

No good deed goes unpunished.