Sir Paul McCartney on Fixing The Hole For Young, Exploited Successful Songwriters
The Cute Beatle (who is vying to the death with Ringo Starr for the vaunted designation of "the Only Remaining Beatle") sounds off on the Internets and the downloading and the young Italian girls:
"Years ago, when this first started, this idea of people being able to download stuff for free, I was doing an interview in Italy and it was a young girl and I said, 'What do you think about it?' and she said: 'Oh, I think it's great. You know, you get it all for nothing.' I said, 'Okay, this week, you go back to your office and your boss says, 'Sorry, I'm not paying you this week,' how'd you like that? She said, 'Oh, no, I wouldn't like that.'
"I said, 'Well, that's the equivalent' because I've kind of, you know, I've kind of had the best of it, really. But the young kids coming up now, let's say, there's a guy who's got a hit and he's got a young family–that's his job. Now, if he doesn't get paid for that, I think that's unfair. So, I think, you know, it's good to get a nice, fair system where whoever does something that's really successful, should get paid for it."
Actually, the equivalent would be something like: "You go back to your office and and your boss says, You've sold a million records but I'm not paying you because you owe for studio time and distribution and marketing costs and keeping the lights on while you were out."
As The Walrus's contemporary, Roger McGuinn, could tell him, those record companies aren't exactly quick to dispense royalties to performers.
Are contemporary young, successful songwriters stuck darning their own socks like a latter-day Father McKenzie? Somehow I doubt it. But wot do I know? I actually saw Give My Regards to Broad Street in the theater.
One goddamn great Macca tune (who really could never write a goddmaned lyric to save his life):