Gary Glitter Paid royalties after BBC airs repeat of him

[arista]

1977
long long ago on BBC4 first then BBC2





updated title.

[Ammi]

...I couldn't even bear to look at him

[LaLaLand]

The whole thing made me uncomfortable. Total creep and the lyrics were just ":|"

[arista]

Paedophile Gary Glitter to be paid thousands in royalties after BBC airs repeat of him performing on Top of the Pops

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2144050/Disgraced-singer-Gary-Glitter-paid-thousands-royalties-BBC-airs-repeat-performing-Top-Pops.html#ixzz1uq509ejP

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/14/article-2144050-131446C4000005DC-822_306x423.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/14/article-2144050-1314476C000005DC-401_634x102.jpg
From the D. Mail

[joeysteele]

Unfortunately there is nothing in law to prevent royalties being paid to such people, it is perhaps time that if they must show old performances or include any appearances of these people in transmissions as repeats that any royalties go to charities.
He should not get them,no way.

He had it all before, he chose to throw his status and life away by his vile actions.

[Marc]

He just looks like a peado :-/

[joeysteele]

Mind you, having said that,I have a Cousin who still plays his 'Another rock n roll Christmas' song at Christmas.
He gets a lot of groans and stick for it though.

[arista]

Unfortunately there is nothing in law to prevent royalties being paid to such people, it is perhaps time that if they must show old performances or include any appearances of these people in transmissions as repeats that any royalties go to charities.
He should not get them,no way.

He had it all before, he chose to throw his status and life away by his vile actions.


Yes true

[Kazanne]

typical of the stupid BBC,idiots.

[GypsyGoth]

Why couldn't he be edited out of the show?

[Scarlett.]

Royalties have to be paid, unfortunately even to wastes of skin like Glitter

[Kazanne]

Why couldn't he be edited out of the show?

exactly.

[arista]

Why couldn't he be edited out of the show?



Then the Pure music fans would get angry.

[Samuel.]

Don't see the problem really. It doesn't affect any of our lives what money he does or doesn't earn.

[Mrluvaluva]

A spokesman said: “It would be inappropriate for the BBC to rewrite history, so the programme was shown in its entirety.”

I am sure I read somewhere that Glitter sold his recording royalty rights years ago though?

[joeysteele]

Well the BBC may not feel it has the right to re-write history but this is 'its' history and the simple action required if they feel they couldn't edit that part is then 'not' to transmit any of that episode and use another piece of footage where he didn't feature at all.

[Pyramid*]

It does make you question whether the issue of Royalities paid should be sujbect to some disclaimer in cases such as this.

I know it can be argued that this all came to light long after it was all made public about how he was, but still, it really doesn't sit well with me.

It's almost as though the very thing he is infamous for is now allowing him to make more money on the back of his awful misdeeds. That just cannot be right.

It's like letting an everyday 'common' Paedo out of jail and every few years, giving him a wad of money because of what work he perhaps did years before he was found out. It seems so very wrong.

[Jesus.]

Arista loves it up the Gary Glitter.

[Livia]

I'm sure there are lots of questionable people paid royalties for all kinds of things. Who's going to decide who gets what?

[Jesus.]

I'm sure there are lots of questionable people paid royalties for all kinds of things. Who's going to decide who gets what?

Arista, obviously!!

[arista]

Arista loves it up the Gary Glitter.


Never.

[Kizzy]

Hehehe jeebs...Urgh gary glitter he just oozes evil yuk! I need to wash my eyes for looking at him :(

[Pyramid*]

I'm sure there are lots of questionable people paid royalties for all kinds of things. Who's going to decide who gets what?

I'm sure there are Livia - it nothing more than a general thought and comment - I don't make the rules up as far as royalites go - so I have no idea what is or is not involved. Merely my thoughts on the matter as far as my own post is concerned: I can't answer for anyone else who have the same thoughts.

[Livia]

I'm sure there are Livia - it nothing more than a general thought and comment - I don't make the rules up as far as royalites go - so I have no idea what is or is not involved. Merely my thoughts on the matter as far as my own post is concerned: I can't answer for anyone else who have the same thoughts.

I wasn't directing my comment to you Pyra... it was just a general thought in response to the OP.

[Livia]

Arista, obviously!!

Of course. How stupid of me...

[Pyramid*]

I wasn't directing my comment to you Pyra... it was just a general thought in response to the OP.

I know ..that's why I said my own comments were my own thoughts, and that I didn't know enough about royalties to really get into it in depth - it's an interesting thought on both sides of the coin all the same - rather than you think your question was perhaps being blanked - I simply don't know the answer but others may do.

[joeysteele]

Well, it's easy enough for the BBC to work out if it shows something royalties will have to be paid, it shows many repeats of things like old Top of the pops it has but not always in their full recording so they can edit if they want to.

In the case of GG all they have to do is know what the content is of the repeats they are thinking of showing and if he is in any of them, don't transmit it. Show other copies or something else.
No conflict,no offence caused to any viewers and no royalties for such as GG in that case.