No Subject

[News System Admin <news@mdis.co.uk>]

Newsgroups: rec.music.gaffa
Path: clive
From: clive@mdis.co.uk (Clive Backham)
Subject: Re: KaTe and Mike Oldfield
Organization: MDIS (McDonnell Douglas) Ltd
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 1994 13:04:30 GMT
Message-ID: <CKJqzJ.IqM@mdis.co.uk>
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL0]
References: <9401312135.AA17589@cthru.iplan.co.za>
Sender: news@mdis.co.uk (News System Admin)

Kuyper Hoffman (kuyper@iplan.co.za) wrote:
: Who else has thought of this or agrees.  Maybe we could even get the
: suggestion to either artist, problem is that KaTe's with EMI and
: Mike's with Virgin (still? - think so) and you know how those dudes
: can be :-)

If what you say about the record labels was true, this wouldn't be
a problem, because EMI bought Virgin Records about 2 years ago.
However, this is all academic, because:

KaTe's with Novercia (or rather, KaTe *is* Novercia), and happens to
licence her work to EMI (Sony in the States, isn't it?). She effectively
owns her own recordings and, subject to already signed contracts, can
licence them to whoever she damn well pleases.

Mike Oldfield is no longer with Virgin; there is now a fair degree
of animosity between him and Richard Branson. (But, come to think of
it, Branson's nothing to do with Virgin Records now, is he?)
Anyhow, Mike's latest work (TB2) was released on Warner Bros. If I 
recall correctly, the CD states that the recording belongs to Warners.
I remember being surprised when I read it, since I'd have thought
that, having finally extricated himself from the Virgin contract,
he would have made sure he owned his own recordings from now on.

Like the idea of some sort of KaTe/Oldfield collaboration, though.

Clive Backham
McDonnell Information Systems, Hemel Hempstead, UK
email: cbackham@mdis.co.uk