Album Veto Rights (1976 - 1985) | Fab Forum | The Beatles Bible

I think with Sessions it was more down to an ongoing legal fight between EMI and Apple than anything else, and those were resolved for the cd releases in 1987. 

It was more the Hollywood Bowl thing that got me wondering. I know that John loved bootlegs and had a massive collection so makes sense he was up for it. Cant see Ringo being that fussed, George would depend on what day you asked him, Paul would be pretty much the same.

I just remember they all had complaints and reservations about the compilations that EMI shoved out as soon as the contract ran out in 1976 but couldnt stop their releases so actually the question remains – why couldnt they stop the compilations (Rock And Roll Music , Love Songs etc) yet they could Sessions? Maybe its simply because it was unreleased material and EMI could do anything they wanted with the rest. But then why couldnt they release the cds earlier unless it was the lawsuits that stopped them only (kind of legal lockdown)? The last of the compilations was 20 Greatest Hits in October ’82 so it would fit with a legal lockdown and then the veto was brought in. But then why ask John, Paul, George and Ringo for the Hollywood Bowl unless it was out of courtesy?

I think im rambling to myself and going in circles.

Thanks for that Satan. I skimmed thru it but it doesnt answer my question of how the 3 beatles and Yoko came to be in the position of being able to block sessions but not the compilations – unless it was only the already released stuff and not what was in the vaults, which would acount for George Martin going to the 4 for Hollywood Bowl. Then legal case outcomes kicked in which brought about the veto rule beween ’82 and ’85.

SatanHimself said

I’ve you’ve got the time to read it, this is a very detailed story of ‘Sessions’:

http://web.archive.org/web/200…..sions.html

It would seem that the entire album was kept quiet from the remaining Beatles until the very last minute, and then Paul threw the brakes on it.

In hindsight, I can see why.  Paul most likely didn’t want an arbitrary collection of stuff that wasn’t good enough the first time around to be unceremoniously dumped onto the market, especially while he was at a very busy point in his solo career.

Thanks for that Satan.

From what i understand they were going to release Sessions in either ’83 or ’84 but due to delays (Pauls Broadstreet album being one) it was rescheduled for ’85 at which point Apple found out and they (mostly Paul) blocked it. Im sure there were legal issues between Apple and EMI (royalties,  it was always royalties) and/or Yoko, George and Ringo v Paul (but that could have been later as wasnt that what stopped Paul being at the Hall of Fame ceremony in ’88?).

However it doesnt answer my question of how the 3 beatles and Yoko came to be in the position of being able to block Sessions but not the compilations – unless it was only the already released stuff and not what was in the vaults, which would acount for George Martin going to the 4 for Hollywood Bowl. Then legal case outcomes kicked in which brought about the veto rule beween ’82 and ’85. They were always suing someone in the 80’s were Apple – and 70’s… & 90’s…. & 00’s. Theyre probably suing someone as i type.

[Note.

I know a large chuck of this post duplicates my last one but i thought i edited it to address Satan’s post 2 back and not copied it. Im not going to delete the last one.]