Gary Brooker once again owns 100% of Whiter Shade Of Pale.

The only winners? Lawyers.

The only loser?

Bach.

Out of interest, what kind of sums are we talking about here?

Matthew Fisher demanded his share (a millon pounds) from 1967 to the present.

In the first decision he won only the right to collect 40% of the royalties earned in and after 2005.

Interesting decision - he keeps his "credit" but get no royalties !

The Judge said - "He silently stood by and acquiesced in the defendant's commercial exploitation of the work for 38 years."

"The delay in making a case, which Mr Fisher had begun in May 2005, "made it unconscionable and inequitable for him to seek to exercise control over the commercial exploitation of the copyright in the work".

--

Pity the Law Lords don't use the same logic when deciding upon "late" abuse claims?

Pete Clarke wrote:
Out of interest, what kind of sums are we talking about here?

To answer your question, Pete - almost impossible to say, but -

In 2004, it was named by performing rights as the most-played record in Britain of the past 70 years.

There have also been more than 800 cover versions.

The future copyright ownership could also generate huge sums if the track is used as an advert, or in a film, and the covers will obviously continue to earn.

Too bad friends had to fall out over this (Matthew toured with Gary for ten years or so in the 1990's until this blew up). Here's a detailed case link:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2008/287.html

Leave us not to forget Keith Reid since his otherworldly lyrics made the song as well.

More info at the Procol Harum website...

It's similar to a custody battle after a divorce. Very sad.

Yesterday the House of Lords overturned the last ruling and awarded Fisher 40% of all FUTURE royalties.

www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld2008...d090730/fisher-1.htm

Reminds me of the Busted Case last year Original group fallout, they had written Busted's first hit songs together in that version of the group.

I have it on good authority there was video evidence, where one of the group members James bourne spoke of how they had written the songs in question
all together, from an early video recording from the time of the original group.

The two members who did not stay, i believe had signed away there rights to the songs sometime after the breakup, the judge upheld that agreement and decided not to decide who had actually written the song's in question, even though the evidence had shown they had ,very interesting situation !!!!!