Articles by admin

Business March 15, 2016

Sony Buys Michael Jackson's Stake In Lucrative Music Catalog

Paul McCartney and Michael Jackson in 1983. Jackson’s share of the rights to many Beatles songs has been purchased by Sony. AFP/AFP/Getty Images hide caption

toggle caption AFP/AFP/Getty Images

The Sony Corporation has announced it will pay Michael Jackson’s estate $750 million for Jackson’s 50 percent share of the Sony/ATV music publishing company.

The backstory here has more twists and shouts than a long and winding road (Couldn’t resist, but note that the rights to both “Twist and Shout” and “The Long and Winding Road” belong to Sony/ATV). Sony’s purchase marks the culmination of one of the most remarkable stories in the history of the music business.

It all started when Paul McCartney advised his young friend Michael Jackson that, to really make money in the music industry, you needed to own the publishing of hit songs. McCartney told CBS-TV in a 1989 interview that Jackson joked to him “One day I’ll own your songs.” To McCartney’s shock, Jackson was true to his word.

A music publisher owns the rights to a song’s lyrics and composition. Anytime a song is performed, played on TV or radio, used in a commercial, etc., the publisher collects royalties. Contracts vary but, traditionally, that money is split 50/50 with the songwriter.

In 1985, music publisher ATV owned the rights to some 4,000 songs, including more than 200 by The Beatles. It also owned Little Richard’s Tutti Frutti. Michael Jackson’s lawyer, John Branca, knew Jackson was looking for songs to buy. When Branca learned that the Australian tycoon who owned ATV was putting the company up for sale, Branca and Jackson put in a bid. After long, tense negotiations, Jackson was able to purchase ATV for a reported $47.5 million.

In the mid-1990s, when Jackson was in debt, he sold half of ATV to Sony, forming the joint venture Sony/ATV. To get full ownership, Sony offered Jackson’s estate $750 million.

The Sony/ATV catalog has swelled over the years and now owns or administers the copyrights to more than three million songs, including hits by Sting, Lady Gaga and Alicia Keyes. The company controls some of the best known songs in the world, including “Over The Rainbow” and “New York, New York.” One analyst tells Bloomberg, with the increase in streaming, the trove’s worth is more than what Sony’s paying for it.

As for Michael Jackson’s estate, it still owns Jackson’s master recordings as well as Mijac Music, the publishing company that owns all of the songs he wrote. In a statement by co-executors John Branca and John McClain, the sale to Sony will allow them to maximize the “the value of Michael’s Estate for the benefit of his children.”

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Health March 15, 2016

CDC Has Advice For Primary Care Doctors About Opioids

When it comes to chronic pain relief, the CDC is asking doctors and patients to think about alternatives to opioids.

4:48

Download

When it comes to chronic pain relief, the CDC is asking doctors and patients to think about alternatives to opioids. Robin Nelson/Zumapress.com/Corbis hide caption

toggle caption Robin Nelson/Zumapress.com/Corbis

In response to the opioid epidemic that has swept the country, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released long-anticipated guidelines on prescribing opioid painkillers such as OxyContin and Percocet.

They were published Tuesday in JAMA, the Journal of the American Medical Association.

The advice is aimed at primary care physicians, who prescribe nearly half of the opioid painkillers consumed in the U.S. The guidelines aren’t intended for doctors treating cancer patients or for end-of-life care.

The guidelines sparked controversy when a draft was released in the fall. Some pain specialists and patient advocates cited a lack of evidence supporting many of the recommendations. Critics voiced concern that the guidelines could result in patients being denied pain relief they legitimately need.

NPR’s Robert Siegel spoke with Dr. Debra Houry, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, who’s been involved in the development of the guidelines from the beginning.

Here are interview highlights, edited for length and clarity.

On how Houry hopes the guidelines will change the way doctors treat pain

I hope this will allow primary care providers to have a conversation with patients about the risks and benefits of opioids and to consider non-opioids as the first-line treatment for pain.

The doctor can tell you that up to 1 in 4 patients with chronic pain can experience opioid dependence. A family history of addiction, mental health issues and other chronic issues can put you at higher risk.

On the potential pushback from people in chronic pain

What I would say is, let’s try some other options first. Let’s try a high dose of a nonsteroidal [anti-inflammatory drug], let’s try an SSRI-type medication, let’s try some of these other medications first and maximize them. We absolutely want to treat your pain, but we want to do it safely. And opioids may be warranted. … If opioids are warranted though, we’re not saying to use them in isolation. They should be used in combination with things like exercise therapy or nonsteroidal medication.

Critics, including the American Academy of Family Physicians, faulted the CDC’s initial recommendation that opioids should not be first-line therapy for chronic pain, saying that’s too strong a stance given the weakness of the evidence.

Well, I think there is weakness [in evidence] on the benefits of opioids but there’s been significant progress on the risk of opioids. We see that there is an increased risk of car crashes, death from overdose. And that’s why we have decided that because of that, and the uncertain benefits of opioids, that continuing to prescribe them for chronic pain is not warranted. On the other end, non-opioids, there is evidence for their benefits.

There is room for more science as we continue to revise and update the guidelines, but given the number of Americans dying each day from opioid overdoses — 40 a day — we have enough evidence today about the risks. That being said, I can tell you as a practicing physician that many guidelines I use are often based on low-quality events, and that doesn’t mean bad evidence. That just means there are not a lot of randomized controlled trials.

On criticism of the initial recommendation to limit prescriptions for acute pain to three days

So we heard that feedback, and for that specific recommendation there is now a range of up to seven days. We want to make sure patients have appropriate access, but we also want to limit the number of patients who become addicted, Having too many days of medication can put you at risk for addiction, so we do think it is important to give the shortest course possible.

Response to the concern over the low starting dose recommended

We’ve actually put a range in there. At 50 morphine milligram equivalents [a standardized measure of potency], we say that you should assess the risks and benefits. And at 90 you should really think hard … consider referring them to a pain specialist. This is for initiation of opioids. We do not think that an opioid-naive patient — someone who hasn’t been on opioids before — should be started on a high dose of opioids. We have seen that the higher the doses of opioids, the more likely you are to overdose. So we believe in starting low and going slow.

What should doctors tell people who suffer chronic pain and are on opioid therapy now?

It would include having that conversation about the risks and benefits. With the newer evidence we know about the risks, I believe every patient should be aware of the risks and benefits of their treatment. And I do think physicians should routinely monitor their patients and reassess them. If a patient is doing fine on a low dose, we’re not saying to change that care. But if a patient is not improving in function or is having adverse events, I think they should reconsider what medication they’re on.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Sports March 15, 2016

NFL Acknowledges Link Between Playing Football And CTE

4:40

Download

NPR’s Robert Siegel interviews Rep. Jan Schakowsky about the NFL acknowledging the links between football and CTE, a degenerative brain disease found in people who have suffered severe blows to the head.

Transcript

ROBERT SIEGEL, HOST:

At a congressional roundtable yesterday, the National Football League’s top health and safety officer admitted something that the league had refused to acknowledge. When asked if there was a link between football-related head injuries and chronic traumatic encephalopathy, or CTE, Jeff Miller said this.

(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED RECORDING)

JEFF MILLER: The answer to that question is certainly yes.

SIEGEL: That yes contrasts with what the NFL said just a few weeks ago before the Super Bowl. An official then said there was no established link. We call up the member of Congress who asked Miller that question, Rep. Jan Schakowsky of Illinois, and I asked her if Miller’s remarks signaled an important change by pro football.

JAN SCHAKOWSKY: Yes. It was a very important admission. But before I had asked Mr. Miller the question, I asked the same question of Dr. Ann McKee, who is a professor of neurology and pathology at Boston University, and she has done a good deal of research. And 90 out of the 94 brains that they had examined – and the only way to do it, obviously, is after people are dead – showed that football players had CTE.

SIEGEL: But just to be clear, the stunning numbers that Dr. McKee produced in her research of how many of these brains showed CTE, that wasn’t a random sampling of former NFL players. Those were – these had been players for whom there had been some suspicion some kind of injury had been sustained.

SCHAKOWSKY: Yes, that’s correct.

SIEGEL: What’s Congress’s role in this? Let’s say everyone stipulates to the fact that if you play a lot of football, you’re at risk of some kind of brain injury. What do you guys do about that?

SCHAKOWSKY: You know, one of the things that we might look at is the relationship of professional football with youth sports and the kind of changes that may need to be made. I don’t know that they necessarily need to be legislated. But for example, with soccer – up to age 10 right now, youth soccer has said that no headers would be allowed, which can cause repeated brain trauma. Though it may be somewhat minor, it could accumulate.

SIEGEL: But when I asked you about Congress’s role here, you set aside legislation. You said perhaps not legislation. If there actually is a threat to public health and safety and it affects so many – mostly young men, but also some women – why wouldn’t there be some room for legislation?

SCHAKOWSKY: No, there may be. There may be a role for the Congress. I certainly wouldn’t rule this out. But I think even this roundtable has had an impact on what’s going to happen going forward having gotten this admission from Mr. Miller at the NFL. So there are all kinds of ways to change policy.

SIEGEL: It has been pointed out that Mr. Miller, after saying that the answer to that question is certainly yes, he added, but there are questions. And I guess some of the questions are, you know, how much higher is the rate of CTE among people who play football than among people who don’t play football or who do other things? Is it possible here that we’ve made too much of his answer to your question?

SCHAKOWSKY: I don’t think so. I think that his response, as I said, was after Dr. McKee had talked about her research showing that 90 out of 94 of the brains that were subjected to the research after the death of the players. It seems certainly the evidence is very, very compelling. And all I asked was is there a link? And I think it’s pretty hard to say that there is no link when you have the kind of evidence that she has found. And she said it was unequivocal, that the link was unequivocal.

SIEGEL: Was the tone of the roundtable – in addition to this one remark from Jeff Miller, was it – did it strike you as fairly constructive about dealing with this problem of brain injury?

SCHAKOWSKY: I thought it was, but I think the emphasis was on research – which of course we have to have, but we’re talking about research that may not have a conclusion for five to seven years. And so in the meantime, what does that mean for all those youth athletes, the young kids that are going out on Friday nights or the junior high kids that are continually knocking their heads around?

And so the question is, is some action required in advance of the final research that is done on this? And I would say yes, that we should err on the side of caution. When it comes to youth sports, we ought to make some changes – that we have to do serious thinking about how much we should subject our children to things that could cause these degenerative brain injuries.

SIEGEL: Well, Rep. Jan Schakowsky of Illinois, thanks for talking with us today.

SCHAKOWSKY: My pleasure, thank you.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by a contractor for NPR, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Entertainment March 14, 2016

Today in Movie Culture: 'Deadpool' Celebrates Its Monthiversary, Another Reason to Love John Boyega and More

Here are a bunch of little bites to satisfy your hunger for movie culture:

Marketing Continuation of the Day:

Deadpool has been in theaters a month, but that’s not stopping the clever marketing. Here’s a new trailer celebrating the “monthiversary”:

[embedded content]

Meme of the Day:

What if every movie ended with the song “Walk of Life” by Dire Straits? The Walk of Life Project has already attached the tune to 50 movies, including Mad Max: Fury Road below. See more at Live for Films.

[embedded content]

Cosplay of the Day:

John Boyega wore his Star Wars: The Force Awakens costume jacket to see an ailing little Stormtrooper named Daniel at the Royal London Hospital, and it’s the most adorable thing ever:

This little stormtrooper Daniel had a wonderful wish after seeing the force awakens. Daniel thank you ?? pic.twitter.com/EXS6B168Jr

— John Boyega (@JohnBoyega) March 14, 2016

Trailer Reaction of the Day:

There has been some negative reactions to the Ghostbusters reboot trailer but for the Stay Puft Marshamallow Man, it’s personal. Watch him watch the spot here (via Geek Tyrant):

[embedded content]

Vintage Film of the Day:

Today is the 80th anniversary of The Bat, a silent film related to the conception of Batman. Watch it in full below.

Filmmaker in Focus:

Speaking of Batman, in anticipation of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, here’s a supercut highlighting Zack Snyder‘s use of slow motion (via Live for Films):

[embedded content]

Lego Build of the Day:

The Toy Store UK is where you’ll find the below Lego Hulkbuster creation inspired by Avengers: Age of Ultron. It is over 8 feet tall and took more than 940 hours to build (via Nerd Approved):

Reimagined Movie of the Day:

Mashable recut the trailer for There’s Something About Mary so it’s now a psychological thriller:

[embedded content]

Film Analysis of the Day:

Aliens from the future watched A Clockwork Orange and they got the point all wrong:

[embedded content]

Classic Trailer of the Day:

Today is the 30th anniversary of the release of Ron Howard‘s Gung Ho. Watch the original trailer for the comedy, which stars Michael Keaton, below.

[embedded content]

and

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Business March 14, 2016

Cancer And Arthritis Drugs Drive Up Spending On Medicines

Spending on prescription drugs in the U.S. rose 5.2 percent in 2015, driven mostly by increased costs of expensive specialty medications to treat conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis, according to data from the largest manager of employers’ drug benefits.

Spending on specialty medications rose 18 percent, while spending on standard prescription drugs rose less than one percent, according to a new report by Express Scripts. The report is based on the prescription drug spending for the company’s 80 million covered patients.

The measure — called “drug trend” in pharmaceutical industry parlance — includes increases in the use of medications and price hikes.

Still, in the health care industry, an increase that’s more than quadruple the rate of inflation — 0.7 percent in 2015 — still counts as a bit of good news. Why? In 2014, drug spending increased more than 14 percent.

“In a year when all the headlines were about the escalating price of drugs, overall costs rose only 5.2 percent,” says Glen Stettin, Express Scripts’ chief innovation officer.

The overall boost in drug spending was moderated by patients switching to generic drugs from brand names, whose prices rose 16.2 percent.

Stettin attributed that shift to pharmacy benefit managers and insurers exerting more control over the drugs their customers can get. Express Scripts and other companies have been more willing to refuse coverage of expensive medications than in the past.

The company pointed to its initial refusal to pay for Gilead Sciences’ hepatitis C drugs, which were listed at more than $90,000 for a course of treatment. Instead, Express Scripts opted to cover an alternative treatment, Viekira Pak made by AbbVie, for which it negotiated a 50 percent discount. Express Scripts has said it saved as much as $1 billion with the deal.

Brand name drug prices are more than 2 1/2 times as high as they were in 2008, while generic prices have declined by about two-thirds.

For traditional pills, “total costs are flat as result of generic and effective price negotiation by payors,” says Ronny Gal, a pharmaceutial industry analyst at the investment firm Alliance Bernstein. “For specialty drugs, there are more drug introductions, at very high price per patient per year, and we still don’t have effective alternatives on the market.”

The report says the surge in spending on specialty drugs was caused in part by the 29 new medications that were approved by the Food and Drug Administration last year, including 19 cancer drugs that are being used on a large number of patients. The prices of older cancer drugs also rose, including for example, the price of Gleevec, which is used to treat adults with leukemia. It went up 19.3 percent last year, the report says.

But drugs for rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis and other inflammatory illnesses sucked up the largest share of cash. Express Scripts says treatments for such conditions cost every person with insurance about $89 last year. Insurers use a measure known as “per member per year” to show how spending is spread across population of insured people.

Diabetes treatments dominated the spending on nonspecialty medications, the report shows, with spending rising 14 percent last year. Three of the top five traditional prescription drugs were diabetes medications — Lantus and Humalog, which are both forms of insulin, and Januvia, a pill that helps control blood sugar.

People who bought insurance through the exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act spent an average of $777 on medications last year, about 15 percent higher than the year before.

The big increase “may be due to patients in this population filling a previously unmet need,” according to the report.

Since the exchanges have only been in place for two full years, Stettin says this is the first time there was good information available about people covered by those policies.

The spending increase “is consistent with the belief that people in the exchange plans, people with chronic conditions, are getting medications for the first time,” he says.

The Express Scripts report takes into account the effect of rebates that the company negotiates with drugmakers without disclosing the details of the arrangements. Rebates are considered trade secrets.

Bruce Stuart, executive director of the Peter Lamy Center for Drug Therapy and Aging at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, says the data are different from what he would have expected based on trends in retail prices.

“I have no reason to doubt their numbers,” he tells Shots. “If they say that they are getting better deals, there’s no way to validate that. “

Let’s block ads! (Why?)

Health March 14, 2016