The other night while watching the Melania documentary on Prime, Michael Jackson songs were heard as part of the score. For a documentary to use this music, they need two licenses: a master license and a sync license. The master license is permission from whoever owns the recording, which is usually a record label, and the synchronization license is permission from the songwriter/publisher to sync the music to video. To put it simply, in order to use a Michael Jackson song in a documentary, filmmakers need licenses from Sony (for the recording) and the publisher/estate (for the song itself), so both sides typically approve and get paid.
So, what did Michael Jackson own, and if a large portion of the country despises the current sitting president and the first lady, then why would Michael’s estate approve this? Many other singers, from Taylor Swift to Rihanna, have spoken publicly about the unofficial use of their music in social media posts on platforms such as TikTok and X from the official White House accounts, making it quite clear that many musicians are taking a stand against the president. Yet here we have a legend’s music featured front and center, one who, if he were alive, may not have approved.
Related articles: What Is a Life Estate Tenant? A Clear Guide to Rights, Responsibilities, and Property Control
Let’s go back in time for a moment. In the 1980s, Michael Jackson famously bought ATV Music Publishing, which he later merged with Sony to create Sony/ATV Music Publishing. This investment made him one of the most powerful music owners in the world. However, after his death in 2009, his estate retained rights to his name, image, and likeness, portions of his music catalog (publishing rights to songs he wrote), certain master-related income streams (depending on deal structures), and licensing rights for films, documentaries, commercials, etc. In 2016, the estate sold its stake in Sony/ATV to Sony for $750 million. Ultimately, this means that the estate cashed out a major publishing asset but still controls other valuable rights. So if you hear a Michael Jackson song in a movie or, in this case, a documentary, just know that Sony controls a large portion of his recordings and can license the music without needing the estate every time.
Who controls the estate? Co-executors John Branca (his long-time attorney) and John McClain (a music executive). Estate planning is one of those things that most wealthy people begin at some point in their career. When a person dies testate, which means they died leaving behind a valid will, that will is later probated in court. In the will, the person appoints an executor to oversee the estate and manage its distributions—handling the will after death, paying off debts and taxes, and in some cases moving assets into a trust.
Executors are also paid for their services, as acting as a fiduciary is time-consuming and involves significant responsibility. If their actions constitute criminal behavior or there is mismanagement of estate funds, they can be both sued in civil court and/or go to jail. This could be why Jackson did not appoint any of his family members as executors, but instead entrusted the responsibility to his attorney and another member of the music industry.
Related articles: Why Is Art So Expensive? The Billionnaire Tax Loophole
Where the confusion sometimes lies is that an executor and a trustee are not the same. For an estate as large as Michael Jackson’s, he needed a trust. Unlike the estate, which is open for a shorter period, the trust runs for years or decades, invests money, collects income (music royalties, business deals, etc.), and follows the rules. The trustee does not own the money; they are just the manager, and managers get paid.
With all of the controversy surrounding the latest Michael Jackson biopic soon to hit theaters, fans have been questioning why the children were not involved or why they are not attending premieres or speaking out about it. The truth boils down to one thing: it’s not profitable to complain. The initial will stated that 40% of his assets would go to his three children—that’s roughly 13.3% each. So let’s say the estate at the time of his death was worth $2,000,000; the children would have roughly received $266,600.
Now, fast forward: the trust is activated and all of those assets are moved, but the rules for the trust now state that each child should receive 40% of its assets each year until their death. So, for example, this deal above that mentions the $750 million deal with Sony would, under the trust, mean each child received 40% of that, which is $300 million each (these numbers are fabricated because we don’t actually know the rules of the trust). Now, with a new movie, perhaps the trust will be paid an additional $2 million, and this means the children or those named in the trust will again be paid significantly.
Related articles: How High-Income Earners Restructure Their Finances After a Major Life Change
Here’s the breakdown: when a person is alive, they create a will and a trust in some cases. When they die, the will is activated and the executor takes over the estate, gathers assets, and distributes them according to the will. Then, the estate transfers the remaining assets into a trust, and the trust officially “turns on.” The trust is what manages everything—assets—and pays beneficiaries over time. Many fans are confused and often slighted by the fact that Michael Jackson did not appoint any of his family members to be the executor of his estate, but in reality, this is the best decision for his family.
They get to live their lives knowing that there have been things put into place to help sustain their livelihood in perpetuity. When the money starts to slow, the estate can do what they are doing now: license music they still hold and have a studio release another biopic for the singer. It’s not a coincidence that Michael Jackson seems to be one of the only musicians whose estate continues to inject him into every generation. If you ask us, that’s not greed, that’s smart and noble. It means the people he appointed are very cognizant of the fact that his children need to continue to be cared for and are seen doing just that.
Image Credit: Photo by Glen Wilson/Lionsgate/Glen Wilson/Lionsgate - © 2025 Lionsgate
Diamond Brown covers music with a focus on cultural influence, artist evolution, and the business behind sound. Her writing explores how music shapes identity and wealth, offering a refined perspective on an industry driven by both creativity and strategy.
