vineband said:
I am on the tail end of producing a mix for a client. This is the first client that has ever asked me for the pro tools sessions and all audio data etc in addition to her masters (20+gigs). I have put 200 hours into the project and don't want to so quickly give away all my work. Hypothetically some producer down the road could open my sessions up, re track a vocal and take all the credit and future money that my edit/mix generates?
I will certainly release the master, but should i release the data?
I am now going to sign producer agreements with future clients but it seems like the pro tools session data ownership would not be in most contracts. Anybody have any thoughts on this?
Where any contracts signed before this? Did you take the time to write one up?
it's all in the contract man. Very important before any session takes place. Your bussiness can come up with whatever contract it wants. It's your protection in case any legal issues flare up (and they do all the time). However, don't assume a client dosn't have the instinct to feel uneasy about it, because they usually do. So you have to come up with something that gives them and you peace of mind.
People pay rediculous money for a lawyer to come up with friendly and confusing ways of saying, "We own the masters (that includes session materials, dat taps, files, etc) until you pay up".
Traditionally, if you're a studio who's job it is to create a sonic piece for an artist who is either it's own producer and/or with a producer, you don't own the masters. You only own them until the service has been paid in full.
You simply provide a service at the discretion of the producer and the client he represents.
Defined clearly, a client is the one handing you the money. A client can be the artist themselves, the producer for the client and/or the record label who puts both the producer and artist in your studio. The client can state how he would like the material to be handled and who you hand it to.
As studio/or freelance engineer you're not responsible for determining the outcome of your clients material, other than for the reasons stated. As a producer, however, you could be. Still, you can't (and shouldn't be able to) do anything without that contract signed.
The studio can only hold the material until the client has fufilled his end of the deal. You can't sell it, manipulate it, release it or otherwise shed light on its exsistence if the client dosn't choose to. You simply hold it until the client has met your terms for payment.
The act of holding masters for creative and monitary concerns (like in this case) is usually something you see more with a producer or a record label, not an engineer or studio.
You do have the right to include a clause that may state things like your intention to hold a backup copy to benefit the client just in case. And also terms on how he can aquire that backup. However, you have to keep your claims within logical reasoning and in benefit to both your bussiness and the client.
If you put terms the client dosn't agree with, they don't have to sign it. They can simply choose to go with someone that will give them more reasonable terms.
For example, a producer/studio owner I worked for a long time ago would make it *very* clear to his clients that he would hold a copy of the masters and session files in case the client needed another copy in the future. It was an additional fee for every copy past the first master. The clients could live with that.
In this case, unless otherwise stated, your client technically owns the masters and can request them whenever she would like; provided she has paid for them per your agreement.
However, the problem you're having here is that it dosn't seem that you came up with a contract to cover your bases completely. It feels like this was based on a either a losely assembled contract or word of mouth.
You don't want to run the risk of looking bad to your client, because of course that lasting impression could hurt future bussiness.
Lord knows I've seen plenty of that, too.
), and worked the support forums, all in support of a couple of different DVD projects, and have come to the conclusion that for anything more than 15 or 30 minute home movies, computer-based DVD burning is just not worth the hassle or the gamble...yet. I'm sure - or at least hoping - that the technology will mature sometime soon, but for now it's just not there, IME.