I DON'T want a record deal...

  • Thread starter Thread starter gaffa
  • Start date Start date
I can UNderstand most of the discussion about artists not owning their own copyrights. BUt let's not forget that these artists are often receiving large advances to sign recording and publishing deals. Plus, a good publisher has an operation that is ACtive in making even more money on a copyright (read: movie soundtrack deals, getting future artists to "cover" the tunes, etc...).

So long as a publisher is actively pursuing other opportunities to licensing this music and the songwriter still gets 50% of all income, I see nothing wrong with a more able company owning or administering the copyright. After all, many full-time songwriters are busy writing songs and have little time or desire to MArket music. So for them (and I suspect for most of you in their situation), a large advance (~$100,000+) and the ability to still collect half of the future royalties is a good thing.

Rev E
 
Rev E - my understanding is that at the end of the day, a large advance amounts to squat if loads of costs are subtracted from it, which is often the case, so that artists contracted to majors can find themselves not very well off after all the bills have been paid. And if, at that point, they don't even own their own songs, it's another case of the energy of slaves. Like Courtney Love put it - sharecropping.

The question for these people seems to be: how much are you willing to trade off for the sake of broad exposure?

You know what I'd like to see? One off contracts with the majors. Let's say you've moved a certain number of units on your own, proving your particular album roadworthy. At that point, the majors come round and supply a contract just for that album, and you supply them a big cut in exchange for a nice ride on their distribution vehicle, but you hang onto the copyright ownership. Everybody benefits, no? Why be an employee of the company? That's stupid if there's an alternative. Why be completely in their pocket? That's old-fashioned. Why not own your own songs?

With people moving their own stuff outside and beyond the majors (and sometimes the indies), people have (or should have) more leverage with the majors.

But what do I know? I don't even have a CD together yet. :)
 
I was going to jump back into this thread a while ago when everybody was bitching about Courtney, but we all seemed to have moved on from there.

I can name Courtney's band, and a couple of the songs that have received airplay here, but that's about it. I wasn't putting here up as an example of a sogwriting and performing genius who got screwed by record companies, only cos I thought here article was interesting.

The music business is just that - a business. And as such, everybody involved wnats to make a profit (why else would you be in business?) I think that the big differences in music is that you can make a lot of money in a short time with the right song, and that a good percentage of the "music providers" (read: bands/songwriters) will jump at the chance for exposure, and so are ripe for exploitation. I don't think that the big distributers are that different from most other industries - just that the suppliers are far more naive.

Either way, it's not going to worry me if I never sell a record (although to do that, I'd actually have to write the record first, but that's mere details really). I've got no aspirations to make it big (or at all) in the music biz.

- gaffa
 
Courtney kicks ass!!!???

I could train my dog to play 3 chords!
 
Dobro,

I just wanted to offer a correction. In my last email, my main reference to contracts was mainly Publishing contracts (as a distinct and separate contract from a Recording contract). It is possible and quite common for artist/songwriters to have separate publishing and recording contracts. While I would agree with you that recording contracts have a lot of charges that force artists to basically have to sell a million records to make any money, Publishing contracts have considerably LEss charges AND publishing royalties are counted from record one, meaning that the songwriter/publisher gets paid for every record sold, regardless of if the artist has recouped.

Much of the slavery aspect of the music industry has to do with Recording Contracts and usually Not, Publishing Contracts. Probably one of the dumbest things that an artist/songwriter can do is sign a deal that combines a Recording and Publishing Contract AND cross collaterizes income from one to the other. The take home lesson is that writing a song is a separate and distinct function from recording it and should IN NO WAY be tied up in the same agreement, no matter how much money is on the table.

So, I hope I didn't mislead you with my earlier post. My point was about Publishing agreements, which are much Less of a rip-off than Recording agreements are. Courtney Love's speech seemed to say more negative things about Recording agreements and the newly passed law that now considers that master recordings (the actual sound recording copyright (SR), as distinct from the music/lyrics (PA)) to be work-for-hire. In times past, artists had the flexibility of getting the rights to their master recordings back (after a few years) so that they could assign those masters to another label. Now the law regards those works as works-for-hire, making them eternal property of the record label. But this ownership only referred to the Master Recording copyright (SR) and not the lyrics and music (copyright PA). So my position on a large advance from a Publishing contract, in exchange for a company that ACTIVELY markets those copyrights to be used in other ways, still stands.

Rev E
 
Hey, thanks for the clarification. But for a publishing contract, does anyone ever get anything like an advance? And is it with a publishing company, or a recording company?
 
Publishing deals are signed with a publishing company. However, remember that all major labels, most labels in general, have a publishing division. Many times they try to push a single agreement that covers publishing (songwriting) and recording. Refer to my last post about my views on this.

But it is very possible and reasonably common for well-informed artist/songwriters to sign a deal with a publisher that is separate from the record label OR start their own publishing company and have a larger publisher "administer" the songs for a lesser percentage than the typical 50% of publishing.

For do-it-yourselfers, it's wise to form your own publishing company to ensure that a performance rights organization (BMI, ASCAP or SESAC) picks up performance royalties for radio airplay, if any. Also forming your own publishing company will give you the ability to "publish" songs of other artists if you ever want to put out someone elses material. One last thing, having your own publishing company, will give you more leverage with a major label if you ever get to sign a deal with them.

Rev E
 
Dobro,

I gave all that info and didn't even answer the question. Simple answer: YEs! Songwriters do get advances on Publishing contracts. With well known or proven writers OR artist/writers who are signed to a deal, the advances can be large.

Rev E
 
Well, my view on the subject, fuck, well, thing is, I don't think she's lying at all, I've heard loads of bands getting the same abuse.
But the thing is, is that, look and think if you were in the same situation. Even if you were going through all that shit, nothing, can beat the feeling of making your music heard, and im sure, if you were too stand in front of thousands of people, you would stick to that job, no doubt about it!!
But than, that also makes me think, if that is the reason she would stay on, why on earth would she quote "It'd be better working in a seven eleven". Makes you think doesn't it? Thinking the music industry is that bad, that you would think that a SEVEN ELEVEN would beat being there? Hmmmmmmmm, lets hope we see more articles like this one, then we can decide for ourselfs.

Peace MeLoDy MaStEr
 
"Courtney Love's speech seemed to say more negative things about Recording agreements and the newly passed law that now considers that master recordings (the actual sound recording copyright (SR), as distinct from the music/lyrics (PA)) to be work-for-hire. Now the law regards those works as works-for-hire, making them eternal property of the record label. But this ownership only referred to the Master Recording copyright (SR) and not the lyrics and music (copyright PA)."

Hello, I'm new here and new to copyright laws and all that. My question is: If ,by law, the actual Master Recording, the sound of it, is seperate from the music/lyrics, then would an artist who has a deal with a major record label who still has the rights to the actual music and lyrics be able to make seperate recordings of the same music and sell under a different label? That is what it seemes like since the label wouldn't have control over the music outside of the recordings that they have the rights to.
Sorry if any of this sounds stupid, but if I don't ask any questions I won't get any answers, now will I?
Thanks in advance.
 
EndersGame,

To answer your question: "would an artist who has a deal with a major record label who still has the rights to the actual music and lyrics be able to make seperate recordings of the same music and sell under a different label?"


It depends on the contract that the artist signed. It is common in recording contracts to prevent artists from rerecording songs made under a label. Some of these restrictions last for a period of time (7 - 10 years). But it all depends on the contract. It could be forever.

I think the take-home lesson is that if you ever sign a record contract, limit this re-recording term to as short as possible (or have it completely omitted). The last thing that you want is to not be able to rerecord your song if you want to.

IMO, more musicians (and their attorneys) need to be more forward-thinking. Even with a lot of money on the table, think long-term.... Ultimately, ownership rights, the right to freely do something (like rerecord YOur tunes), the right to buy back the masters for a stated fee.... these things are much more valuable in the long-term than upfront money. Those things should be guarded like the royal family jewels. You should sign a contract thinking "what if this relationship doesn't work out?".

Courtney Love makes very good points, but a lot of her grief could have been simply solved if she and her lawyer read the agreement more carefully, thought more about the long-term and refused to budge on certain things (reversion rights, accounting, etc...).

Rev E
 
Thanks for the clear answer Rev E, you do a newbie like myself much good. Damn, I better take a few business classes. I never want to get screwed out of my music.
 
there is an audience for every type of music and we're only
seeing the tip of the internet iceberg. all we have to do
(those of us who work at creating and performing music) is
to find a way to reach the greatest number of listeners in our efforts to be heard and maybe (for some) make the world
a little better with the tools we've been given and as a bonus be compensated for all the work we put into it.
i'm pretty sure i'd like to fuck courtney after a shower.
 
Hot topic

Wow, some great thoughts in this thread. I think
it is like the analog / digital discussions where
there are good points all around. The record
companies give nice goodies to their imprisoned
artists, but staying independent has the peace
of freedom and a few goodies. With one CD
release on the market as an independent, I
got a little air play, a little marketing, but
generally failure overall. I'm still having a
blast however. I still have my soul, peace, and fun
recording at my pace in my home studio. Ya know,
we have to love it to hang in here year after year.
A little inside track info: If you write a hit song,
nobody can stop it. Like a virus, a hit will infest
and grow. Why ? Radio stations want the credit for
breaking a hit song, apart from record company credits. Additionally, When it hits, the public will plow down
the record company blockages to get to your product.
They will take you to the stars as an independent.
It has been done many times. We just don't hear about
it; they don't want us to know it is possible. You will still have your soul at that point too. A hit probably won't happen for most of us, but we must admit, we are having a blast just toying with the game. - If you must have a record deal, go through "TAXI" they are the best
A&R people out there. They will tell you if your song is a polished turd, or great. They will also tell you what you need to improve. When you send them something good, they will personally place it on the desk of the largest record companies and they will sign you - they respect TAXI. Get ready to sell your soul at that point. - Even though
I don't personally like record companies or their tactics, I keep the TAXI link on my site for independents who must
go for the golden goose. good luck....

Chuck


Chuck

[Edited by Chuckschwandt on 08-08-2000 at 09:43]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top