Legal question for some of the professionals . . .

  • Thread starter Thread starter chessrock
  • Start date Start date
C

chessrock

Banned
Here's a hypothetical scenario:


Suppose someone comes to you for a small recording project.

Their plan, ultimately, is to distribute 100 CDs.

When the project is done, you give them 2 copies: One is an audio copy clearly labeled "Audio," while the other one is a data CD, with the 16-bit .wav file, appropriately labeled "data."

You tell them briefly the difference between the two, and that they will want to take the data copy to wherever it is they are having it burned.

Two weeks later, you get a call from the client, telling you they got their CDs back from whoever burned the copies for them. But there's one problem: They put the CD in, and there's no sound. Nothing. You tell the client to bring it up on their computer and see if there might be a .wav file there. Sure enough, there is.

So basically, the CD house just burned them 100 copies of their .wav files.

Anyway, the client now wants you to reimburse them for half of the expense to have them re-burned. Their logic / reasoning is that you didn't clearly explain to them the difference between the audio CD and the data file CD. That you should have explained to them that the data CD will not play audio on a standard CD player, etc. Not to mention the fact that you told them to bring the data CD to whomever would be burning it for them.


So my question is . . . what do you do?

And more importantly, what do you do to cover yourself from future problems like this? Do you have a legal document for them to sign that clearly spells out that your job is to record, and mix the audio, etc. and that any problems that occur further down the line are not your responsibility?

Keep in mind, now, that I'm dealing mostly with dipshits, so there are probably any number of problems like this that could occur, and I highly doubt I can anticipate every possible scenario, so I'm wondering if there's any sort of blanket contract that would cover my ass from anything that occurs once the project leaves my door.

Thanks!

Chessnubs
 
Last edited:
Maybe I'm out of the loop, but I've never heard sending WAV files to CD dup plants.

After all, it's part of the mastering engineer's job description to create a redbook master... FORMAT CHANGE AND COMPATABILITY was originally what mastering was all about, anyway.
 
bleyrad said:
Maybe I'm out of the loop, but I've never heard sending WAV files to CD dup plants.
Click to expand...

I see. Would it then be the studio's job to either provide the redbook master and/or advise the client to have a redbook master created for duplication?
 
if a client makes it clear that they want a product that is able to directly be duplicated should they take it straight to a duplication house... well, i'd say you should do that :)

on the other hand, it's entirely possible i just haven't been keeping up with duplication houses in the last few years, and WAV->audio duplication has become common.
last time i had something duplicated, the plant insisted on either DAT or redbook (and even a redbook master was a very new and sketchy idea at the time... i opted to send a DAT)
 
If you do a master for duplication always mark it clearly:
"CD Red Book Premaster" which will make it all perfectly clear. Also mark all other disks clearly as to their content.

1. If the disks you gave your client were marked, they have no comeback whatever.

2. If they send the wrong disk to a duplication house, they are accountable for their own stupidity.

3. If they arranged for an audio CD to be copied from a red book master, but burned data copies instead knowing they were supposed to copy audio......... the duplication house suffers from the same stupidity and should absorb at least some of the costs themselves.

4. Any reliable duplication house will start with verifying the data. Most are able to accept oudio as red book premasters, or as data files (some prefer data), depending on what has been arranged by the client.

5. Unless you gave them a data disk marked as a red book premaster, and a red book disk marked as a data disk, you are not liable whatever.

6. In the future, if you have a client who is going to send your disk to a duplication house, establish contact with the duplication house direct, which will give you understanding of their processes / requirements, and avoid mistakes.

7. Most pro studios have accounts with duplication house(s), so they can offer duplication facilities to their clients. This is a source of revenue (studios get a percentage of the business), and takes the client out of the loop, which avoids problems.
 
i am no professional...but i think that nobody can make you pay anything, simply because there was no documents at all saying anything. it didnt say that you had to explain in more detail about the cds. i think this guy/band is an idiot for not making sure and asking more legitamate questions. ha.
 
I think a question you need to ask yourself is "even if I'm right, if these guys think I'm a jerk, how many and what people are they going to tell not to record at my studio?". It might be worth the cash to prevent negative word of mouth.
 
Now the cheap ass bullshit infecting the industry comes home to roost. Im all for Do it Yourself stuff. I made a career of it. But there comes a point where you have gone FAR below rock bottom and are only throwing good money after bad.

In an effort to be a cheapass, your client has taken it upon himself to get the dupes handled. Maybe he was just ignorant, but either way, in the old days it wouldve been handled fine.

Being cheapasses themselves, the Dupe house failed to listen to the CD, or find out exactly what they were copying

welcome home cheapasses, hope you like paying twice!
 
haha...yeah.

maybe you should tell hte band, take it up with the duplication house! they should have took your data disc (clearly marked!), and made it into stereo cd-audio format!

lol!
 
legally since the CDs were properly marked you are not responsible.

however,

you need to consider future earnings.

if you do pay 1/2 will this client come back and spend much more money?

will this client hook you up with other clients?
 
I have to agree with cross, you really need to weigh the bad word of mouth vs. half the cost of 100 CD's.

However, before I took the hit in the pants I would find out which duping company this guy went with and give them a call and find out how in the hell they could press 100 audio CD's for your client and not check them to make sure they actually play. You may be able to talk them into either redoing them for free, or at a discount and this might reduce or completely erase your need to come up with any cash yourself. If it works you can really look good to your clients for "going to bat" for them. If it doesn't you don't need to say anything. If it came down to that I would cover half the cost and do what your doing...find a way to help ensure that doesn't happen again.

Clearly the fault lies first in the client and secondly in the duping house.
 
Chess - Sounds like your client went to a cheap, bit for bit, slap in the disk and press copy dupe house. I doubt that they ever thought about Redbook (if they even know what it is), or checking signal integrety and level, or anything more than pressing the copy button. If that's the case, it's hard to say that the dupe house is culpable. If they were handed only the one CD to copy, and they did it, then they did their job. If on the other hand they represent themselves as an audio CD duplication plant, then they have implied an expertise that should include the most basic of quality control, ie. seeing to it that they were actually manufacturing a redbook audio CD. In this case, I would think they should agree to do it again for the cost of media.
Your client was acting as a producer, and was ill equipped for the task. It would be the producer's job to insure that the proper masters and instructions were delivered to the duplication plant, not the studio owner or engineer. What they did was to depend on you to tell them how to do that job, which you may have done poorly. In the legal sense, this was probably not a written or implied responsibility on your part. You were contracted to provide recording services, and to deliver to your client a master recording. Having done that, your legal responsibility ended. Now we tread onto moral ground, as it sounds like you may have givin your client bad advice on which disc to deliver to the plant when you probably should have told them it was their responsibility to determine which format the plant prefered to work from, having no working relationship with the plant yourself.
The fairest thing may be for the plant to provide the re-duplication for cost of media, and for you and the client to split the media cost, which should be no big hit for anyone. But as I say, legally, I think your job ended when you handed over the masters.
Anyway, that's my take on it, with the implied three paragraphs worth of disclaimers that boil down to "hey, what do I know".
Good luck, RD
 
I have had short-run duplication as part of my business here for about 2 years now,and can attest to the "murphy's law" factor.

Any reputable cd duplication facility should thoroughly check the master before burning a run of copies and delivering them to the client. I don't know what type of duplication equipment they were using,but my stack has a little screen that tells me what is going on,and I watch it like a hawk while burning. If it was me doing that run,and I had printed 100 blanks that were obviously for an audio project,and the display tells me I have a data disc,alarm bells would start going off and I would start to investigate. On audio projects,I always burn a test copy and listen to verify I am getting good product before starting the run. Then I will pull one disc at random from each run of seven and throw it in the player for a spot check.


Good luck!
 
Honestly, after thinking it over, I'm definitely going to send a partial refund . . . because I think it's good business practice to always do whatever I possibly can to ensure the client walks away 100% happy. And I understand that had I had better knowlege, I might have been able to provide more accurate advice, and that's a value-added I totally lost out on.

I feel like an idiot for telling them the wrong thing, and to me, that's unacceptable on my part. If I plan on ever making a serious go as an engineer, then I need to be sharper and more in-tune with what's going on around me before I give advice.

As to who's fault it is, though . . . I'm of the opinion that it's the client's fault for not looking in to it more. You should ask the CD dupe house what kind of file they need. If you don't, then you're at their mercy, and you've basically forfeited your control.

Understanding hindsight is 20/20 . . . if you're totally clueless to the process . . . you tell the dupe house something to the effect of : "Hey, I got two copies here, one's labeled 'audio,' and the other is labeled 'data.' Which one do I give you?"


End of story.
 
have you tried contacting the duplication house directly and seeing if they will redo the job for some reduced cost?

that might make your 50/50 split a little cheaper...
 
I think the main blame falls on the dupe house. See if they will take some of the cost and if not go somewhere else.
 
chessrock said:
Honestly, after thinking it over, I'm definitely going to send a partial refund . . . because I think it's good business practice to always do whatever I possibly can to ensure the client walks away 100% happy. And I understand that had I had better knowlege, I might have been able to provide more accurate advice, and that's a value-added I totally lost out on.

I feel like an idiot for telling them the wrong thing, and to me, that's unacceptable on my part. If I plan on ever making a serious go as an engineer, then I need to be sharper and more in-tune with what's going on around me before I give advice.

As to who's fault it is, though . . . I'm of the opinion that it's the client's fault for not looking in to it more. You should ask the CD dupe house what kind of file they need. If you don't, then you're at their mercy, and you've basically forfeited your control.

Understanding hindsight is 20/20 . . . if you're totally clueless to the process . . . you tell the dupe house something to the effect of : "Hey, I got two copies here, one's labeled 'audio,' and the other is labeled 'data.' Which one do I give you?"


End of story.
Click to expand...
Good move.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top