Fun Stuff > BAND

Indie Label Signing Practices OR Oral Contracts Are Bad But Oral Sex Is Still OK

(1/7) > >>

pilsner:
Following up on this excellent article that Tommy linked in another thread, I was stunned to learn that not just one but a number of indie labels have been satisfied with oral agreements managing ownership of copyright and division of future sales profit.  Any self-respecting lawyer pretty much anywhere in the world will tell you that an oral agreement concerning intellectual property rights is an awful idea -- on the other hand it seems almost a matter of pride that the community is so tight no one will ever sue.  Completely missing, as alluded to in the article, the issue of what happens when the musicians themselves pass away and the beneficiaries of their estates sue, ignorant or uncaring what comity existed between the deceased and their labels.  Perhaps the salient point here is that these were kids at the beginnings of their careers -- nevertheless not memorializing an agreement in writing down the road when it is clearly worth something is... shocking.

Anyway, this thread is about casual signing practices in independent labels in general, and the Butthole Surfers/Touch & Go debacle in particular (assuming the depths of that subject weren't plumbed in that other thread). 

Melodic:
i'd take a blowjob as an oral agreement in pretty much any legal matter.

a pack of wolves:

--- Quote from: pilsner on 17 Feb 2010, 19:25 ---Completely missing, as alluded to in the article, the issue of what happens when the musicians themselves pass away and the beneficiaries of their estates sue, ignorant or uncaring what comity existed between the deceased and their labels.

--- End quote ---

An artist's releases still being financially viable even after they're dead is extremely rare. The chances of those records still being viable to keep in print and the death happening before the label has recouped its costs and the albums are perceived by relatives to be worth enough to take the label to court over them in the hope of making more money are so small that it really isn't worth worrying about.


--- Quote from: pilsner on 17 Feb 2010, 19:25 ---on the other hand it seems almost a matter of pride that the community is so tight no one will ever sue.

--- End quote ---

It's absolutely a matter of pride that people will work hard and do the right thing without needing to be forced into it by law or even monetary incentive. Personally, I think that's unequivocally a good thing, and it works without lawyers policing people's relationships. It's rather telling that the bands who are signed to major labels with contracts drawn up by lawyers are the ones that are the most exploited.

McTaggart:
Does it work though? It might work fine while the people are a part of this community but after a sudden falling out or a gradual loss of faith what keeps everyone honest is gone. Written agreements are also not about policing relationships, they're about policing property. Putting it in writing doesn't mean you distrust the person, if anything it's a symbol of how strong your agreement is.

Oh and maybe it's the mathematician in me but something being unlikely does not mean you should ignore it. It is worth worrying about because it can happen and it will happen if your sample space is big enough. It only needs to happen once for it to really screw someone over.

tricia kidd:
i assume most of us are familiar with "scenes", and know that the definition of "scene" is, among other things, "breeding ground for drama, infighting, backstabbing and stories with two sides".

usually this manifests in people writing songs about each other, or talking shit in interviews.  when Ministry screwed over Gibby Haynes, all the Surfers did is write a song about it.  Jim Thirlwell has had much to say about Lydia Lunch, both obliquely and in interviews.  Tricky once called Bjork a "psychic vampire".  and who can forget this shirt?



this has been true in scenes for as long as scenes have existed.  in light of this, i do think it is naive for anyone to believe an informal "handshake agreement" will be peachy keen forever.  reading that article, i simply can't take a side.  both parties clearly made mistakes.  Gibby should have just called Rusk, but Rusk should not have ignored the Surfers' manager's calls on the assumption that either Gibby would eventually call or the situation would just go away.

look at what happened to Factory Records with the Happy Mondays.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page