| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
publishing income
If a musician in a rock band contributes occasionally to song
arrangements, but only in a 'second opinion' kind of way (i.e. after an initial sequence is already in place), and occasionally to harmonies, should that band member be eligible for any publishing income? What about a bass player who performs and composes most of the bass lines? (Sorry, I realise this is a huge can of worms) |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rob McLennan - ZETLAND wrote: If a musician in a rock band contributes occasionally to song arrangements, but only in a 'second opinion' kind of way (i.e. after an initial sequence is already in place), and occasionally to harmonies, should that band member be eligible for any publishing income? What about a bass player who performs and composes most of the bass lines? (Sorry, I realise this is a huge can of worms) These issues should be addressed in your Band Partnership Agreement. There are a few ways to do it and a good entertainment attorney should be able to help you sort this out. It can be a pretty gray area. If it isn't spelled out in your BPA clearly then you will have to let a judge decide if you get into a disagreement, and the judge's remedy probably won't make anyone completely happy. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
It always amazes me the "can of worms" that gets open by band members who
are overly concerned about "their share of the pie" when there generally isn't any pie to be anguishing over. 99% of the bands out there will NEVER have a song that generates enough money to squabble over, and yet huge amounts of time and creative energy will be wasted (not to mention ill-will generated) by members of a band trying to figure out who did what. If you didn't write the song (melody/lyrics, major hook or chordal structure), you're "****in' into the wind" anyway. Anything else is you doing your job as a member of the band - it's the reason your in the band. A well placed bass part or harmony does NOT entitle you to a share of the proceeds - that's just your job in that particular position in the band - otherwise they'll get someone who can do that job! As the previous poster mentioned, if its that big a concern to you (in other words we're talking real money here and not just your ego), have the band sign a partnership agreement. IMO, it's a waste of money being spent on the lawyer rather than good food and beer to share with your mates after a session - but that's your perogative. In my own experience, I've walked away from some world class (but totally unknown) players because the first thing they wanted to talk about wasn't the music, but what would be their share of it. In many cases, we were just having a lark recording something with no expectations or ambitions for more - we were creating art, not commerce. Unless you are about to sign a major contract or come into some large amount of money as a result of your songs - I'd advise you to drop the ego trip and enjoy the whole point of your art which IS the music. If it's not, you're in the wrong field. Oh yeah - what is the freakin' point of this post on a recording newsgroup (between posts like these and the OT political/naked celebrity posts - I'm about to lose my mind!!!)?!? And why am I in such a mood this morning?!? Breath deep John....let the coffee and chemicals kick in... -- John Marsden Little-Big Sound audio for video, film & digital media; graphics & software solutions www.lbsound.com "Rob McLennan - ZETLAND" wrote in message om... If a musician in a rock band contributes occasionally to song arrangements, but only in a 'second opinion' kind of way (i.e. after an initial sequence is already in place), and occasionally to harmonies, should that band member be eligible for any publishing income? What about a bass player who performs and composes most of the bass lines? (Sorry, I realise this is a huge can of worms) |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
No.
A song becomes a song when melody and lyric (and I would add chord progression) is created. Everyone who contributed to that becomes part writer, and unless specified before the writing session, with equal shares of the writing and publishing. You get a publishing share if you are a writer, or a writer gives or sells you a publisher share. Nothing you can do besides writing earns you publishing. Playing a bass part from a chord chart, or even changing a note from a transcribed part becauses it's better doesn't give you writer or publisher status. If I write a new bass line and harmony part for "I Saw Her Standing There" I don't squeeze into the Beatles split. Had I had the forsight to sit with the lads and contribute to the song, then I get a split. If bandmates show up with a completed song, and the band works together on an arrangement, still no writer's cut and thus no publishing. My most painful realization of the unquestionable domination of writing was this. I bought a "sample" CD of thick synth sounds, created by someone I don't know and probably never will. It cost me $100 bucks retail. A composer came into my studio, to create music for a TV show. I loaded one of the sounds, a drone if you will. The composer pushed down "E" two otaves below middle C for 3 minutes. At the end of the day, after mixing several things, I made my hourly rate and was paid. The composer took that 3 minute drone to the show and by chance became a very popular underscore choice. I found out later it was worth hundreds of thousand of dollars over 5 years from it's use. The guy who made the sound got his share of the retail price, I got an hourly rate, and the "composer" with the one finger got a house, because he was the "writer". (It's important to note he had the job that gave the drone it's value in the marketplace, that's the talent in this case.) The lesson is, be the writer, and/or "it's all about the gig." By the way, guys who hum or sing melodies into tape recorders and hire arrangers to add the chords are sole writers, the arrangers get their fee. Good luck; See12mic (Rob McLennan - ZETLAND) wrote in message . com... If a musician in a rock band contributes occasionally to song arrangements, but only in a 'second opinion' kind of way (i.e. after an initial sequence is already in place), and occasionally to harmonies, should that band member be eligible for any publishing income? What about a bass player who performs and composes most of the bass lines? (Sorry, I realise this is a huge can of worms) |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Rob McLennan - ZETLAND" wrote in message
om... If a musician in a rock band contributes occasionally to song arrangements, but only in a 'second opinion' kind of way (i.e. after an initial sequence is already in place), and occasionally to harmonies, should that band member be eligible for any publishing income? What about a bass player who performs and composes most of the bass lines? No. My gut reaction is if they're asking, I'd find new band members because they don't "get it" and are unlikely to "get it" later on should the band ever become successful. -- Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined! 615.385.8051 http://www.hyperback.com |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
The chord progression cannot be protected. There are thousands of
songs with chords from I Got Rhythm alone. Luke I didn't say anything about protection. If Lennon & McCartney came in with a song and George changed the chord progression, maybe everyone liked it better, George may have an right to a part of the writer/publisher share. It's not automatic, but it could be discussed and then split. Could go either way, it falls into that arranger meets writer gray area. Especially if you compare it to a bass player's decisions on how to play over the B minor bar, which has nothing to do with melody, lyric, or song structure. Someone put it to me this way years ago. Real writing starts at the blank page. How blank is the page when the bass player gets to it in rehearsal, that may be the question. "Not very" is more often the answer, and that makes him a player and not a writer. see12mic |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
|
You say "unless specified" and "with equal protection", which suggests
that legal protection is an issue here, and that by default, the chord progression is legally protected as well -- unless legally otherwise set forth. Perhaps I've missed something though, and you can set me straight. Again, I never used the word protection, you have added that. I am not talking about copyright or any agreement a band makes prior to writing music and creating a recording. The original question in this thread was: am I intitled to publishing income if the person in question was not a writer, the answer is no. When two people write a song under normal circumstances, the song is split between the writers. If the song makes a dollar, from record sales and airplay, each writer makes 50 cents. However, the 50 cents is paid as 25 cents to each writer and 25 cents to each share of the publishing. The publishing portion is like any valued item, you can give it away or sell it. You can never legally sell your writer's share. So John Lennon and I write "Heart & Soul". John and I write the melody and the lyric. However John and I have the chord progression C (for 4 bars) and then F, then G. We play the song for you, our bass player and you suggest after two bars of the C, to move to A minor (which is the classic progression for the song). John and I like it. The melody stays intact and so does the lyric. Do you deserve writers credit for the A minor? That's the gray area. Since you are a band member, it should be considered. If we brought you in to do an arrangement and we're paying for such, you most likely would not. If instead of suggesting the A minor, you played a tasty lick between the F and G and then asked for a writer's share, you wouldn't get one. You wouldn't get one for the harmony part either. If you were to write with Paul McCartney today, Paul might think, since he is a songwriting legend, he should get 75% of the song and you, since this is your first song should get 25%. That's an example of specificing the split beforehand. Doesn't happen often, but could. This deal should be cut before the two writers begin working on a song. Other than that they get equal shares (ownership/income) from the song. I hope that clears it up. see12mic I didn't say anything about protection. If Lennon & McCartney came in with a song and George changed the chord progression, maybe everyone liked it better, George may have an right to a part of the writer/publisher share. It's not automatic, but it could be discussed and then split. Could go either way, it falls into that arranger meets writer gray area. Especially if you compare it to a bass player's decisions on how to play over the B minor bar, which has nothing to do with melody, lyric, or song structure. Someone put it to me this way years ago. Real writing starts at the blank page. How blank is the page when the bass player gets to it in rehearsal, that may be the question. "Not very" is more often the answer, and that makes him a player and not a writer. see12mic I *think* I see the distinction you are trying to make. However I'm somewhat confused. You say: A song becomes a song when melody and lyric (and I would add chord progression) is created. Everyone who contributed to that becomes part writer, and unless specified before the writing session, with equal shares of the writing and publishing. You say "unless specified" and "with equal protection", which suggests that legal protection is an issue here, and that by default, the chord progression is legally protected as well -- unless legally otherwise set forth. Perhaps I've missed something though, and you can set me straight. Luke |
|
#14
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
Luke Kaven wrote in message . ..
wrote: You say "unless specified" and "with equal protection", which suggests that legal protection is an issue here, and that by default, the chord progression is legally protected as well -- unless legally otherwise set forth. Perhaps I've missed something though, and you can set me straight. Again, I never used the word protection, you have added that. I am not talking about copyright or any agreement a band makes prior to writing music and creating a recording. See above, I quote you as saying "with equal protection". That's straight from your post, right? You don't distinguish enough between what is protected and what is negotiated. I can't take issue with your opinion on what should be negotiated. We agree that the arrangement can be whatever is agreed-upon. But you don't specify what it means to be a "writer". Luke Here's my Original Post: "No. A song becomes a song when melody and lyric (and I would add chord progression) is created. Everyone who contributed to that becomes part writer, and unless specified before the writing session, with equal shares of the writing and publishing. You get a publishing share if you are a writer, or a writer gives or sells you a publisher share. Nothing you can do besides writing earns you publishing. Playing a bass part from a chord chart, or even changing a note from a transcribed part becauses it's better doesn't give you writer or publisher status. If I write a new bass line and harmony part for "I Saw Her Standing There" I don't squeeze into the Beatles split. Had I had the forsight to sit with the lads and contribute to the song, then I get a split. If bandmates show up with a completed song, and the band works together on an arrangement, still no writer's cut and thus no publishing. My most painful realization of the unquestionable domination of writing was this. I bought a "sample" CD of thick synth sounds, created by someone I don't know and probably never will. It cost me $100 bucks retail. A composer came into my studio, to create music for a TV show. I loaded one of the sounds, a drone if you will. The composer pushed down "E" two otaves below middle C for 3 minutes. At the end of the day, after mixing several things, I made my hourly rate and was paid. The composer took that 3 minute drone to the show and by chance became a very popular underscore choice. I found out later it was worth hundreds of thousand of dollars over 5 years from it's use. The guy who made the sound got his share of the retail price, I got an hourly rate, and the "composer" with the one finger got a house, because he was the "writer". (It's important to note he had the job that gave the drone it's value in the marketplace, that's the talent in this case.) The lesson is, be the writer, and/or "it's all about the gig." By the way, guys who hum or sing melodies into tape recorders and hire arrangers to add the chords are sole writers, the arrangers get their fee. Good luck; See12mic" I did not use the word "Protection" as you see. You did however, and now you're referencing your own erroneous sentence. A writer is a person who contributed significant intellectual content to melody or lyric to create a song. Period. Keeping with the beatles theme, "Got To Get You Into My Life" recorded by Earth Wind & Fire from the Sgt. Pepper's Movie, is a completely different arrangement, and although I haven't analyzed it, probably has some substitution chords, but that doesn't make Maurice White a writer on the song. The people (or person) who wrote the music and the lyric are the writers. If someone adds a bridge or a B section to a song they are a writer. If a band member substitues a chord, well, gray area. Prior to a rehearsal the band should know where they stand when this happens. Most times small changes don't mean writer's credit. There is no protection. I repeat, no protection during the song creation process. If the writer brings in a finished song in rehearsal and rejects your changes, you're not a writer. If you suggest a change he likes and he tells you he will not offer writing credit, you then begin negotiating the terms of him using your change. Once he likes the change, you can't un-ring the bell, and I assume you're out of luck. It's good to have an agreement with people you're working with. When I write with other folks, they come over and we work on something until it's finished to our satisfaction. When we are demo-ing the piece, and a guitar player plays a solo he makes up on the spot, the last thing I expect from him is a request for a writer's share. Once you have a disagreement on who played what role in the creation of a song, you can work it out amonst yourself, or throw lawyers at one another, because there is no protection. So much so, I would never suggest there was. This pretty much ends songwriting partnership 101, Luke, if this is still not clear, check into some resources offered at BMI or ASCAP. Or pick up a songwriting book with this area covered, maybe it will be more clear. Bottom line. Take 10 minutes prior, and let everyone know what role each will play. I've been writer, singer, keyboardist and engineer at various times and only one role - writer - do I manipulate the material. Good Luck. |
|
#16
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thanks for everyone's input. Seems the concensus is that musicians
should not get a cut of publishing unless they contribute to melody/lyrics. In my case, I was considering giving away a small fraction of the publishing income (not copyright) as a reimbursement for my band members' loyalty and commitment in attending band rehearsals for the last three years. It's an opportunity for them to share in some (publishing) income that is not eaten into by expenses. And it will keep them motivated. I realise you could argue that they will eventually get reimbursement by way of the recording income/album sales, touring, etc. But I hear too many stories about bands hardly ever making any money from these streams. Rob. |
|
#17
|
|||
|
|||
|
Seems the concensus is that musicians
should not get a cut of publishing unless they contribute to melody/lyrics. Publsihing is different that the writers share. Some bands will share in a piece of the publishing of an album as the non writng members don't get the same income and may work for a lot of years before record or gig income makes a difference. Notice I said some bands not all. Also you need to be careful as if someone quits early on and you need to hire someone else, a publishing share is gone. In my case, I was considering giving away a small fraction of the publishing income (not copyright) as a reimbursement for my band members' loyalty and commitment in attending band rehearsals for the last three years. It happens. Sometimes a band's commitment and talent increases the value of the copyright. I would never do this lightly however. --------------------------------------- "I know enough to know I don't know enough" |
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#19
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Charles Alexander) wrote in message om...
(Rob McLennan - ZETLAND) wrote in message . com... If a musician in a rock band contributes occasionally to song arrangements, but only in a 'second opinion' kind of way (i.e. after an initial sequence is already in place), and occasionally to harmonies, should that band member be eligible for any publishing income? What about a bass player who performs and composes most of the bass lines? (Sorry, I realise this is a huge can of worms) I'm not an entertainment attorney and whatever agreement you have with your band supercedes what I am about to say. In the strictest sense of the word - No, he or she is not entitled to publishing income. However, if you want or like - you can pay s/he a fee for arrangement and/or bass/vocal sides. But again it comes down to whatever you've arranged. Alternatively, you can assign a percentage of income(sometimes called "points") from record sales or other revenue to your bassist. Though this is typically for producers and arrangers etc. A lot of contemporary pop bands do have agreements with the primary songwriters in the band that they share in music publishing revenue - either equally or a small percentage. I think this is done more for political/personal rather than legal/artistic/proprietary reasons. In just depends on how you and your bassist want to define that relationship. In Nashville, session and band musicians heavily contribute towards the arrangement of the song and it is done in a collaborative atmosphere. However, there is no expectation of any other payment except what the individual musician is being paid for playing on the session. It is considered a work for hire. YMMV. Charles This is the answer I was looking for - thanks Charles. You've really hit the nail on the head here I think. |
|
#20
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Mike Rivers) wrote in message news:znr1084239390k@trad...
In article writes: Thanks for everyone's input. Seems the concensus is that musicians should not get a cut of publishing unless they contribute to melody/lyrics. Well, nobody who doesn't contribute to the writing of the song should get a cut of the publishing, unless they're contributing to selling it, which is really the most important part. Yep, this is true. However there are many ways to skin this particular cat. Legally, Rob doesn't have any other obligations. However, I've heard that some bands like Air Supply (when they were hot) and Boston (when they were really, really hot) chose to treat everybody but the two primaries in each case as sidemen. Well paid sidemen but sidemen none the less. With the exception of any sidemen who might have co-written songs. For example, Air Supply's keyboardist was a pretty prolific songwriter in his own right and brought songs to messrs. Russell and Hitchcock all the time - I have no confirmation of this - but they then would add their own names to that of the keyboardist and call it a co-written work. This though a tad smarmy - seemed to work for everybody concerned. Especially when the royalties came pouring in. The benefit to the other band members was that no matter how the band did - they were guaranteed a minimum "salary." The benefit to the primary band members was that they didn't have to give up their publishing to "keep" guys around. Again, since the only model I know is the Nashville model. I can only speak from what is considered the de facto standard here. If you need players here, you pay them whatever the going rate for the specific player is, often times at the end of the night, you're out of pocket at least $100 or $150. Musicians here who are good or are in demand, usually get paid. If not they move on to someone who can or will pay. Artists typically don't unless they're a name draw. So it behooves you to be really good at an instrument for session work - at least here. They usually don't get paid much but it's something. I'm a songwriter/artist. I can't remember the last time I got a paying club gig in this town unless it was the cover or worse...tips. The irony is that once you move here, you have to leave town to make a living. Charles |
|
#21
|
|||
|
|||
|
If a musician in a rock band contributes occasionally to song arrangements, but only in a 'second opinion' kind of way (i.e. after an initial sequence is already in place), and occasionally to harmonies, should that band member be eligible for any publishing income? What about a bass player who performs and composes most of the bass lines? (Sorry, I realise this is a huge can of worms) These issues should be addressed in your Band Partnership Agreement. There are a few ways to do it and a good entertainment attorney should be able to help you sort this out. It can be a pretty gray area. If it isn't spelled out in your BPA clearly then you will have to let a judge decide if you get into a disagreement, and the judge's remedy probably won't make anyone completely happy. In theory even if you contribute one note or even one word tot the song you are entitled. How this will actually work out will depend. Members of a group get a percentage and what that percentage is depends on the contract - if there is no contract involved then it definitely will be a can of worms! When you say "already in place" do you mean after it has been completed? What is the issue if that 2nd opinion is performed in a live concert? Again it depends on what the contract says. Rose Send A "ShoutOut" to the World! http://members.aol.com/Roseb441702/shoutout.htm |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
If a musician in a rock band contributes occasionally to song arrangements, but only in a 'second opinion' kind of way (i.e. after an initial sequence is already in place), and occasionally to harmonies, should that band member be eligible for any publishing income? What about a bass player who performs and composes most of the bass lines? (Sorry, I realise this is a huge can of worms) These issues should be addressed in your Band Partnership Agreement. There are a few ways to do it and a good entertainment attorney should be able to help you sort this out. It can be a pretty gray area. If it isn't spelled out in your BPA clearly then you will have to let a judge decide if you get into a disagreement, and the judge's remedy probably won't make anyone completely happy. In theory even if you contribute one note or even one word tot the song you are entitled. How this will actually work out will depend. Members of a group get a percentage and what that percentage is depends on the contract - if there is no contract involved then it definitely will be a can of worms! When you say "already in place" do you mean after it has been completed? What is the issue if that 2nd opinion is performed in a live concert? Again it depends on what the contract says. Rose Send A "ShoutOut" to the World! http://members.aol.com/Roseb441702/shoutout.htm |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| John Mellencamp Attacks President Bush In Open Letter | Audio Opinions | |||
Linear Mode
