Open for Coldplay? Don't Get Too Excited

Check out the film “Great World of Sound,” a hilarious but depressing movie that addresses the myriad ways those in the music business prey upon the “little guy” and his (or her) hopes and dreams. The characters “auditioning” in the movie are all real performers who had no idea they were participating in a fictional story, which is a little exploitative in itself, but worth it to expose these all-too-prevalent scams.

Oh yeah!! I’ve heard about that and have never seen it. I’m going to have to check it out. Thanks for the tip!

Yeah, I heard about this – so shocking! What’s the point of entering?!

You’re so right, Helen. I don’t think there’s any point in entering. This is just exactly what’s wrong with the music industry.

you are totally wrong in your reading of this–the artist is not giving away the rights to the music it created before entering into the contest–capitol records gets an option on the same genneral onerous terms and conditions in most label deals–it could have been better stated, but nobody is getting robbed here–and before you give legal advice and scare insigend artists, you might want to run your opinion by an attorney

I am no way connected with capitol records or any label–i just find it funny that everyone is all of a sudden a legal expert on a simple contest like this–if you want to blast out about signing your rights away, go look at the deal you have to sign before you enter american idol.

Thanks for your comment. Nope, not a lawyer, but definitely familiar with a bad deal when I see one. You’re right, the American Idol contract is ridiculous. That doesn’t make the Capitol deal – or any other bad deal – any better or more justifiable.

Yep, there are lots of bad deals out there – but worse than the bad terms of the deal they hold the 60 day option for is the unfettered rights to use the contest entrants music, images, name, etc – this is the way they make sure they can capitalize on this band if they happen to make it big some day in any way, and it’s a joke. Is it legal? Sure. Would a lawyer say that they can do that? Sure. Did a lawyer write these rules? I don’t doubt it. Does that make a good deal for an unsigned band? No way, no how.

I hear about exploitative, horrible – and completely legal – deals all the time. Just because they’re legal doesn’t mean I’m going to say any band should settle for them.

The real problem with this trend is that there are always going to be musicians who will enter anyway (probably living at home and/or with no care to what they are endorsing) by participating. In LA, the pay-to-play model has been steadily branching out since the 80’s when it started to catch on in clubs. And now the same exploitative trend seems to be spreading to the few areas where there was still some chance of making some money. Maybe someday a light will go on when there is no longer any financial incentive for good musicians to participate in the music business at all.

i just read the official rules. it never says anything about receiving rights to the participants music. WHAT IT SAYS IS THIS:

Each member of the winning band grants permission for Sponsor and those acting under its authority to use his/her name, photograph, voice and/or likeness, for advertising and/or publicity purposes, in any and all media now known or hereinafter invented without territorial or time limitations and without additional compensation.

That’s what that means, Musicians Says. That means they have the right to use your music and image any way they like, anywhere they like, whenever they like, without paying you. They can’t get your future recordings but they can use everything you send them, anyway they want.

What I want to stress to everyone here is that this may sound innocuous right now, but this the very sort of thing an unsigned band often agree to that seems like no big deal and then comes back to bite them big time if they “make it.” Imagine you enter this contest. A few years from now you have a hit song. Suddenly, this video you entered in a Coldplay contest is being played everywhere. Capitol is selling a CD with an old song of yours on it – maybe it’s a song you’ve since decided you want to leave behind. You can’t stop it. And you won’t get paid for it.

Also, it’s so disingenuous to include something so far reaching in the small print of what is presented as a contest to help out unsigned bands.

My opinion is only one. I understand some people will weigh up the pros and cons and decide that this isn’t a big deal. I can see understand that viewpoint. I just don’t share it.

Seems like a likeness clause to me. Likeness clauses are needed if they are to promote the winners at all. They strictly say for ADVERTISING AND/OR PROMOTIONAL PURPOSES in the clause. They say nothing about any other rights. They CANNOT steal your music and sell it with this agreement.

With this agreement – They aren’t going to make slaves out of the winning band in order to churn out product. Not saying they won’t make the winning band sign another agreement to do this…but this agreement is not it.

Thanks for the comment, Clark. I agree with you that a likeness clause would be a normal and acceptable thing here, but I find this clause to be a bit more broad and open ended than that.

There are two larger point here to me. First, contest rules are a normal thing, but what we’re dealing with here is something that asks a band that might not have a lot of experience to make an agree that does reach beyond “we’ll use your image to promote our contest and the show.” Second, in a general sense, I think this is an example of why musicians need to slow down and examine every agreement they make – even ones that seem like a just bit of fun like this one.

I don’t find that the pros outweigh the cons here. Of course, I realize that for some people that they do. I dislike the spirit of this contest. A lot.

They have to be able to use their likeness to promote the opener. How else would they promote the band if they can’t even use their name.

I think you should look at any simple likeness agreement. The clause only states for promotional and advertising.

While I don’t disagree things like American Idol and such are raw deals (although let’s face it most people on that show are looking to get famous, not make music), I don’t see anywhere on the official agreement that discusses this $5,000 recording contract or 60 day option…can you link that?

Wow, Clark – this is really interesting – the wording of this clause has been changed completely since I wrote this post. I hadn’t checked it since I wrote my initial blog.

The terms used to specify the $5,000/60 day option and it used to subject all bands who entered – not just the winners – to a far more opened ended arrangement that gave them rights to use likeness/music beyond simply promoting this show.

Well, you’re right of course. The likeness of the winners has to be used to promote the show and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. Wow, I’m really stunned. I’m going to have to blog about this on the front page of the site.

Thanks for bringing this to my attention!

WOW. That IS interesting.

Now I’m wondering if bloggers like you made the rules change…

Good job if so!

Wish I could take credit! I did notice Perez Hilton complaining about the contest as well, so I’m placing my bets he had more to do with it! But I’m glad things changed, and thanks again for bringing it my attention. I was beginning to think I was losing my mind.

You know, it is a very interesting article, but the big picture is that all deals are like this. Whatever you sign during your lifetime is, in some way or another, a bad deal. It’s only surprising that because it has to do with someone successful that it actually catches someone’s eye. Don’t be fooled, just because someone has brought this to your attention, you can’t avoid them, and there is nothing you can do.

Sincerely your,

Haha

Ooh, have to say I disagree with you a little bit here. I’d hate for musicians to think that they don’t have any choice but to sign deals like this (actually since the rules of this contest were changed, this isn’t a great example, but you know what I mean..).

Now more than ever, there’s no reason for musicians to think that they don’t have any bargaining power in the deal making process, and bad deals aren’t a necessary evil. There are mutually beneficial music contracts out there – I promise!