ECLECTIC HEIGHTS

Sunday, December 11, 2011

MAKING THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE THROUGH YOUR CAREER IN THE ENTERTAINMENT BUSINESS

The influence of music, news, film, and television on the mood and behavior of our society is enormous. Numerous studies and common sense tell us that people mimic the behavior that they see repeatedly. What they see often becomes socially acceptable behavior. Is this a good thing? Yes and no, it depends on if the underlying message of the media is positive or negative. If you are currently working in the entertainment industry or planning a career in it you must consider the effect of your creation on society as a whole. You must understand the power you posses to influence people. Media is not just "mindless", or "fun", or "doesn't influence me". People often make those statements when what they are watching or listening to is called into question. Opinions, beliefs, knowledge etc. are formed through what we read, listen to, and watch. This is true of what we see in the real world and the entertainment industry. The question you need to ask yourself is "do I desire to make the world a better or worse place by my creation?"

Authors C. Barbour, N.H. Barbour, and P.A. Scully write that "today, the visual and auditory stimuli of the new media bombard most homes and communities. Some of this exposure is educational, positive, and directed at an appropriate level for young children. A considerable amount of current fare, however, is violent in nature, is provocative, and is presented in ways unsuitable for children’s level of maturity (DeGaetano, 2005; Levin, 2005). With the rapid expansion of electronic transmission devices, young people are exposed more than ever to both good and bad influences.Producers and advertisers expand successful films and television shows by flooding sales counters with associated toys, clothing, and DVDs. Similar marketing comes from developers of video and computer games. These games influence individuals’ values, compete for children’s attention, and certainly reduce the amount of reflection and interaction time children have with both adults and peers (Singer & Singer, 2001). Although some maintain that such games are opportunities for children to “let off steam,” others insist that there are better ways of achieving this goal."

There has never been a period of history where entertainment creations were available so easily to so many. This indicates the ability to influence people has never been greater but influence them how? When I was growing up the majority of programming on television was positive in nature. Bad guys were clearly defined and negative behavior was shown to be undesirable. There was usually a positive message in the content of the programming. Time marched on and characters and messages became more blurred. Heroes on TV and in the movies today are often extremely flawed characters but are shown in the highest possible light and rarely suffer consequences for their negative actions. It is simply not a realistic portrayal. Entertainers who were adulterers, addicts, or became a criminal had their careers ended if the behavior became public knowledge. Is there any behavior that would end the career of an entertainer today? Drug use won't do it? Beating a woman will not do it? Having a criminal record is only going to increase your album sales. Where are the consequences for individuals negative behavior? What is the impact on our society when we constantly see entertainers escape serious consequences for their behavior?

What would happen if music, movies, television, and film portrayed people in better fashion and showed serious consequences for on screen drug use, criminal activity, adultery etc.? What would happen if the pernicious ladies of film and screen were constantly impacted by STD's, abusive men, and other real life consequences of living that life style? The high school girl who has grown up in a world of The Jersey Shore and pornography certainly acts differently then the generations who did not grow up watching that style of programming. The girls of The Jersey Shore often date men with rage, drug, alcohol, and other issues. The actors of the show have been richly rewarded for this negative behavior. What about all the shows where getting pregnant as as teacher leads or being a self-centered, mean-spirited, and demanding spoiled brat leads to you being featured on MTV? Check out the allegedly serious journalist of ABC News covering MTV's most watched show.

When you create a song, show, book, or movie try to influence people in a positive manner and watch how the world's issues become just a little bit smaller.

I've decided to add a song for every new blog post. Here is The Gorillaz with their version of Crystalised.

Monday, November 28, 2011

IS INTERNET TV NOW YOUR BEST OPTION?

All of you have probably watched a segment of or an entire episode of one of your favorite shows on Hulu.com or the networks own web site. You most likely have watched an on demand movie from Netflix or Blockbuster video If you are a sports fan you have watched some of your teams events and special coverage online. Why do you still pay for cable? Is it the convenience, habit, or not realizing there are options?

I've been researching the best ways to reduce my cable bill without losing the programming I care most about. It is not possible to do this via the cable company. I began speaking with friends and researching my options. I watched a segment of my local news that gave tips for eliminating the monthly cable bill and saving a significant amount of money annually. The video and tips the show offered is from http://www.moneytalksnews.com/2010/06/30/you-dont-have-to-pay-for-cable-tv/.

I spend an average of $1,768.00 with my cable company. That includes high-speed Internet, multiple-levels of cable channels, NHL Center Ice, and the HBO channels. I assure you that I do not come close to watching all of the channels and 75% I never watch but I am forced to pay for them to have the channels that I do desire. I believe cable should be like a menu. You order the channels you want to watch and do not pay for the ones you have no desire to watch. Money Talks News estimates the average annual US cable bill is $900.00 (not including Internet). I obviously pay much more above the national average. My Internet is $552.00 annually, leaving my cable bill at $1,216.00. If I can save the $1,216.00 and invest it in a Roth IRA or other compound interest earning vehicle it will provide for a nice retirement. The money will be much more valuable to me during my retirement then any shows I will watch.

Money Talks News recommends starting with an antenna to get your local stations directly on your television set. This is 100% free and will provide your local news and many of your favorite shows. You even get HD programming during prime time. If you read the article above you'll find useful information concerning how to best utilize an antenna.

AntennaWeb, a site provided by the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) and the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB), will show you exactly where to point your antenna for the best reception at your address. It will also let you see which stations are broadcasting over the air in your area. There may be more than you think.

Source: Money Talks (http://s.tt/12mLO)

Over 99% of U.S. TV households can receive at least one local station over the air, while 89% can watch five or more. The picture is perfectly clear thanks to the switch to digital TV completed on June 12, 2009. You’ll either see a crisp, beautiful image or no image at all (static is a thing of the past). And the best part? All your favorite programming will still be in HD.
HDTV is more expensive for local stations to produce, so it’s common to see a station broadcast in regular standard definition during the day, but switch their signal to high definition for prime time. So while the local news may not be in HD, your favorite shows like Glee, America’s Got Talent, and The Bachelorette will be.

Source: Money Talks (http://s.tt/12mLO)

Your favorite shows that are not broadcast over the air for free can often be found on the networks web site in their entirety and at zero cost. You will need to watch a few commercials but the amount is less then you will be forced to watch on cable. I am not suggesting you watch all your television on your laptop. I do not want your entire family huddling around your laptop to watch your favorite shows. There are numerous methods to watch television over the Internet on you existing television set. Several models of televisions now come equipped exactly for this purpose but you do not need to run out and buy a new set (please do not try using this article as an excuse).

You can use your laptop or existing computer to accomplish this. There are instructions in the Money Talks News article. The Roku Digital player cost around $80.00-$100.00. Boxee is similar in cost and function but they will give you instructions on how to make a Boxee or install their free software to your existing computer. It will turn it into a high quality media player with an interface specially designed to show high-quality on your TV. Google TV, Sony, Logitech (highly recommended by the guys at Best Buy), Intel, Apple TV, X-Box, and Sony Play Station can also perform these functions.

You can watch most sports programs over the Internet now. You may need to pay for some. The NHL Center Ice package I get on cable is about $20.00 less on the Internet version. The NFL can be watched if you have a friend with a dish that doesn't mind giving you their mobile code. ESPN3 is growing daily and per Dan Schointuch, "provides college football, college basketball, NBA, MLB, UEFA Champions League Soccer, Masters & US Open Golf, All 4 Grand Slam tennis tournaments and more. Plus, you get a fully interactive experience with real time in-game stats, scoreboards, and live chat."

Many of the shows you watch on the premium channels (HB0, Starz,etc.) can be purchased online from Amazon or I-Tunes within days of it airing. The ones that do not will be released on DVD or be covered under your Netflix or Blockbuster membership). You can go visit a neighbor or loved one if you cannot wait.

Each year ESPN3 delivers thousands of live games and events like College Football and Basketball, NBA, MLB, UEFA Champions League Soccer, The Masters and US Open Golf, all 4 Grand Slam tennis tournaments, and more. Plus you get a fully interactive experience with real time in-game stats and scoreboards and live chat.

Source: Money Talks (http://s.tt/12mLO)

I am certain I will soon drop my cable for one of the above options, I know most of these shows will be viewed on demand but I am trying to research the best method to record what I watch on the Internet. I encourage you to exam these options and ask yourself, "When I am 94 years old am I going to feel positive if I paid cable TV all of these years or is there a better use of my money?"

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Sign Only Quality!

My Father owned an apartment building when I was growing up. When he screened renters, checked their references, and selected quality people to rent to he rarely had any aggravation. He made money instead of losing money, he had little stress and the operation was enjoyable. He could focus on improving the apartments and enjoying his life. When he rented to people he was unsure of he almost always suffered negative effects and it usually cost him time and money.

I had learned from observing this over the years but I could only apply it to the part of my life that dealt with renting the extra room in my home. It took me a while to understand that selecting quality people to work with is vital to your success and happiness. The quality of your life is directly determined by who is in it! We've all heard some variation of that before right? When then do we often select poorly?

When I began my professional career I would often agree to sign any athlete, coach, or musician. Why? I am a very helpful person and I can see potential in many people. I am confident in my skills and abilities to help them, so I thought I could make them a success and benefit myself also. Was I correct? Heck ya, about once out of every 20 times I took a risk, would they have success worth of the time and energy I put into them. I would have enjoyed greater success and a lot less stress and aggravation had I bypassed some of these clients.

W.I.I.F.M. Principle (What's In It For Me), it sounds terrible right? I thought it sounded selfish when someone first explained it to me as a college student. "What a horrible way to operate in the world," I thought. It isn't a negative principle at all if applied properly, it is a very positive one. When presented with an opportunity, simply ask yourself, "is this worth it? Will the return on my involvement be positive for me? Will this create unnecessary stress and aggravation? What are the potential negatives? What are the potential liabilities to me? Can I lose money? Can my reputation be damaged?

Create a hard copy check list of what makes a client worth signing. This evaluation if done well, will save you time, energy, and money. It is tempting when business is slow or you are trying to build your client roster to sign everyone and anyone who is willing to sign with you but this is not the path to success. The path to success is to sign as many quality clients as you can. You must be able to handle the workload of all the clients you sing. When deciding to sign a new client you should ask yourself if you will need to hire additional staff to handle the workload. If the artist is a definite income earner then it is not a problem but if it is a client who may or may not make income for you is increasing your business cost a risk you are willing to take?

Here are some additional questions to answer when deciding to sign a new client:

1) Is this person a hard worker? Are they willing to do whatever it takes to succeed?

2) How close is this person to earning income for me?

3) What is the potential return-on-investment?

4) Will this client add cost?

5) How difficult or easy is this person to work with?

6) Does this person have a realistic set of expectations of themselves and what they expect from you?

7) Who does this person associate with? Is their entourage a positive or a negative?

8) Do you believe in this artist?

People are worth taking risks on, just not all of them, so choose wisely!

PRESS KITS THAT MAKE AN IMPACT!

If you are going to promote a band, a business, or product you need to have a press kit that benefits and influences everyone who opens it. Here are keys to success.

Make it appealing to the eye from the first page to the last.
It is imperative to make your press kit dramatic and bold. It has to stand out from all the others! The cover should be eye catching and professional. The professionals you are sending this to need to be inspired to pick it up and read it, the first page needs to be impactful enough in its image and content to make them turn the next page and that page need to make them want to continue reading. High quality photos should be included as often as possible. If you have an artist that is less appealing to the eye substitute logos, stage shots from a distance, photos of fans reacting with enthusiasm etc..

Show how your artist or product is different from all others.
Is it the type of music they play, where they are from, their background stories, something your product does that makes it interesting and worth talking about. What can promoters use to market your band? Has your band won any awards or special recognition? Insert statistical data on album sales, radio play, tickets sold, shows played.

Make it easy for them to do their job.
Write the story for them. Make it so interesting and appealing that press, media, and promoters not only desire to do business with you but use the material that you have given them to do their job. This way you are controlling the message. They will be helping to spread the message you want out there about your product. It is vital to control the message, rather then having others do it for you. Allowing others to explain what you are about is a recipe to have your product hijacked for their cause or at the least lead to disappointment.

Give them what they need.
Provide full list of equipment needs if dealing with a musical press kit. This is an item-by-item list of every item, staff, and instrument needed for a successful show. It needs to be clear who is responsible for it, the venue or the band. Provide a stage plot. This is a detailed drawing of where every band member, their individual equipment, and monitors are to be placed on stage. Venue managers and promoters will be thrilled to find this information included in the press kit because they often have a hard time getting it from bands or never do.

The more you do their job for them the more likely they are do cooperate with you.
Provide them with every item they need from you (other then the personal rider) from the start and they will be so impressed they are more likely to want to work with you because they know you are professional. A professionally packaged press kit and artist is a rarity and one of the best ways to separate you from the pack. Will a promoter prefer to work with a professional group or one that sends bits and pieces of info and they have to chance them down for the rest?

The press kit must be kept current, available for download, and hard copy.
The press kit should be available for download on your web site. It should be available to be emailed and available by traditional mail. It is not enough to create it and not update it. The list of shows must be current, the equipment needs sometimes changes, etc. Plan to review it every month and updated as needed.

Biographies for each individual member and the story of the band.
You would be shocked how many press kits include neither. Do your best to make each story interesting. Provide threads a writer could use to create bigger stories. If playing a specific city like NY, create connections to the city. If a band member is from the city or has a memory there, if there are historic moments about the band there, or a historic venue the band is eager to play include it. A list of quotes about your band and from your band is critical. It is helpful to spread them out throughout your press kit, to help keep the interest alive. Include a page with all of the quotes.

Include high-quality photos.
These are necessary for venues and press to market, promote, and present your product in the best possible fashion.

Include high-quality MP3's or CD:
These are used to sell and promote your band. This can also be provided online or on a thumb drive or other emerging technology.

Band contact information.
Full contact information for the bands booking director, press agent, road manager and management must be accurate and included.

Copies of Articles.
Included in the digital or hard copy press kit. All positive articles that highlight why someone should work with your band should be included.

Song Page:
If well-known act or up-and-coming artist include a list of songs that are in the arsenal. It will be presented differently between known and unknown artist. If a known artist then list the songs, chart positions, lyrics or anything else that sells it. If an unknown find something interesting and include the lyrics if interesting. Descriptions of energy levels or musical styles may be helpful for an unknown artist.

Make it interesting, make it powerful, and make it your best sales tool!

Sunday, October 23, 2011

Protecting Intellectual Property, Trademarks, and Your Business

I studied three entertainment law podcasts this week to enhance my knowledge of the topic. When you finish reading this, I encourage you to listen to the same podcasts to enhance your basic understanding of the subjects discussed here. The first podcast is session 5: "Tackling Intellectual Property Law in Cyberspace" from the 9th Annual CIPLIT Symposium. The presenters were Rose Hagan from Google, Ann M. Bartow from The University of South Carolina, Greg Vetter from The University of Houston and Sonia Katyal from Fordham University.

Rose Hagan spoke about her role at Google and defending it from lawsuits that arise from emerging Internet related legal issues. At the time, Google was facing 8 lawsuits and had already been involved in several others. Individuals, companies, and trademark holders were asserting their rights, and attempting to establish precedents for Internet law. Google is often involved in these cases simply because it is a major player in Internet advertising. Google sells advertising space based on terms advertisers select by picking keywords. While Google doesn't create the ads for advertisers, it needs to establish standards within the emerging law and common sense. She stated that Google has no desire to infringe on trademark owners rights because they also spend a great deal of time and money protecting Google's rights and image. Google has policies for keyword and advertisement text. It based these on the countries where the ads are created and the relevant national laws governing trademarks, intellectual property, commerce, and Internet advertising. and ran and the laws that effect them. She cited cases such as Tiffany v. Ebay and a case involving 1-800-Contacts. Most of the issues she discussed involved advertisers attempting to gain unfair advantage by manipulating Internet marketing options. If a company used my companies keyword, property, and branding to bring customers to their site instead of mine and to sell similar or counterfeit items, then I would need to assert my legal rights to protect my business.

Ann M. Bartow sounded as though she was on the verge of a breakdown as she rapidly moved through her presentation. She stated that "Intellectual prestige is not a trademark problem". She provided examples of designers or companies suing others if a product looked similar to one of their own. They may sue over a style they are using. She believes that these styles, stitching patterns, etc. are not unique enough to be protected and I agree. Some of her examples were of a designer suing another over what they claimed was a similar design but really was re-imaged by both designers from a previous designer's work. It is not unique enough to be protected. Other designers and companies do not want others to be selling items with common themes to their own because they do not want their brand to be damaged because a store that is not as elite selling it makes it less "special". This is the "intellectual prestige" she mentioned. For "intellectual prestige" to be proven it better be a unique and truly original concept.

Greg Vetter spoke about patent law. He focused his talk on software arts and claims law. His insights into patents are interesting. It made me realize that I'd never he happy engaged in patent work but it is valuable information. You may be thinking, "I am not an inventor, so why does this matter to me?" I thought the same but as he spoke I understood. I'll never be spoken about in the same breath as Edison, Tesla, or Ford either but some of his talk applied to my Internet-based business. If your company creates patents for some of its concepts, branding or materials you must have a clear and unbroken history of ownership based on filing and maintaining proper legal documents.

The final speaker for the podcast was Sonia Katyal. The most interesting part of her talk was discussing intellectual property law vs. digital technology. She believes that freedom of speech, public domain, and digital technology moves fast enough that it changes the facts on the ground. I disliked her talk; she seems to relish the idea of destroying copyright owners rights. She believes testing these laws and destroying or minimizing the rights of property holders is a good thing. She seems to have a love for outlaws, activists, and criminals. While Napster and similar sites helped to popularize the online music distribution market eventually became a benefit to the consumer, the right holders, and the companies who invested in the creation of the work, what she endorses hurts all. She wants to dance around in the shadows that the corrupt and criminals use to justify their unethical actions. Sonia Katyal should understand that if people like her and the Internet outlaws she attempts to glorify continue to steal and devalue the creations of others and profit can no longer be made then the creators will simply stop creating new work until certain that their rights are protected. The protection that people like Sonia Katyal attempt to provide to the outlaws makes the world a less safe, less fair, less positive, and less ethical place. These outlaws makes the world a worse place. I wonder if she found herself isolated with outlaws in the real world instead of in the safety of academia if she would still attempt to lionize them? I doubt it but she would probably then attempt to justify their behavior by explaining how society turned them into outlaws rather then understanding that individuals are responsible for their own behavior and to follow the laws of society instead of attempting to break them.

The second podcast deals in Trademark Protections. The first presenter was Marc Trachtenberg. His presentation was entitled "Protecting Your Marks In and From the New Top Level Domains". The panel discussed the Internet being the gateway to billions of people who go online to purchase products via mobile devices or computers. This is why protecting your marks is vital because selling online may be a companies main or only source of revenue. His talk mentioned activities such as cybersquatting and typosquatting. Cybersquatting is the illegal practice of registering potential domain names before the proper rights owner can and attempting to force the company who wishes to register the name to pay for the right to do so. The case of Panavision v. Dennis Toeppen is one of the most famous cybersquatting cases. Typosquatting is when someone registers and operates a name very similar to a registered domain name in an attempt to trick Internet users to visiting their sites by mistake. They will add an extra letter and make the sites look similar. An example of this is Bank of America's web site is www.bankofamerica.com. A typosquatter would register it as something like, www.banksofamerica.com. How many of you would easily pick up on the difference after having done a keyword search the typosquatters site came up first in the search and then led you to a site that looks exactly like the Bank of America site? They may steal your banking information, money, address book, place spyware, malware, and worse on your computer.

Can your business survive the credibility hit if someone did this to your business and your customers were tricked into visiting a mirror site that damaged them? The podcast made it clear that you need to register your domain on as many of the web domains as possible. There are two categories the generic TLDs (.com, .org, etc.) and country-specific TLDs (.us, .uk, .asia, .ca, etc.) and it can be expensive to register with all of them. It is best to register your mark with as many as you can even if you never attend to use them but the annual fee's can be prohibitive. It is less expensive to be proactive then reactive because brand abusing is growing at least 28% per year according to the presenters data. Marc Tractenberg states that, "With evolving law and technology you can never plan for every eventuality." He advises to select a distinct domain name to protect the company and save money in advertising. If you pick a domain name that is common you will spend too much in advertising fees directing users to your site.

They discussed the IP Clearing House and met with concerns of the audience. It is viewed as a tool to reduce the cost and administrative burden on mark owners.

The third podcast is "IT/Contractual Aspects of New Top Level Domains." It is related to the previous podcast that I discussed. The commentators wisely point out that the policies, registrations, and procedures are geared more towards good people, who act in good faith. They are classified as "Good Actors". The governments, companies, and others who govern the Internet believed that everyone would obey the law on the Internet. What law? Which countries law? With what authority could they be penalized and is there a penalty? There was not much law and it is foolish to expect all people to act ethically without potential enforceable consequences. The panel called these people "Bad players". A consumer must be able to trust a companies web site and overall web presence. This podcast spent time speaking about how to set up a more significant governing body to eliminate the most severe Internet liability and criminal issues. These issues can destroy a business.

The three podcast reinforce common sense business practices that existed even before the Internet:

1) Do everything legally possible to protect your business from the start. This includes filing all proper copyright and trademark registrations, filing proper paperwork with all relevant governing bodies and verifying that you have eliminated potential liabilities. It is always less expensive to protect yourself proactively then it is to fight legal battles to regain your rights. The legal fee's or issue created by a attack on or loss of rights can destroy a company.

2) Develop a strong and adaptable business plan. Technology and the laws that govern it are changing rapidly. A significant source of revenue for your company can disappear quickly but a new one may likely replace it, be wise enough to see these happening and position your company to thrive during the transition.

3) Your clients must be able to trust you! If they don't trust you on the Internet they will not be spending their money on your site. Your information needs to be accurate and your web sites must be secure, especially if accepting payments.

4) If you are unwilling to stay current on the laws that impact your business then it is vital to hire qualified counsel who is and annually reviews your business. A change in a law can hurt your business but it may provide increased opportunities. You need to be aware of both to maximize your companies position in the marketplace. It is best if you are remaining current on the law because it is less expensive and even the best lawyer will not know as much about your business as you do.

5) Constantly look for new opportunity. Opportunity may exist in your greatest failures. Almost always in life and business you can create opportunity if you are adaptable, creative, understand people's needs and desires, and are willing to do the work necessary to ensure success.

Feel free to insert your favorite "clean" lawyer jokes in the comment section.

Monday, October 3, 2011

ECLECTIC HEIGHTS: Legal Manuevers

ECLECTIC HEIGHTS: Legal Manuevers: I have been fascinated to read about several entertainment industry related cases and decided to share them with you. Technology, business p...

Sunday, October 2, 2011

Legal Manuevers

I have been fascinated to read about several entertainment industry related cases and decided to share them with you. Technology, business practices, and other events are changing the industry and changing how the industry and those in it operate.

The first case involved actor Jared Leto and his band 30 Seconds to Mars being sued by their record company EMI/Virgin. The record company filed suit against the band for damages totaling $30 million dollars. Mike Masnick, who writes for Techdirt.com shared the following thoughts on the legal actions by the band and the record company.

"It's always fun to remember stories like the following one the next time you hear some RIAA exec claim that it represents musicians. The RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) represents the record labels and record labels are continually at odds with musicians -- sometimes to extreme levels. Wired reported that EMI/Virgin Records had sued the band 30 Seconds To Mars for $30 million recently. Wired now points us to the response from 30 Seconds To Mars, where the band notes that the lawsuit appears to have a lot more to do with the band opting out of its contract. The band points out that, under California law, a contract of more than seven years is not valid -- and the contract EMI held with the band was for nine years.

So why opt out? Perhaps this has something to do with it:

If you think the fact that we have sold in excess of 2 million records and have never been paid a penny is pretty unbelievable, well, so do we. And the fact that EMI informed us that not only aren't they going to pay us AT ALL but that we are still 1.4 million dollars in debt to them is even crazier. That the next record we make will be used to pay off that old supposed debt just makes you start wondering what is going on. Shouldn't a record company be able to turn a profit from selling that many records? Or, at the very least, break even? We think so.

The RIAA itself will be the subject of future research for me but this article is interesting to all who are in the entertainment business and wish to be fully compensated for the work we have done. 30 Seconds to Mars cited the De Havilland Law that states "no service contract in California is valid after seven years" This is great to know for all parties before signing a deal. The record companies seem to be experts at not compensating artist. Does the law where the record company is based take prescendent over where the artist are based? I am not aware if a similar law is in place in New York but what if a NY label signed a California band, does the De Havilland Law protect the band in the same way? The De Havilland Law is named after actress Olivia De Havilland after a successful lawsuit on her behalf which set the prescendent. It has been challenged but no definitive understanding of exactly the application to record deals has emerged because both sides are attempting to muddy the waters.

"In 1987, the record companies lobbied legislators to pass an amendment to the Labor Code Section 2855, which applies only to recording artists and allows record companies to sue recording artists for damages if the artists do not fulfill their original contract.
After seven years, this amendment is no longer relevant, according to Cappello, and artists have the legal right to terminate a recording contract without repercussions, he said."

It is ridicoulous for a record company to sell 2 million records by an artist and claim that they have lost money. It would be almost impossible. Without reviewing the entire contract between the band and record label, we don't know if they provided tour support. Marketing, distribution, recording cost, and advance should have all been more then covered with 2 million units sold. It is true that record companies are masters at manipulating the books to control artist and minimize what they need to pay to the artist. Joe Strummer form the Clash said it was a form of child abuse. Many artist sign deals at a young age and without proper representation. They have no real idea what they are signing and what the contract language means. George Michael ended up spending millions to be freed from his record deal. Strummer decided to "bore them out" because he didn't want to waste millions to be released form an unfair deal. He limited his work to film scores, producing, and performing the 1-2 songs per other artist albums or soundtracks that his contract allowed for and a few tours fronting the Pogues. When he was released he got back to music after signing a deal with Hellcat & Epitath Records. He selected them because of his managements experience with the label and the fact that Hellcat Founder Rancid's Tim Armstrong was a huge fan of Strummer's and he knew he would be treated well and fairly.

I believe artist should write into the language of their record deal that they have full rights to oversee all cost and review all accounting documents related to their business with the label. If the label is claiming to have spent $18 million on marketing for the band then they should need to produce detailed documents of where and how the money was spent. It would be wise for the artist to need to approve any spending on their behalf before it occurs. It will help keep the artist cost under control. Artist must act as an active participant in business decisions made involving their business! I know many artist don't like to think of their art as a business but it is! The artist who don't treat it as such usually end up broke and at the mercy of their record label.

Masnick, concluded his article with a very strong statement against the RIAA, that I felt was worth sharing. "So, at what point will the press and politicians stop buying the RIAA's claims that it's looking out for the musicians and trying to get them paid? The RIAA has always been in the business of not paying musicians."

In 2009, 30 Seconds to Mars and their record label settled their dispute and continue to work together. The exact terms and conditions of the settlement agreement remain unkown.

The next case I was drawn to is Courtney Love being sued by the parent company of her record label Vivendi Universal and her countersuit against the same label. This case has numerous similarities to the 30 Seconds to Mars case. The record company filed lawsuit because it claims that Love did not deliver the 5 albums that the contract called for. Love claims that the terms of the contract are unfair to artist, is an industry practice by record labels that operate under unfair contracts, terms, and work conditions.

According to ABC News, {"Labels, nevertheless, continue to intimidate artists who try to end contracts after seven years by suing them for lost profits, the attorney added. Cappello said this suit "will shake the very core of the way business is conducted in the music industry, and it will give countless musicians the financial and artistic freedom they do not currently enjoy."
"I'm one in a long line of artists who have tried to break free since the [Universal/PolyGram] merger," Love said. "Beck, Garbage, Sheryl Crow, and others have tried to leave or sue that company and they've all been shut down or threatened."
Crow's attorney, Jay Cooper, said, "Sheryl expressed some unhappiness but never threatened to sue, and eventually, we renegotiated the contract."}

Courtney Love's band Hole Celebrity Skin

The De Havilland Law appears to be best used not to be freed from a record deal but to renegotiate the deal. That is what 30 Seconds to Mars did and that is what Sheryl Crow did. It appears the labels can be pressured into striking a more fair agreement but if an artist wants to be free to sign with a competitor label they will fight it until the bitter end.

Perhaps labels should be more fair in the contracts they sign an artist to and their business practices. Yes, the record industry and those who work for it have become enormously wealthy operating the way they have but it has always been unfair. Now artist and their representation are becoming aware and informed enough to fight back. These battles going on are reshaping the industry even if it takes a long time. I do not expect the industry to start being fair because a few artist have managed to renegotiate or get out of their deals. However, continued pressure, loss or revenue and artist simply starting their own labels may force them to do so in the future. If you are an artist reading this you have been warned to be very cautious in your business relationships within the entertainment industry. Hole: Malibu

The final case I wanted to discuss involves Joel Osteen and Lakewood Church. I enjoy listening to Joel's televised sermon's every week. They help focus my brain on the positive and it is often needed in these challenging times. This case is interesting because the two parties had signed a licensing agreement for use of the song Signaling Through The Flames. What has sparked the lawsuit is disagreement of when the agreement ended or will end.

Brenda Sapino Jeffreys writes that, "The plaintiffs allege in the complaint that the defendants entered into a “limited licensing agreement” to use “Signaling Through the Flames” on their website and in certain venues, but that agreement expired on Feb. 1, 2011, after one year, and the defendants did not renew it. Lakewood spokesman Donald Iloff writes, “The music in question is 1 minute of background music which Lakewood Church had a license to use. The plaintiff is apparently confused about the scope of the license, and are now demanding $3 million for uses that are authorized. We think this is unreasonable.” This appears to be the main issue because both parties agree that Lakewood did at some point have the proper licensing agreement for the song. Is it still in force or has it expired. Did one or both sides not fully understand the terms of the agreement. It appears clear there has not been an intentional unauthorized use of the song. It seems that a fair agreement on compensation can be reached easily when there is a ruling on what the terms licensing agreement are.

The lesson in the above case and all of the cases is to fully understand the law, rights, & responsibilities. Hire quality experts to guide and approve any deal you are involved in. One of the best lessons I have heard from many legal experts over the years is that what a contract does not say can be more important then when the contract does say. If you are being recruited by a company for a record deal, film deal or any thing else and they are treating you well, being very kind to you, giving you gifts, taking you to expensive dinners, and telling you how much they love you. Understand that all those good feelings will not help you if you enter a dispute with the company. The only thing that will help you is to have handled your business like a true professional.
Joel Osteen "Don't Lose Your Joy"

Writing on these three cases made hear The Clash's Complete Control in my head while typing, so I decided to post it as the relevant record of the week. It is the Clash's response to their record label releasing their song "Remote Control" as the next single instead of the track the band felt was best and overall their feelings of mistreatment and manipulation by their record label and management. The song came to fruition when their manager Bernie Rhodes and Sex Pistols manager Malcom McLaren called the two bands together for a meeting and stated that they "Demand Complete Control". The meeting ended at that moment with both bands laughing hysterically as they stumbled out into the streets of London repeating the phrase "Complete Control" as the two bands headed off in different directions. The Clash's "Know Your Rights" may have been a relevant recording as well but I'll save it for another time.

Photo 1: Copyright@Sanderbaks.com
Mike Masnick's full article can be found here: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080820/0204472040.shtml
Hellcat Logo: Copyright@Hellcat Records
Photo 2: Copyright@JaredLeto
The full ABC News presentation on Courtney Love can be found here: http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/story?id=108872&page=1
Photo 3: Copyright@Courntey Love
Photo 4: Copyright@Joel Osteen
Brenda Sapino Jeffreys' full article can be found here: http://texaslawyer.typepad.com/texas_lawyer_blog/2011/08/recording-artists-and-record-company-owners-sue-lakewood-church-pastor-joel-osteen-and-co-pastor-vic.html

ECLECTIC HEIGHTS

Sunday, December 11, 2011

MAKING THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE THROUGH YOUR CAREER IN THE ENTERTAINMENT BUSINESS

Monday, November 28, 2011

IS INTERNET TV NOW YOUR BEST OPTION?

Sunday, November 13, 2011

Sign Only Quality!

PRESS KITS THAT MAKE AN IMPACT!

Sunday, October 23, 2011

Protecting Intellectual Property, Trademarks, and Your Business

Monday, October 3, 2011

ECLECTIC HEIGHTS: Legal Manuevers

Sunday, October 2, 2011

Legal Manuevers

About Me

Blog Archive