Quote:
Originally Posted by kane
Ok. I'm wrong about SC.
You would be surprised at what goes into a record contract. Some artists sign away all publishing rights and just about every other right they have when they sign a record deal. There are many acts out there these days that had some hit records and are now broke because they had bad deals.
|
publishing rights, not gifting rights. As for seeing the contracts yes i am aware of them. One of the future projects (seekingsongs.com) is designed to work within the restrictions of the contracts. The hoops we had to jump thru to create a bit torrent base alternative to the record label, that would allow artist to leverage was insane. But it is possible
Quote:
A record company is not a monopoly. If there was only one company that would be different, but there are many different records labels. You can sign, or not sign, with any number of them. If there was only one record label then it would be a monopoly for sure, but there are many to choose from.
The record labels don't own the radio stations (well, I think some of them may own a few now) nor do they own companies like MTV and VH1 and other media outlets. They simply have access to them.
|
1. there is a lot more vertical intergration than you realize (as the viacomm vs youtube case proves)
2. RIAA is a collective trade body, which by its structure is an oligopoly. It grants it members a monopoly power, and when their decisions mirror each other, it is under the law as if they were a single legal entity.
Contract changes that would in fact eliminate the right of the artist to authorize bit torrent sharing (non commercial distribution) of their work would in fact be sherman anti trust violations. again from the seekingsongs project.
Quote:
I have said a million times Radiohead is a different story than many bands. They started small and built up a career for themselves so they were able to dictate more of the terms of their old contracts and walk away from it when they did.
Current new acts may not have that freedom.
|
again, the limits of the contract are bound by the sherman anti-trust laws.
I suggest you look up the MPAA screener ban
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/4730.cfm
record companies thru their representation of the RIAA face a similar problem. Given the fact that the RIAA is in fact the one procecuting this "pirate" such a uniform dictate from the group would have the same anti trust implications as the MPAA screener ban.
Especially because the RIAA is suppose to represent both the rights of the artist and the record companies without prejudice to either party.