I stopped reading after that.

That makes sense–thank you. So this Panama-based outfit must have received some other section 106 right along with the ability to sue.

Unlike rational folk that throw out the baby and keep the bathwater.

I bet he cut off his nose to spite his face. That might be an improvement, though.

Perfect.
At last, someone who knows what they are talking about in this thread.

You do realize that by saying “At last, someone who knows what they are talking about in this thread” you’ve included yourself along with everyone else in this thread (except the person you’re replying to) as not knowing what you’re talking about, right?

And this folks is why we should pause and read what we wrote before we hit submit. Then again, it is probably the first truthful thing you’ve ever said on this site. So kudos to you.

The sad part is if we knew who you were, with your claims to be an artist of some stature, although that’s highly doubtful, we’d probably boycott you on principal alone. Not for what you say, but for how you say it. Namely, you act like a dick. Then again, it’s possible you actually are an artist. In which case we wouldn’t boycott you, we might give your work a listen, but we’d probably regret the money spent doing so, and we’d realize blaming pirates for your failure is just you’re way of coping with not having any talent and just sucking as a musician in general.

Be a man, tell us who you are. Plenty of other artists come here and do so. Some big, some small. Some on labels, some independent. Their opinions are respected, even if disagreed with. Why? Because they’re willing to stand by their words and beliefs.

Sadly, I’d expect nothing less of an Anonymous Coward such as yourself to say “Well, I can’t reveal who I am but suffice it to say I’m kind of a big deal and I know all”. Truly laughable.

The sad part is if we knew who you were, with your claims to be an artist of some stature, although that’s highly doubtful, we’d probably boycott you on principal alone.

You DO understand there can be multiple people posting as AC right?
Or are you as clueless about that as you are on the workings of the music industry.
I’ve never claimed to be an ‘artist of some stature’.
However, I have ACTUAL, and lengthy music industry experience. And it’s clear anyone who claims record company employees across the board are ‘rapists and pimps’ and calls Joe Strummer a ‘no talent nobody’ is either ‘clueless’ themselves, or more likely a very sad and angry individual.
What a shame you’ve never met these people in person as I have.

Wait. Why are you using old artists(and in John’s case, dead artist) as an example in an argument about the modern industry?

Back in their days copyrights as hard as diamonds and copyright trolls don’t exist. And they actually all get their fair share.

If the Beatles were to have existed as a modern band though, they’ll all be complaining like the rest of the artists in the industry.

Aaaaand: Ha, ha. If you only knew who I was.

We know: You are an Anonymous Coward. A faceless nobody. A disembodied voice who is as insignificant as a grain of sand. Show us who you are before saying those words. Only a coward and a sinner would hide in the mask of anonymity.

Show me artists who signed mainstream deals where they retained their copyright, and I’ll show you a ridiculously short list of people.

You first.
My list would be too long.
I thought you were hip to the new music business?
Fact is, since the 70’s bands have been recording their own music.
Signing your life away to a label so they can pay for everything is old school.
And as I said, every contract is different, every contract is negotiable. So any blanket statement about signing away copyright is bound to fail.

Concerts don’t count as “met in person.”
I know.
Were you talking about your own experience?

I may not be a troll in real life, but I play one on the Internet. =P

I can point out at least two artists who have gone ON RECORD to say that they don’t make much money outside of concerts…

Dixie Chicks, in the 90s, said to Dan Rather “please don’t say that our CDs made lots of money, we don’t see that” and “our deal is the same as any deal in Nashville”.

Toby Keith now owns his own music and makes his own money because of the records screwing him over.

That’s two, A list musicians who have said that they were getting the short end of the stick…

During their peaks.

So, you fail.

Yes, out of the millions of signed artists, a few tens, or maybe hundreds, have felt ripped off.
But have you ever read a football player cut from the team who is complimentary about the coach and management? Recording contracts often end unfortunately, that’s just a fact of business. For most it’s a mutual parting, which is why you don’t see most artists griping about labels.
Funny you guys keep mentioning Anvil. For decades and through most of the film about them, they are busting a gut JUST to get signed to a mainstream recording contract.
Are they stupid???????

Did you see the end when they said releasing it themselves was the better way because they kept more of the money?

It’s kind of funny that you say that there’s no revolution against mainstream labels…

http://www.marklafay.com/2011/03/signing-to-a-record-label-is-likely-not-your-best-option/

Please hang up and try your call again later.

But, if you don’t want to read the link, let me give you an excerpt from it…

“When I signed my first artist in 2003, we did a more traditional artist royalty type of recording agreement. We also signed a co-publishing agreement with the label?s publishing entity. Even then, the labels were viewed as banks and the agreements they gave bands were, at best, really bad loans. Bands would sign away most of their rights for a recording advance, maybe some commitments to tour support and a whole lot of ?potential.? Once you sign an ERA &/OR EPA, you are largely at the mercy of the company. Your future will rely heavily on the label?s ability to work your record and support your efforts to exploit your art. The problem with being a smaller band signed to a deal is that you rarely, if ever, see any money from the sale of your recorded music. These deals are structured in a way that the bulk of the financial burden is shouldered by your 10-18% of MSRP (less all applicable deductions, of course). Selling 100k albums on your own would be a hefty pay check where as a selling 100k albums with a recording company may not even recoup your debt to the label.”

So, wanna try your argument again? This time with some real facts to back it up?

Do you carry a club and hide under bridges?

It would be easier for you to list signed artists who have said they never had a problem with their contracts and were happy, all of the contracts, including when they very first started.

Can you provide a list of people who have gone on record or at least described to you that they have loved their contracts and were very happy, all of the contracts, even at first signing when they had never been on a label before?

Even 20 artists who’ve said they enjoyed their contracts and didn’t feel they were slaves or taken advantage of or lost their copyrights.

I’m actually eager because I believe, from what I have read and heard, it’s the other way around, millions are pissed and say nothing because that was a clause, and a few say something good because that’s always permitted.

from what I have read and heard, it’s the other way around, millions are pissed and say nothing because that was a clause, and a few say something good because that’s always permitted.

That’s the problem with Techdirt, it’s all based on what you ‘read’ or ‘heard’, not what you experienced first hand.
Does Masnick have any music industry experience? I’m pretty sure not, and yet he’s happy to argue with people who do.
Anyway, you read and heard wrong. Artists are not blocked from talking about their labels. many do.
Also, you set the bar unrealistically. A label deal is a long term relationship. You never argued with your partner? Of course artists have ups and downs. There are few who are 100% happy with everything their label does. That’s the nature of a relationship, partnership and compromise.
The huge gulf between being 100% happy with labels, and regarding labels as rapists, pimps, evil slave owners etc, shouldn’t need my explanation.

if they are illegally downloading your music, they are not your fans, true fans dont steal, freetards do

Back up your claims with evidence, AC 64 (Red AC), and prove that you know anyone in the music business at all. Or provide a complete retraction of everything you have ever said on this site. Now. Any other response, including silence and/or imitating/parodying this one, will be considered such a retraction.

We’ll wait.

“That’s the problem with Techdirt, it’s all based on what you ‘read’ or ‘heard’, not what you experienced first hand.”

So your comments are based on first-hand experience? Great, once you’ve told us who you are and what your experience is, you might have a chance of convincing Techdirt readers that things really are as you say. If you can’t or won’t do that, your comments will continue to sound like the self-serving defensive retorts of someone who fully understands how label deals are heavily weighted in favour of the labels’ interests.

“You and your type expect us to believe intelligent innovators like Bowie and Dylan accepted being raped and pimped.”

No, we all know that Bowie and Dylan were among a few very successful drops in an oceans of musicians. We also know that the experiences of Bowie and Dylan are pretty irrelevant in a discussion about the modern music industry, and yet you keep bringing them up.

Lady GaGa and Adele were new artists when they signed their deals. So they were negotiated the same as every other artist, NOT from a position of unusual power.

So you’re agreeing with what I wrote then? “But you’d have to establish what their contracts were like when they first got signed, not after they were a commercial hit.”

Point being, as other artists have ranted, you either do what they say (unless you’ve made the label rich) or you don’t sign, no other choice. If you have examples of artists first signing and not being given the “take it or leave it” option, please list them.

So while “rapist/pimp/slave master” are exaggerated terms, they have been uttered in similar form from many former and still current label artists.

Many who say such things say “everyone we know…” just like David Lowery saying everyone he knows (and extrapolated to everyone) royalties were well above %12. However, DeeLite’s female vocalist replied in a comment saying everyone she knows is stuck with %12. So she says “don’t generalize” to him. I posted the link a few weeks ago and don’t feel like searching for it. Sorry.

So I would not generalize that every label is a rapist, however I would not generalize that only a small number of artists are being exploited, as you have implied with “partnership” analogies. Please tell me what artists who are not Nickelback or Rush who can stand up to their label and get what they want?

Raw numbers, I am willing to bet, will illustrate that, as I said before, only a few have say in their own contracts beyond “No.” to which the label will respond with “Fine, give us back the money we lent you plus these extra fees.”

Point being, as other artists have ranted, you either do what they say (unless you’ve made the label rich) or you don’t sign, no other choice. If you have examples of artists first signing and not being given the “take it or leave it” option, please list them.

Almost all signed artists.
The fact is there is a whole industry in contract negotiation,
There are teams of entertainment lawyers working for artists, as well as established managers and management companies.
You are never told ‘take it or leave it’ when it comes to your recording contract. It’s a negotiation.
Of course, once you’ve signed up to be in a partnership, it’s not acceptable to ignore your partners suggestions completely.
Sometimes an artist will suggest recording their album on Endeavor, while orbiting the earth, then when the label says it’s a ridiculous idea, the artist whines to the press their label controls them and treats them like a slave.

Yeah, I’m sure The Beatles thought they were worth MORE money.
But the fact is they were successful, rich and powerful by their early twenties, despite EMI if I take your opinion. McCartney was still releasing his albums though EMI as a multi-millionaire in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s.
What was Lennon’s last label? Geffen?
But these guys were rich, experienced and opinionated enough not to associate their name with with, or put their music out through labels that were abusing other artists as pimps and rapists would.
So what do we have here. Actual politically aware artists signing to major labels versus inexperienced techdirt posters who think they know better.
I know which side I believe.

??somebody should fight for fellow artists, because this is madness. Music has become tap water, a utility, where for me it?s a sacred thing, so I?m a little offended. The Internet has emasculated rather than liberated artists?? – Bono

the gatekeepers still exist except now they’re the internet tech companies and worse than the labels ever were…

old gate keepers = access to distribution

new gate keepers = access to revenue from distribution

in both cases the actual artist is screwed…

pirate bay = 100% of the artists money
artists = 0% of the artists money

no sharing where it counts I see…

Artists have a wide variety of opinions, and many of those opinions change over time. It is easy to find examples of artists on each side, as well as many who have mixed feelings. You can’t win an argument about artists in general if you’re selectively quoting the ones that seem to be on your side. So, your response was pointless.

I didn’t call you a nobody because you disagree with me. I called you a nobody because it’s clear from your words and knowledge that you are, in fact, a nobody.

Surely you are better than this. Is this an adult debate or high school? Amazing. Oh well.

Why do you support screwing over artists?

Hmm did I say that? I don’t think I did. I don’t like to see any artist screwed. I support artists choice. The right to choose to self release, or the right to sign with a major, or whatever they want.
It’s up to them, not up to me, OR YOU.

All got their start and made lots of money from major label contracts.

Radiohead crack me up.
They made a mint signed to a record company that also made armaments, then when they’d made enough money kicked up a stink about evil corporations.

There isn’t a variant of Rule 34, but there certainly should be! Because it does seem to be true, people say something and I can almost always respond with a link to an XKCD about it.

I too have worked in the music industry for decades. I talk to artists. A lot. I have experience in this subject, because it’s what I do every day.

Our contracts are awesome. We give the band money and help them sell their music to the public. We take a cut of all sales, the band has to pay us back plus interest out of their share of the sales and then we retain copyright on the songs. Win-win for me.

I won’t tell you who I am, you’ll just have to take my word for it. Also, people who don’t believe me can suck an egg.

See what I did there?

‘Appeal to Authority’? Just because you say you have the experience doesn’t mean we believe you. I could say I personally know a few artist, myself (true! We know the Go-Gos, for instance, through our friends/landlords who are close personal friends), but without revealing who I am and the names down the line you have no way of knowing if what I’m saying is truth or fiction. The same goes with you. Without any justification or verification, we would need to take you at your word. We will not do that. We don’t do that with people who agree with us, why would we do it with someone who childishly attacks us?

Sorry but no one had any options back in the 70’s and 80’s and 90’s. There was no Internet for file sharing until the late 90’s.

So your choice was the ultra expensive route of record yourself, drive to record stores and beg them to put you on a shelf (many did not and from what I read that was label control preventing such things). That was your only means.

Things have changed so yes they could have gone on their own if the Internet existed back then with the maturity and popularity that it has now.

But try to stick on the topic at hand of bad record contracts.

You know if you replace “Harvard” with MPAA/RIAA legal team, and if you replace Tenenbaum with Dodd, you’d have a more accurate description.

Rule 386’d

The comments here have been a fascinating read. One side has a name, no experience in the field in question (sorry Mike, but you don’t work for a label, and I don’t believe have ever worked for a label), and a few pieces of anecdotal evidence. The other side claims expert knowledge in the field in question, throws around some un-cited anecdotal evidence, and has no name. Both have weak positions, but only one is a troll.

Please don’t feed the trolls, it means they win.