Who is entitled to payout from a licensee or publisher?

[NeverTheMachine]

Typically,

 

Is it the songwriter(s) who wrote the song for the band?

 

or,

 

If the band as a whole paid to produce the recording, song, master, whatever ... is each member equally due some of this licensing money?

[Johnny-Boy]

Songwriter is entitled to PRO writer's royalties (ASCAP, BMI, etc). Licensing depends on the agreement between everyone involved.

 

John

[A. Einstein]

Those who payed/financed the production fee usually own the master.

 

It is also common that the band members who don't write the song melodies and lyrics have a share in all music royalties, also mechanicals, sync and so on. However United States treatment of mechanical royalties is in sharp contrast to international practice, as well in the USA one can make any contract wuth privat persons and other entities, also contracts which would be illegal in other countries.

 

 

.

[Kramerguy]

Oftentimes producers / labels put in contractual language that is misleading and confusing, but that (may) ultimately give them a percentage of the copyright ownership, excessive percentages of royalties, and ownership of the masters which leads to total distribution rights. Watch out for 'production credits'- they are a whole new level of evil designed to separate you from any profits YOUR music might generate. You should get an entertainment lawyer, a GOOD one.. watch out for those asshats too.. many of them are bottom feeders who just charge you a fee and only gloss over the contracts, missing things that are not in your best interest. I've wondered if half of them even understand much of the language invented in the last 10 years. If a lawyer only charges $350 for a contract negotiation, you should probably run as fast as you can towards the nearest exit. You really need to do homework on these guys and find out what their reputation is. But anyways, it's all about protecting yourself from the bottom feeders. This industry seems to have a much higher percentage of them than any other I can think of.

[WRGKMC]

It two part. (or more) It can get very complex.

It starts with copyriting and spelling out who wrote the song.

 

If the person wrote every part of the musical arrangement for all the band members,

the lyrics, chords, leads, melody, harmony, bass percussion.

If the copyrright is done so the songwriter has sole rights to the composition

then he can be the sole collector of royalties. If the Drummer, bass player, singer

who writes the lyrics make claims as cowriters or contributors and they dont wave their rights

then they are legally entitled to a portion of the royalties unless they sign a wavor when the song

is actually sold, published, performed etc. .

 

It can get very complex from there because you also have the recording that can be diced and sliced,

everyone getting in on their part of the action. Album cover designers, recording engineers, even the order of the songs

on a best of album can be copyrighted to an individual. All has to be spelled out in black and white or you can have legal

issues if someone comes back and tries to claim their rights.

 

The main thing is, if you write music, have all parts of the arrangement written and copyrighted before you

introduce it to a band. You "can" claim the basic song is yours then and anything they add to it is simply

added improvision. You wont work with others for very long if you take what they contribute and arent given credit for it.

[Johnny-Boy]

"If the person wrote every part of the musical arrangement for all the band members,

the lyrics, chords, leads, melody, harmony, bass percussion."

 

 

Technically all that's needed for a song copyright is melody and lyrics. If one person is 100% responsible for both, then he is the sole owner of the PA copyright (the only person entitled to PRO royalties). Agree with it or not, that's how it is.

 

The SR copyright is more complex (make sure all bases are covered). Of course, if the writer is feeling charitable, he/she can add other writers to the PA copyright registration (but it's not required of him/her). Sometimes sacrifices are needed to keep peace in the band.

 

For the sound recording, I would give every band member an equal share. It makes for better relationships.

 

John:cool:

[NeverTheMachine]

I guess I'm asking more about the lump sum payout from an opportunity provider and licensee. From what I understand this is different than royalties which is paid by the PRO.

 

Legally, ethically, morally what is each band member entitled to of the payout? I guess it depends on an "agreement", but there is no such agreement at the moment.

 

For example, a song is written, arranged, produced by one member and has copyright/publishing rights over a particular song; not to mention other intangibles and soliciting for licensing in the first place.

 

On the other hand, every band member has contributed to financing the recording, mastering and has performed on the record.

 

It's essentially the balance between 1) all of the above + copyright/publishing rights and 2) recording/master ownerships & performance credits.

[A. Einstein]

the third-licencing takes up to 85% of the song sales price

 

the producer take 50% of the net.. and so on

 

... so at the end I have to send you an invoice for your residue

[J.Paul]

 

I guess I'm asking more about the lump sum payout from an opportunity provider and licensee. From what I understand this is different than royalties which is paid by the PRO. Legally, ethically, morally what is each band member entitled to of the payout? I guess it depends on an "agreement", but there is no such agreement at the moment. For example, a song is written, arranged, produced by one member and has copyright/publishing rights over a particular song; not to mention other intangibles and soliciting for licensing in the first place.

 

 

Don't you guys have a musicians union in New York?

They know and I'm sure they're listed.

 

It sounds you've got the writer/publisher share figured out,

so if there's not a band agreement I would at least pay the band as session musicians.

 

For the "demos" I'm doing guys (and gals) get $50-$80,

but if something actually gets licensed it's not a demo anymore, it's a "master" (which is payed on a different scale),so at that point more money would be owed....but that's based on the old model of physical pressings and distribution.

Sean knows about all this stuff...maybe he'll chime in and clarify.

[HoboSage]

My understanding is that, under U.S. Copyright law, absent an agreement to the contrary, each band member performing on the recording, as well as any producer, engineer or session player making a non-trivial original contribution to the sound recording who is not making such a contribution as a work made for hire or is otherwise not entitled to co-authorship under the Copyright Act given the particular facts, will be deemed a co-author of a joint work, and each band member and other co-author thus has copyrights in the sound recording and can exploit those copyrights to the sound recording without any other co-author's permission. However, each co-author is also entitled to have every other co-author account to him for an equal pro rata share of all royatlies and other profits the other co-author receives from exploiting copyrights in the sound recording. Again, this is the default presumption when the co-authors have NO agreement regarding authorship or ownership of the sound recording. My understanding is that this is also the default regarding copyrights in the underlying song where more than one person collaborates to make a song - words+music. Absent an agreement, each person making a non-trivial original contribution to either the words OR the music that could have been registered separately, will be deemed an equal co-author of the entire song - all words AND all music.

[Johnny-Boy]

Caution in using the term music in "words & music" instead of “words & melody”. The term "music" is much broader and would delusion some band members into thinking they should be part of the writer's song copyright.

 

John

[HoboSage]

Copyright recognizes "musical works" - melodies are just musical works. Any band member contributing original music is a co-author. Period.

[daddymack]

The first two things here: 1) are you licensing the song (copyright form PA) or 2) are you licensing your recorded version of the song (copyright form SR), and who is listed as authors on these forms ?

Next...do you have a publisher?

Next...if it is a the recorded version, was this a band effort, or were the musicians/producer/engineer paid up front with a 'no contingency' contract in effect?

 

The best thing you can do is consult a qualified entertainment attorney...give him all the specifics and he can sort it out for you.

[Johnny-Boy]

 

Copyright recognizes "musical works" - melodies are just musical works. Any band member contributing original music is a co-author. Period.

 

 

Melody consists of a rhythmic succession of single tones. Doesn’t account for harmony. If a session player contributes a few original chords, he’s not entitled to be on the writer’s copyright registration (PA).

 

John:cool:

[NeverTheMachine]

 

The first two things here: 1) are you licensing the song (copyright form PA) or 2) are you licensing your recorded version of the song (copyright form SR), and who is listed as authors on these forms ? Next...do you have a publisher? Next...if it is a the recorded version, was this a band effort, or were the musicians/producer/engineer paid up front with a 'no contingency' contract in effect? The best thing you can do is consult a qualified entertainment attorney...give him all the specifics and he can sort it out for you.

 

 

It's potential licensing of a recorded version of a song. For the songs in question, I would be listed as the sole author on either forms. The publisher is same as the copyright owner, myself.

 

The recorded version was a band effort indeed, so I guess that's where it gets tricky. The band as a group pitched in to pay to record the album, pay mixers, masterer, etc.

 

There are no contracts, or agreements of any sort, thus far.

[Johnny-Boy]

"The recorded version was a band effort indeed, so I guess that's where it gets tricky. The band as a group pitched in to pay to record the album, pay mixers, masterer, etc." - NeverTheMachine

 

To keep peace in the band, probably a good idea to give all members an equal share, save the writer's royalties. Most independent releases barely cover the cost of production. Most your hard copy sales will come via performances/concerts. Digital sales pay little.

 

Best to sit down with all band members and discuss this. Write up an agreement, and have everyone sign.

 

John:cool:

[NeverTheMachine]

 

"The recorded version was a band effort indeed, so I guess that's where it gets tricky. The band as a group pitched in to pay to record the album, pay mixers, masterer, etc." - NeverTheMachine To keep peace in the band, probably a good idea to give all members an equal share, save the writer's royalties. Most independent releases barely cover the cost of production. Most your hard copy sales will come via performances/concerts. Digital sales pay little. Best to sit down with all band members and discuss this. Write up an agreement, and have everyone sign. John:cool:

 

 

Thanks.

[HoboSage]

NTM: Did you, by yourself alone, demo record the song or set it down in musical notation before the full band recorded the song, or is the band recording the first recording of the song? I'm unclear why you use the term "the recorded version" of the song. What other "version" of the song is there? Unless you recorded the song by singing the words to a melody or you wrote the song down with notation and lyrics before the band recording, then, for copyright purposes, there was no song before the band recording, and you're not the sole author of the song.

[NeverTheMachine]

I demo'ed a couple alone, and some with the full band (field recordings, etc.) all before the actual final master recordings were released.

[Johnny-Boy]

 

I demo'ed a couple alone, and some with the full band (field recordings, etc.) all before the actual final master recordings were released.

 

 

Your wording is a bit confusing. "Demo'ed" to me means a demo recording of a pre-writtened song. Do you mean that you wrote a couple of the songs alone, and the rest were kind of a community creation. You'll have to sort out which members were part of the songwriting and which were only session players on each song. Or just decide to split everything equally.

 

John:cool:

[NeverTheMachine]

 

Your wording is a bit confusing. "Demo'ed" to me means a demo recording of a pre-writtened song. Do you mean that you wrote a couple of the songs alone, and the rest were kind of a community creation. You'll have to sort out which members were part of the songwriting and which were only session players on each song. Or just decide to split everything equally. John:cool:

 

 

For some songs that I wrote solely, I would write the melody and lyrics at home, and record a home "demo" version with said lyrics, melody and chord structure.

 

For other songs that I wrote solely (melody and lyrics), I would work out stuff at home, but not necessarily record anything till I jammed out what I had written with the band.

 

If anyone contributed to lyrics or melody they get songwriting credit, whether that was from home, or on the spot in a jam session. To me and the rest of the band, it's clear that melody/lyrics are songwriting, and everything else is everything else. What I want to know is who is legally entitled to licensee money.

[sventvkg]

 

My understanding is that, under U.S. Copyright law, absent an agreement to the contrary, each band member performing on the recording, as well as any producer, engineer or session player making a non-trivial original contribution to the sound recording who is not making such a contribution as a work made for hire or is otherwise not entitled to co-authorship under the Copyright Act given the particular facts, will be deemed a co-author of a joint work, and each band member and other co-author thus has copyrights in the sound recording and can exploit those copyrights to the sound recording without any other co-author's permission. However, each co-author is also entitled to have every other co-author account to him for an equal pro rata share of all royatlies and other profits the other co-author receives from exploiting copyrights in the sound recording. Again, this is the default presumption when the co-authors have NO agreement regarding authorship or ownership of the sound recording. My understanding is that this is also the default regarding copyrights in the underlying song where more than one person collaborates to make a song - words+music. Absent an agreement, each person making a non-trivial original contribution to either the words OR the music that could have been registered separately, will be deemed an equal co-author of the entire song - all words AND all music.

 

 

Uh..Not quite..The person or persons who wrote the lyrics and the person or persons who wrote the music and melody are the writer/writers. The producer, session musicians, arrangers, etc are NOT entitled to copyright as per US Law. So, if a person writes chord changes and or contributes lyrics they are one of the authors. There doesn't have to be an agreement stating that, it just is and Copyright protection begins even before the song is a recorded work.

 

Copyrighting a sound recording is an entirely different thing. In the united states people adding musical parts, the artist performing the song, engineers, arrangers, etc are NOT entitled to copyright as they are all considered work for hire. This differs from Much of the rest of the world. The sound recording is owned by the person who paid for it.

 

So if you write a tune, go in to the studio pay the musicians, studio, producer, engineer etc etc..the sound recording and the music and lyrics copyright are all yours in the United States. IT's not too complicated. As an extra layer of protection, you could make all your hired guns sign a work for hire contract but again, in this country it's really not needed.

[sventvkg]

 

For some songs that I wrote solely, I would write the melody and lyrics at home, and record a home "demo" version with said lyrics, melody and chord structure. For other songs that I wrote solely (melody and lyrics), I would work out stuff at home, but not necessarily record anything till I jammed out what I had written with the band. If anyone contributed to lyrics or melody they get songwriting credit, whether that was from home, or on the spot in a jam session. To me and the rest of the band, it's clear that melody/lyrics are songwriting, and everything else is everything else. What I want to know is who is legally entitled to licensee money.

 

 

You are correct. It's amazing how much misconception there is about US Copyright Law.

[sventvkg]

 

I guess I'm asking more about the lump sum payout from an opportunity provider and licensee. From what I understand this is different than royalties which is paid by the PRO. Legally, ethically, morally what is each band member entitled to of the payout? I guess it depends on an "agreement", but there is no such agreement at the moment. For example, a song is written, arranged, produced by one member and has copyright/publishing rights over a particular song; not to mention other intangibles and soliciting for licensing in the first place. On the other hand, every band member has contributed to financing the recording, mastering and has performed on the record. It's essentially the balance between 1) all of the above + copyright/publishing rights and 2) recording/master ownerships & performance credits.

 

 

Basically the Copyright is owned by the Artist who wrote music and lyrics and the SR is owned by everyone in the band. This is refered to owning the Master which only has any value if someone wants to use THAT SPECIFIC recording in a licensing situation. However, if the songwriter and owner of the music and lyrics copyright wanted to go in an re-record everything at some point down the line and license THAT version instead and keep all the money himself, he's perfectly legally entitled to because you see, he OWNS the music and lyrics. The band members only have claim on that specific recording in which they contributed financially to.

[Johnny-Boy]

From "Lawyers for the Creative Arts":

 

Distinguishing Between Copyrights in Sound Recordings and Musical Works:

Sound recordings and musical works are separately copyrightable works that can

be owned by one or more authors. It is important to be able to distinguish

between the two: a musical work, or a song, usually means a melody and often

(but not always) lyrics; a sound recording is the actual recorded performance of

that song.

 

That being said, yes, chords can be supplied as well, but not necessary for a song copyright (PA).