Hi,
Been offered a contract to sign a track of mine.
But I don't like the look of it...
It's perpetual (the label say that means 70 year ?.
What 70 years I may it be around then ??
Plus a 30% royalty payment to me....don't like the sound of that..
Any one here had a contract of this type ?
I'm not gonna sign anyway...I'd be fool , but just thought If ask anyone
Had any experience in this type.
Thanx in advance,
Perpetual contract term, why would u sign to it...
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 610 posts since 28 Nov, 2006
-
- KVRist
- 148 posts since 13 Jan, 2004 from San Diego, CA
It depends upon the value you place on the track. If you have the good fortune to make something off a track that would otherwise provide you no monetary value, there's little/nothing to lose. However, if this track is poised to be a huge hit and generate a truck-load of revenue, you might want to pursue another venue for release.
With regard to contract law of this sort, they must state several things:
(1) The intellectual property to be transferred (in this case the song),
(2) the length of the period for which the transfer is valid,
(3) the compensation (e.g. royalty rate) you will receive for use of the property, etc.
Because intellectual property, such as music, can be protected with a copyright, you have to consider the length of time protection from infringement is granted. In the US, copyrighted music lasts 70 + your remaining life span. The company is taking the 70 year limit because there's no guarantee that you'll drop dead after signing the agreement. While neither of us hope that happens, the minimum period of protection granted is 70 years.
On the royalty payment, 30% doesn't sound too bad. Their argument is that the effort they undertake to place your track versus the compensation they receive is fair. There's no guarantee they will make good use of your track. You might consider including a claw-back clause that allows you to have the track back if they haven't placed it within 1 or 2 years. While agreements are negotiable, people might not be. But it's always worth a try.
I am a licensing associate at a university in Miami and deal with these issues all day long. Nothing to be too scared about, as long as the the party you're dealing with is legitimate. Do your homework on them first. If they're legit, this could lead to some great opportunities down the line. You'll have better terms and more negotiating power then too.
With regard to contract law of this sort, they must state several things:
(1) The intellectual property to be transferred (in this case the song),
(2) the length of the period for which the transfer is valid,
(3) the compensation (e.g. royalty rate) you will receive for use of the property, etc.
Because intellectual property, such as music, can be protected with a copyright, you have to consider the length of time protection from infringement is granted. In the US, copyrighted music lasts 70 + your remaining life span. The company is taking the 70 year limit because there's no guarantee that you'll drop dead after signing the agreement. While neither of us hope that happens, the minimum period of protection granted is 70 years.
On the royalty payment, 30% doesn't sound too bad. Their argument is that the effort they undertake to place your track versus the compensation they receive is fair. There's no guarantee they will make good use of your track. You might consider including a claw-back clause that allows you to have the track back if they haven't placed it within 1 or 2 years. While agreements are negotiable, people might not be. But it's always worth a try.
I am a licensing associate at a university in Miami and deal with these issues all day long. Nothing to be too scared about, as long as the the party you're dealing with is legitimate. Do your homework on them first. If they're legit, this could lead to some great opportunities down the line. You'll have better terms and more negotiating power then too.
It's the music that makes the science worthwhile.
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 610 posts since 28 Nov, 2006
Hi, thanx for that..
It really does help & i will do my home work as u advise ..
The label only advise the contract as perpetual in but don't mention the term length ..
They told me 70 yrs in a email ...
They won't reduce the length l I asked.
I've asked them (no reply yet) how I would go about it if I wanted to leave them after say 5yrs?
What do u think please ?
Cheers,
It really does help & i will do my home work as u advise ..
The label only advise the contract as perpetual in but don't mention the term length ..
They told me 70 yrs in a email ...
They won't reduce the length l I asked.
I've asked them (no reply yet) how I would go about it if I wanted to leave them after say 5yrs?
What do u think please ?
Cheers,
-
thecontrolcentre thecontrolcentre https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=76240 - KVRAF
- 35168 posts since 27 Jul, 2005 from the wilds of wanny
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 610 posts since 28 Nov, 2006
-
- addled muppet weed
- 105827 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
whats the upfront payment?
30% of something is better than 100% of nothing, by which i mean consider that they may well be in a better position for marketing the track than you alone, along with that theyre marketing your name which if the track goes big so does your fanbase, then you can start selling your own stuff once you have that fanbase.
im not saying go ahead and sign, im just pointing out what could be on offer for selling one of your tracks in such a contract, not like youre signing yourself to the label.
30% of something is better than 100% of nothing, by which i mean consider that they may well be in a better position for marketing the track than you alone, along with that theyre marketing your name which if the track goes big so does your fanbase, then you can start selling your own stuff once you have that fanbase.
im not saying go ahead and sign, im just pointing out what could be on offer for selling one of your tracks in such a contract, not like youre signing yourself to the label.
-
- KVRAF
- 6113 posts since 7 Jan, 2005 from Corporate States of America
Make sure they will indeed include your name as the actual author of the work... If they're licensing it to create derivatives under some pop star's name, would you be bothered?
- dysamoria.com
my music @ SoundCloud
my music @ SoundCloud
