By Grubman, Indursky & Shindler (216.139.153.109) on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 01:54 pm:

DMX Refuses To Record For Def Jam

DMX announced at a press conference that he was refusing to deliver any more recordings to Def Jam, the label he is signed to.
DMX that over the years, he has made the label almost $50 million dollars, but received an amount in return that he called "a loan."

"The highest paid artist gets paid 18 cents on the dollar, it's straight robbery," DMX said. "They still own your music and they ask for maybe 27 songs each album and they only use about 16 and give the rest away. It's straight robbery man, I can't be a part of it anymore."

DMX added that record labels tie artists up in unfair contracts that last too long. He also lashed out at the radio industry.

"All the radio stations are bought and paid for, it all comes from the heads of the record companies. It's not about talent anymore."
DMX is still signed to the label. At press time, Def Jam representatives had no comment.


�

By RD (65.54.98.16) on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 03:37 pm:

The recording business contracts as they relate to recording artists: Stinks! Always have and probably always will since practically nothing is being done to implement any changes. A good start would be giving the rights to the masters to the artists once the artist(s) has recouped any and all expenses associated with making and promoting the recording.

By KevGo (64.115.26.80) on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 04:05 pm:

Okay, Gang.....
First of all I agree with RD - many of these recording contracts and agreements DO stink and I've seen my share of old & new.

However, once again I must impress that artists MUST become more business oriented and READ these agreements BEFORE they sign them. Do NOT trust just your agent/manager/attorney with reading these things for the artist.

Also an artist should have a REVERSAL CLAUSE in their agreement so that they could take their masters with them after the label makes (or loses) their money off the fruits of the act's labor.

Ray Charles had a reversal clause written into his contract with ABC-Paramount Records prior to signing with the label in late 1959. When he walked away from the label in 1975 with his masters, ABC Records damn near crumbled and was sold to MCA.

Dave Clark of the Dave Clark 5 had a master reversal clause in his agreement with EMI. The label thought of nothing when they agreed to this set-up. They probably regretted it after the DC5 spent almost five years on the pop charts and Dave left with the tapes.

Artists, please educate yourselves before the contracts are written.

Kevin Goins - KevGo

By Tony Russi (68.18.235.158) on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 04:15 pm:

Good advice Kevin!!

By RD (65.54.98.16) on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 04:18 pm:

Kevgo, I agree that artists must educate themselves...and many have. But in the case of recording contracts they are usually: TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT!

This whole true even in the case of writing contracts. I've repeated the account many times here of a friend and his writing partner who interned at Philly International in the seventies under the tutorledge of Bunny Sigler but when offered contracts turned them down because they were so unfair and one sided. In addition, the money was funny. There was no room for negotiation. Either they signed on the dotted line or they could bounce. They bounced.

By Tony Russi (68.18.235.158) on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 04:24 pm:

RD, I'm sure you are correct that the companies attitudes are "take it or leave it" because for everyone that leaves it there are 100 who'll take it.

By Paul Jackson, Jr. (216.139.153.109) on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 04:29 pm:

Number one, I'm not the famous session guitarist, we just happen to have the same name.

Number two, Kev you're right, artists should educate themselves about the biz. I tell aspiring artists all the time, hone your craft, but on your down time, pick up and read Wm. Kravilovsky's excellent book "This Business Of Music" or Donald Passman's "Everything You Need To Know About The Music Business" and many other books on the biz.

Know what some, not all, but some tell me that confirms that artists will ALWAYS get screwed ? "Naw man, I ain't got to read to a book, I gotta do this" I then say back to them "OK Junior, you'll learn"

This generation of kids are some of the laziest sons of bitches I've ever seen. I guess they deserve what's coming to them.

By RD (65.54.98.16) on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 04:54 pm:

Paul, more artists got screwed back in the day then they do now. At least some of the artists today are reaping some riches. You can count on your fingers and toes the soul artists from yesterday who made any significant monies from recording companies. Neither Tupac nor Biggie's parents (or people) had to go begging to get them proper funerals, which cannot be said from some of the soul superstars of days gone by.

The problem is the industry is rotten from the top and just because a few artists are able to persuade someone to be half way fair with them doesn't cure the problem.

It's like the thread about Berry. I don't know anybody who worked for Berry Gordy in a salaried or wage position that had a problem with him or Motown. However, if you talk to many of the recording artists you'll get a different view. And, it's not just Motown it's the whole recording industry and how they relate to their recording artists, and in some cases, their songwriters.

By Paul Jackson, Jr. (216.139.153.109) on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 05:11 pm:

RD, you're right and I wholeheartedly agree with you. From what I'm observing, as we all are, this generation don't know how good they have it. It's sad to me a lot of kids don't care about their history in terms of the soul artists that paved the way for them. They figure they weren't around then, so why should they be concerned now.

In terms of funeral expenses for artists, Virgin Records to my knowledge has NOT flipped the bill for her funeral to this day. That funeral home had to file a lawsuit against Virgin Records to be paid. Seems like some things never change.

By KevGo (64.115.26.80) on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 06:41 pm:

RD, Paul, Tony & company:
Yes, many of these recording contracts do have that stench of "take it or leave it" and if the artist really wants to be on that certain label they will (sadly) sign on the dotted line with their own blood.

Hopefully the mergers and buyouts that's happening with the majors will send a message to artists signed and unsigned to seriously thinking about setting up their own shop like Prince did and sell their stuff direct. It doesn't cost that much to manufacture a CD (most CD pressing plants charge as little as forty-nine cents per disc to manufacture and that's including the CD case, insertion of booklets/back covers, labeling and shrink-wrapping) and with folks becoming more internet/media savvy (from websites to radio commercials), it's now easy for an artist to "open up their own shingle" and maintain ownership of their work.

The pop group Hanson walked away from the same company DMX is battling and set up their own label (which they did), obtained distribution and they currently have a new single that's getting airplay on Top 40 radio. So folks, living without the majors and their B.S. contracts can be done.

Kevin Goins - KevGo

By Juicefree20 (68.161.31.69) on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 07:24 pm:

I think that most of the young artists are just so happy to be able to say that they've got a record, they don't even think of the terms, or the implications of what they're signing.

Juice

By Isaiah (205.188.209.9) on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 07:32 pm:

RD, thanks for your correction regarding the young artists, as this is not something new to them... Most of the artists whose material we love, never saw the kinds of money these kids see today... Most died, or are living, broker than when they started in this industry, and that's why so many got the hell out of it(smile!) Does that mean they were lazy and stupid??? In some cases, hell yes, but we'll not disrespect their memory, or body of work the way we do the younger artists...

Peace!
Isaiah

By LadyMystique (216.37.229.14) on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 - 09:23 pm:

KevGo-excellent advice that I could use for my band if we get to cross that road. And I agree that you could go Indie!

By bigdaddyg2k4 (205.138.55.65) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 05:33 pm:

Much respect to the resident music expert, KevGo for shining the light and passing on valuble info about the music biz and how up and coming artists/producers/songwriters/etc. can set up their own shop and distributing their own music without the need of a major label. I'm not in the industry either (but hopefully soon to be), and haven't read a single book on the (mis)practices of the majors and I know what be going on in the ivory tower. It's a doggone shame that to this day, the majors are still screwing over artists for their music and ownership of their masters just they did back in the day. If I decide to sign to a label, it will never happen. The info is out there like KevGo mentioned about how to set up shop on your own with companies like Disc Makers for example, and use the internet to your advantage to market yourself to the masses, just like the majors are doing, but without all of the cutthroat politics that go along with it. I'd rather start my own empire with my bare hands and sweat than to be a slave for somebody else using the same bare hands and sweat. I'm making the money, not them.

By KevGo (64.115.26.80) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 07:20 pm:

BigDaddy:
Thank you for the post and the props. You're right as rain - the information IS out there on how one can set up their own thing. Folks like DiscMakers do great business helping "the little guy/gal" put their own recording together and making it look professional (there are others such as Europadisk and Rainbo that almost do the same thing).

The important thing is if an artist DOES want to record for a major label, they MUST do their homework. Books like "This Business Of Music" breaks the legalese down to plain English whereas Passman's books contains interviews with those who are in the biz and what advice they have to offer. Also, Fredric Dannen's "Hit Men" is THE bible on the history of corruption in the music biz. Dannen had the guts to walk into the lion's den to interview figures such as Morris Levy and Dick Asher - and walked out alive to tell the tale.

Once again, if you want to make money as an artist in music, learn the business and own as much property as possible.

Kevin Goins - KevGo

By GOAT (64.228.147.10) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 07:30 pm:

However, once again I must impress that artists MUST become more business oriented and READ these agreements BEFORE they sign them. Do NOT trust just your agent/manager/attorney with reading these things for the artist.


I find that difficult. If you are a new band up and comming and trying to break into the recording industry it is very difficult to make a deal on YOUR terms. Most record labels give you what they want to give you as you have nothing but the music for offer.

You are at the mercy of each and every recording company and that isn't going to change even if you have the business ethics. They can make or break you so unfortunately they own you.

I for one certianly don't agree with it but how can you change it unless you start your own label and even then it is near impossible to go big with it.

I just don't see anyway out.

By KevGo (64.115.26.80) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 08:23 pm:

GOAT:
First of all, my post was an insistance that an artist "looks before they leap" into a recording contract. Even if they do wind up signing it they should at least be educated as to what to expect.

And yes, it is possible to call the shots early in the game. Look at the examples I cited - Ray Charles, Dave Clark. There are many more as well - Joshie Armstead (she owned three labels!)and Curtis Mayfield. These folks were able to buck the industry once they learned how to play the game (and mind you they learned pretty damned early!).

As far as an artist never "going big" on their own, may I point out singer/songwriter Ani DiFranco, who for the past ten years has released discs on her own label (Righteous Babe) which is independently distributed (by Koch Distribution) and each disc since 1996 has sold at least a quarter million copies per title. That's right - a quarter million per title. AND Ani gets booked on David Lettermen every year she releases an disc. Ani DiFranco has had almost every major label beat down her door offering a deal and she's turned down every suitor.

The majors are not the end-all or the be-all unless you really want to be a part of them really badly. In that case, then there is really "no way out" as you indicated. However if more artists become self-sufficient (like Natalie Merchant has become since leaving Elektra) then there will be no need for the majors and their bad contracts.

Respectfully submitted,
Kevin Goins - KevGo

By NYC Diva (67.31.84.137) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 08:51 pm:

Juicefree, what you're saying is just as much true today as it was back in the day. Far too many of these artists don't stop to think about the business end of show business. As a result they end up getting ripped off or taken advantage of.

By Eli (68.236.53.71) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 10:29 pm:

When looking over a a contract, the first thing you must delete is the "C" Clause....cross -collaterelization.

This simply means that the company can recoup monies from ANY AND ALL royalties earned by said artist including, artist, publishing mechanicals, songwriting mechanicals , even performance royalties, so therefore the artist gets the royal shaft!

DELETE...DELETE..DELETE

By RD (65.54.97.201) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 11:47 pm:

I think some of us here live in a fantasy world. Some labels, like Motown, didn't even allow aspiring recording artists to take their contracts out of Motown so a lawyer could look them over. They pretty much had to sign them on the spot.

The cross-collatarization clause is especially detrimental to the recording artist who also write songs. It's common for the artist/writer to have one of his/her songs recorded by another artist and achieve hit status and never get paid a penny of mechanicals because the artist/writer is in the red with the record company for past recordings and recordings in the can and the songwriting earnings goes toward erasing the recording debt(s).

The average person couldn't read and uncerstand a recording contract from a major label if they earnestly tried. Most lawyers would come up short too. Artist contracts can be more than 50 pages long with some approaching 100 pages. And good lawyers who specializes in reading and implementing changes in a artist contract don't come cheap. And most recording companies, unless they really want you bad, are not going to allow you to make many, if any, changes anyway.

To put the fact that artists get stiffed by recording companies, and have been for years, off on the artist is BLAMING THE VICTIM WHEN THE VICTIM IS VIRTUALLY POWERLESS.

By stephanie (69.138.239.31) on Wednesday, March 24, 2004 - 11:53 pm:

This all sounds great but the artists especially the new ones really have no choice if they want the promotion of the record label..if you think about it the record label IS putting up the money to promote them and their tours and they want their money back and the masters. I see how it works from a business standpoint and I understand it but that doesnt make it right,
Stephanie

By KevGo (64.115.26.80) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 01:41 pm:

Folks:
If an artist REALLY wants to educate themselves about contracts or the biz the guides are out there for them to use and understand. There are also seminars related to this topic they could attend. Common posted a URL under the "FYI" thread that leads to a series of seminars held by the folks at Global Entertainment that not only help new artists understand their agreeements but show them how to set up their own thing. There are no amateurs involved in this - folks such as Miles Copeland and Hal Blaine (two long-time vets of the biz) are involved in this organization.

Granted the majority of acts who want to record for the majors are probably NOT gonna read through the entire agreement or try to understand. At the risk of pissing off certain folks here I have a hard time sympathizing with a current artist who is crying foul, especially with the research that is available today. A veteran from years past has my sympathy wholeheartedly and I would defend their rights vigorously. But a DMX, who in the face of other current artists (especially in the hip-hop field) who understand that this is a BUSINESS first and foremost, should follow his colleague Eve's example and keep expanding his business sphere into things not musically related.

Kevin Goins - KevGo

By Eli (68.236.53.71) on Thursday, March 25, 2004 - 01:58 pm:

Another IMPORTANT thing to look for in a contract is ALWAYS agree to be paid on the GROSS amount of the RETAIL selling price of a cd.
never wholesale as it is more than half of retail and never the net, for obvious reasons.

By LadyMystique (216.108.206.177) on Saturday, March 27, 2004 - 04:33 pm:

My band and I were discussing this recently and with the state of the industry nowadays, we'd rather do shows than get a recording contract. If we want to put out CDs, we'd rather do it ourselves. I'm sorry, but that's our opinion...we just want to play and make music and not worry about the potential "sharks" out there.

By Juicefree20 (68.161.46.83) on Sunday, March 28, 2004 - 01:31 am:

LadyM, when you consider the cost of making CDs & a decent press package, would be hard for you to get a worse deal going for yourself. The money you make belongs to you. I think that you should go for it.

Juice

By Fred (152.163.253.70) on Sunday, March 28, 2004 - 03:04 am:

Bobby,

I'm going to disagree with you on getting paid on retail rather than wholesale. These days contracts with a "retail" royalty rate use a "manufacturer's suggested retail price" (MSRP) that usually has no real relation to the price actually paid by the customer. When Universal announced it's plans to drop the suggested retail price on many CDs last year, the artists with retail royalty rates got the shaft.

Furthermore, it is illegal to have an MSRP in the EU, so the labels just use an arbitrary price to determine royalties on foreign sales. Wholesale prices are are a lot more stable and easier to track. It took decades, but the majors finally realized this and all of the will be going with the wholesale base soon.

Of course, if you have a choice, you have to make sure the wholesale royalty percentage is about twice what the retail percentage would be so you make the same from each copy sold.

By LadyMystique (216.108.206.177) on Sunday, March 28, 2004 - 10:56 am:

Thanks Juice...I think I will!

By Houston6855 (171.75.110.163) on Tuesday, March 30, 2004 - 12:43 pm:

It'a my 1st time on this site but truly found some valuble info.
I agree with a lot of things being said. I agree that with things such as a computer a little time noone artist should get screwed as any artist previous. But it's like Pimps & Ho's every young girl or woman in America 2day knows that if she's working 4 a pimp she's never going 2 come out ahead. But does that stop women from looking 4 a man or woman 2 pimp them? No as knowing that getting in bed with 99% of these Major record Labels & probably 85-90% of these Indy Labels you gonna come up short. They are still going 2 sign.
I'm going 2 run a couple things 2gether. I read a post about Artists in the past in my personal comparison a lot of artist in the past did truely die broke. But on one note they did music because they loved their music, where as a lot of artist 2day come into this industry looking 2 get rich. & if thats their primary goal they shouldn't be mad or crying foul because they fall short because of lack of planning.
thanx kev 7 everyone else

By Eli (68.236.59.174) on Tuesday, March 30, 2004 - 01:33 pm:

Fred,
Thats what I was driving at regarding the retail/wholesale situation .
I should havementioned the calculation regarding the "doubling up" of the point structure re artist royalties. .