Importance of communication, email, reminders, follow-ups.

Deal memos, record keeping, getting the artist to sign off on the contract.

Communication, exclusivity

Types of deals, splits.

Protecting dates, Exclusions

The tech rider, routing and sharing backlines

What Per Advance really means

Riders, Questions, Per Advance

Centering around 10 core principles, the rights listed include, “We have the right to be compensated for the use of our creative works, and share in the revenues that they generate” and “We have the right to license our works and control the ways in which they are used.”

Read the whole thing here:

ASCAP’s Bill of Rights
for Songwriters and Composers:

1. We have the right to be compensated for the use of our creative works, and share in the revenues that they generate.
   
2. We have the right to license our works and control the ways in which they are used.
   
3. We have the right to withhold permission for uses of our works on artistic, economic or philosophical grounds.
   
4. We have the right to protect our creative works to the fullest extent of the law from all forms of piracy, theft, and unauthorized use, which deprive us of our right to earn a living based on our creativity.
   
5. We have the right to choose when and where our creative works may be used for free.
   
6. We have the right to develop, document, and distribute our works through new media channels while retaining the right to a share in all associated profits.
   
7. We have the right to choose the organizations we want to represent us and to join our voices together to protect our rights and negotiate for the value of our music.
   
8. We have the right to earn compensation from all types of “performances,” including direct, live renditions as well as indirect recordings, broadcasts, digital streams, and more.
   
9. We have the right to decline participation in business models that require us to relinquish all or part of our creative rights—or which do not respect our right to be compensated for our work.
   
10. We have the right to advocate for strong laws protecting our creative works, and demand that our government vigorously uphold and protect our rights.

Add your name to a piece of music industry history!  You can electronically “sign” the actual ASCAP petition here:

 See the report here:

An Urgent Message from NMPA regarding your rights: 

Original source =(http://womb.mixerman.net/showthread.php?t=6404).  Also at: http://nmpa.org/aboutnmpa/presidentscorner.asp .  Bold and Italic emphasis = mine.

On Monday, January 28, the Copyright Royalty Board (CRB) begins the hearing that will determine mechanical rates for every songwriter and music publisher in America. It will be the most important rate hearing in the history of the music industry because in addition to setting rates for physical products, rates will be set for the first time ever for digital products such as digital downloads, subscription services and ringtones.

The National Music Publishers’ Association (NMPA) will be representing the interests of songwriters and music publishers and will be fighting vigorously to protect those interests to ensure that musical compositions are compensated fairly.

On the other side of this fight stands the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and the Digital Music Association (DiMA). Both the RIAA and DiMA have proposed significant reductions in mechanical royalty rates that would be disastrous for songwriters and music publishers. This is literally a fight for the survival of our industry.

To give you an example of what is at stake, the current rate for physical phonorecords is 9.1 cents. The NMPA is proposing an increase to 12.5 cents per song. The RIAA, however, has proposed slashing the rate to approximately 6 cents a song – a cut of more than one-third the current rate!

For permanent digital downloads, NMPA is proposing a rate of 15 cents per track because the costs involved are much less than for physical products. The RIAA has proposed the outrageous rate of approximately
5 – 5.5 cents per track, and DiMA is proposing even less.

If you find that troubling, it gets worse. For interactive streaming services, which some analysts believe will be the future of the music industry, NMPA is proposing a rate of the greater of 12.5% of revenue, 27.5% of content costs, or a micro-penny calculation based on usage. The RIAA actually proposed that songwriters and music publishers should get the equivalent of .58% of revenue. This isn’t a typo – less than 1%. And DiMA is taking the shocking and offensive position that songwriters’ and music publishers’ mechanical rights should be zero, because DiMA does not believe we have any such rights!

The initial hearing will last four weeks, with the three permanent Copyright Royalty Judges hearing arguments Mondays through Thursdays from 9:30 am – 4:30 pm each day. At the conclusion of the initial hearing, there will be more discovery, followed by a rebuttal hearing in May, and a final decision expected on October 2.

The NMPA will be spending millions dollars in this proceeding to protect the interests of songwriters and music publishers against the much larger record labels and digital media companies. And although we face such an enormous fight, we have an incredible advantage – we represent songwriters, without whom the record labels and digital music services could not exist.

Please forward this to anyone who is involved in the songwriting and music publishing industry.

 We will be sending out regular updates as the CRB progresses to keep you informed. Through your networks, we hope to reach the vast majority of the industry. If you did not receive this directly, and would like to be added to the master NMPA communications list, please send your contact information to Jamie Marotta at jmarotta@nmpa.org.

As always, we appreciate your support of the NMPA which allows us to wage this fight on your behalf.

David M. Israelite
President & CEO
National Music Publishers’ Association
http://nmpa.org/home/index.asp

Hear 2.0 reminds us of the cyclical nature of the music industry. (ad-supported music).

Media futurist predicts a songwriter’s strike due to the failings of the Performing Rights Organizations (PROs).  I believe there’s a good chance he’s right about this; –the industry and the courts still haven’t gotten a good handle on a digital world without borders.

A lot of bloggers are pointing to the end of the record labels.  I read with interest the post about “Digital is more than just the Internet“  from New Music Strategies.  The point is well taken;  –the industry was not prepared for the wide open spaces and changing formats/distribution methods.  Change takes time and the folks who made a living off the status quo were slow to see the handwriting on the wall.  But don’t rule them out yet.

Seth Godin published some new music lessons for the industry to think about. (hypebot, our digital music).

The Digital Rights Management experiment apparently failed, so the labels will have to come up with something new(our digital music).   My bet=look out for  digital watermarks that track the tracks (Listenerd). 

The RIAA is probably not dead. (Mashable via Listenerd).  I know my job continues to change incrementally.  The same can be said for the industry, even though change can be painfully slow (and those who do not change are condemned to fade away).

Finally, we’re all here for a purpose.  Look at Louis’s post and contemplate the future.  What changes do you need to make?

For you plugin-heads;  a free Vintage meter! (RTAS, VST & Direct X).  (thanks to the Womb board).  Plus a list of more FREE RTAS plugs!

Happy Sunday!

Peace,

J

This means Clear Channel can start buying newspapers, right?  

Future of Music blog is pretty confident that this is a win for big business.  Perhaps it will be a fresh reinvention of radio and newspapers…like a cell phone edition that calls you up every day, tells you the latest gossip with your favorite song playing in the background while AC Nielsen records your GPS coordinates and bankcard balances.  (Just kidding, AC!) 

Here’s a nifty quote from Future of Music’s report:

FMC understands the concerns of our allies about the rule changes. Many groups believe that they leave room for cross-ownership in smaller markets. And it’s important to note that there was dissent on the Commission itself. Here’s a quote from Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein:

“For many years, the underpinnings of the Commission’s public interest analysis with regard to media have been to promote localism, competition, and diversity. Yet it is clear from the record that this decision undermines all of these goals. . . as a result of newspaper-broadcast cross-ownership, there is less local news in the market as a whole and there is less competition for stories and ideas since two competing entities become one. There is also less diversity, as a voice in the market is lost, and broadcast outlets are taken even further out of reach of women and people of color.”

My 2 cents =  if the FCC wanted to increase diversity, they’d unleash Low Power FM and allow any of us to set up radio stations.  Then let the chips fall where they may!  Power to the free markets, baby!

I can see it now:  *cue ”Peaches & Regalia”   **VO:  “You’re listening to  ”W-D-R-J”…All Zappa,  All the time!” 

And now a word from St. Alphonzo’s House of Pancakes…

Guess what Santa’s bringing the media industry this Christmas?  An affirmation that intellectual property has specific ownership and rights that supercede what some say is a public’s right to free content.  Read more about USB’s acceptance of  DRM checks for video content.  This means that Hollywood and multimedia developers can hope for a brighter future (unless you believe a hack is already being developed).

Read more about USB and DRM here:

What happens if the pirates win? 

  Read about China’s story here: 

(mediafuturist)

The Balance Sheet: This is how much each player got paid at the end of the game on sales of $3m
 RecordCompany                                                                               $710,000              

Source: Netribution  originally taken from Steve Albini’s post (Former Nirvana producer).

Future of Music Coalition’s blog has a take on the U.S.  Senate hearings on public performance royalties.

Basically, if a song receives airplay on the traditional radio outlets, the composers/songwriters get paid but the performing artist doesn’t. In the past, everytime the performers’ rights organizations have lobbied congress to repeal the exemption, the National Association of Broadcasters defeats it.

The FMQB quotes NAB chair Steve Newberry:

“I’m trying to find out what’s happening this week, but no luck so far… I’ll keep you posted”What I fail to understand after nearly 30 years in the radio industry is why the recording industry is willing to essentially bite the hand that feeds it. ”

Also from FMQB is this quote from Lyle Lovett:

“When radio plays recorded works, they generate profit for themselves because they attract listeners and advertising dollars. Yet radio has never compensated performers for the value their creative work brings to the radio industry, because the Copyright Act does not protect sound recordings in the same way it protects the underlying songs,” said Lovett. “Let’s face it. No one tunes into a radio station to hear the commercials.”

Can you imagine what radio would be like if the NAB lost this year?