Opinions: Song contest rules unfair?

[Kubi]

Well, just to balance the statements above, in my own experience the by far most onerous contract I was ever offered for use of my music was by Current TV...

You too?! Ha! They tried to ram an agreement down my throat and I countered with a strict license that only allowed the use of my unedited music in timed relation to the piece (a pilot) and they had to agree to BMI licensing as well. They refused to that last point to the very end and then caved.[...]

They never caved for me, and with my director's support I refused to sign. Since through their shady tin-pan-alley-style business practices they have a whole library of ill-gotten music, they replaced my score literallywithin 20 minutes. I know, because the re-scored film was available online within that timeframe. It was truly un-believable. They also reserved the right to edit the bejesus out of the film itself, despite the fact that they paid the filmmakers a pittance. Just disgusting.

The irony was that I got a contract for a similar short-film scenario from Fox network in the same week (my music was in one of the "On The Lot" shorts), and that contract adhered to all the reasonable 'standards' you'd expect, as in, they simply got the right to use the music as part of the film, and edit it for trailers etc. along with the footage as needed. All with proper filing of cue sheets for ASCAP. At the time the whole Murdoch/Gore connotation did strike me as ironic, my experience with the 'progressive and friendly' Current TV and the 'evil' Fox empire was so 100% opposite to the prevailing prejudice...

[Kubi]

No... I know what you meant and I try to see both sides. From their point of view, it would suck to have somebody come back at you over and over for more. I get that. I think I may enter it for the hell of it and if I did by some miracle win the thing, I'll tell them I'll give them a very fair, generous license but there's no way I'm assigning copyright to them.

Be careful and read the rules again - you may agree precisely to that simply by entering. Just a thought.

[James Steele]

No... I know what you meant and I try to see both sides. From their point of view, it would suck to have somebody come back at you over and over for more. I get that. I think I may enter it for the hell of it and if I did by some miracle win the thing, I'll tell them I'll give them a very fair, generous license but there's no way I'm assigning copyright to them.

Be careful and read the rules again - you may agree precisely to that simply by entering. Just a thought.

I've looked at them closely... but will again. I think you have to win for them to do that and I would imagine you'd have to execute some sort of document assigning the copyright, yes? Absent some sort of written agreement, I can't see how it would hold up. I dunno. This is all just me blabbering at this point.

[Jim]

This type of contest exists across several creative industries. I've seen "design our logo" contests with similar rules. Doritos is asking customers to submit TV ads for the Super Bowl, and if memory serves, Budweiser did it, too.

The contest runners are mining for cheap talent. They pay the costs of advertising the contest, and they need some quid pro quo. That alone isn't unreasonable. The Contest Winner will be able to tout his acclamation in marketing endeavors. Certainly, that is something of value. I can say with a fair degree of certainty that seasoned advertising creatives will jump on the Doritos contest, if for no other reason than the ego-stroking and potentially career-advancing possibility of being chosen the winner.

If you don't like the rules, don't play the game. That's my motto when I play poker.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

The Contest Winner will be able to tout his acclamation in marketing endeavors.

Every 250 years that is valuable to an aspiring artist. Not quite as useful as "I was HIRED to score ___________ (fill in the blank)." Or, "My song was # ____ on BIllboard (pick a number, any number!) That aside, it is still unethical to require someone sign away all rights, title and interest in their property.

[James Steele]

Well, looking at their wording, it says "by entering" you agree that if you win you will sign an agreement provided by them that assigns the copyright and other rights. So they're trying to get you right from the beginning. I guess the real issue is whether they will sue you for breach of contract if you refuse to sign the agreement when the time comes.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

Well, looking at their wording, it says "by entering" you agree that if you win you will sign an agreement provided by them that assigns the copyright and other rights. So they're trying to get you right from the beginning. I guess the real issue is whether they will sue you for breach of contract if you refuse to sign the agreement when the time comes.

Can't do it. Transfer of copyright (see my earlier link to the LOC) requires a legally executed agreement. Agreeing to agree is not enough. You signature on a piece of paper is required and you cannot be coerced into signing. They probably would not announce the winner until they signed the agreement. The real question is "how much is the song worth TO YOU?" Also, how much is your integrity worth? The earlier suggestion is probably best: DOn't like the rules? DOn't play the game.

I suspect if they got the killer song they wanted and you didn't agree, they'd negotiate with you if they wanted it that badly.

[James Steele]

Yeah... I hear you. It's tough having ethics when dealing with people who have none... or might not. I suppose if you sign something as part of the entry packet that you *will* agree to this assignment if you win, it might be more difficult. The problem is that there are vagaries as far as the "prize." The unambiguous prize is two "days" of studio time at a local studio. You give them permission to use your name and likeness, but that doesn't mean they will. They mention that a music video will be made for the song, and musicians might infer that they will appear in this video, but no guarantee of that. Basically, there's no clearly enumeration of the publicity the winner will or will not get, and basically that's the only real prize here.

[Jim]

The Contest Winner will be able to tout his acclamation in marketing endeavors.

Every 250 years that is valuable to an aspiring artist. Not quite as useful as "I was HIRED to score ___________ (fill in the blank)." Or, "My song was # ____ on BIllboard (pick a number, any number!) That aside, it is still unethical to require someone sign away all rights, title and interest in their property.

But useful nonetheless. This situation isn't much different from American Idol, and the exposure has worked out pretty well for some of the winners AND losers.

I don't agree that these contests are unethical. I mentioned already that there IS a quid pro quo... value exchanged for value. It's up to the entrant to decide if the trade-off has value for himself or herself. You're already a pro, Mike. I'd expect you to perceive little value for YOU, but for somebody who's never sold a piece of music, this could be the foot in the door to jump-start a career. It's hard for unknowns to get work, and this may be just the ticket to convert somebody from an unknown to a known.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

It's hard for unknowns to get work, and this may be just the ticket to convert somebody from an unknown to a known.

I understand that perspective, but it is woefully unfair to ask for ALL rights from the writer(s). Stephen Foster sold away the rights to "Oh Susannah" for about $100. It went on to be the biggest selling piece of sheet music ever (I think it may still hold that record) and perhaps one of the most popular songs in American history. Foster never saw another penny from the sale. He died with 38 cents in his pocket (assuming he was wearing his pants at the time... ).

That is what can, and often does, happen. Sorry Jim, but the corps that put this kind of stuff together have the appearance of "helping unknown artists get foothold. In fact what they really want is unfettered rights to material that they can exploit for profit. To quote Art Garfunckle: Any way you look at it you loose.

And I would add that my view of this has not changed since I was a wannbe. I copyrighted my first and every subsequent piece and have NEVER sold off my rights. The last time I was asked to do so was for a film series. I was offered $1500 for all rights in perpetuity. I hired a lawyer (in exchange for a percentage of the publication income!) and we licensed certain rights, but not all rights. Since that time (about 20 years ago) the work has brought in about $150k in broadcast rights and maybe another $40k in spin offs (use in other markets - as it was a non-exclusive license). I may still die with 38 cents or less in my pockets (assuming I am wearing pants at the time of my demise - but with my record, I doubt I will be.) But that's for another thread

The other thing to consider is that once people know you as someone who will sellout, you will be asked to sellout in all subsequent deals. I for one would rather have a career with my dignity, and royalty income intact. But that's just me, I suppose.

[James Steele]

Hmmm... perhaps "unethical" isn't the right word. "Greedy," "confiscatory," "punative"? I'm not being sour grapes here. I'm just saying that the sponsors of such a contest could protect themselves in other ways. They could make sure that they and their assigns would never have to pay a single red cent for the use of the song for their rest of time "throughout the universe" (LOL) without demanding an assignment of copyrights and all ownership of it.

As has been said, one can simply opt not to participate. Only reason I even noticed it is I had a pre-existing tune that I think fits the bill amazingly well. Of course, if I was smart I'd simply record it and pass along to connections I have locally and attempt an end-run around the contest. But then, I'm a rock and roll kinda guy, thus not smart. If I were I'd use Logic, speak with a British accent and wear loafers without socks.

I've just developed a morbid fascination for these sorts of contests, because the vast majority of them seem designed to relieve large numbers of aspiring artists of rights to their own intellectual property in exchange for the *chance* of some publicity, some free studio time, and maybe a cheap amp and a Les Paul knock-off. One of the worst I've seen was one on a major "internet networking web site," that implored bands to enter their best songs by uploading MP3s. Thousands and thousands of young hopefuls did so. According the the fine print (which probably most of them didn't read) merely by "entering," those artists agreed to grant to the sponsor: unlimited license in perpetutiy without any compensation or attribution to the author; a right to grant licenses to any third third parties it wished without compensation or attribution to the author; and the right to create derivative works without compensation or attribution to the author. Of course it dawned on me: this major networking web site had also started a music label and presumably had signed artists. By offering a chance at a few hours of studio time, and 5 minutes of "fame" they could amass rights to thousands and thousands of songs. True... a lot of it might be crap. However, the best songs or even fragments of songs (remember the derivative works?) like a good riff, or chorus could then be recorded by bands on its own label without paying a dime to anybody or even giving them a writer's credit.

I mean I hate so sound so cynical, but I've come to view almost all of these things as a scam to get something for nothing. And of course there will always be those who will happily go along with it.

[James Steele]

And I would add that my view of this has not changed since I was a wannbe. I copyrighted my first and every subsequent piece and have NEVER sold off my rights. The last time I was asked to do so was for a film series. I was offered $1500 for all rights in perpetuity. I hired a lawyer (in exchange for a percentage of the publication income!) and we licensed certain rights, but not all rights. Since that time (about 20 years ago) the work has brought in about $150k in broadcast rights and maybe another $40k in spin offs (use in other markets - as it was a non-exclusive license).

Michael! That is so awesome. That incident is probably one of several that you could relate that is inspiring. I wish aspiring composers, songwriters, etc. had more people like you counseling them in these matters.

I've always felt that you have no chance at a fair deal unless you're mentally and financially prepared to walk away from a bad one. If what a songwriter or composer has to offer is worthwile, a fair deal will come, but usually not before attempts are made to test you and see if you're desperate. It's a standard negotiating tactic. That's one of the reasons I have always cultivated other sources of income as I have said "no thanks" in the past because I'm not financially at risk if I say "no." Saying "no" is a luxury I am able to afford.

And yes... I mention ethics. Some people have a view that all is fair in business and if you can totally screw the other party and they let you, you're just a smart businessperson for doing so. I have a hard time with that. So I don't do that. I sleep well at night.

[MIDI Life Crisis]

...there will always be those who will happily go along with it.

You hit the nail on the head James. Someone please name one person they know of who signed away their rights in this manner and became a famous (and more importantly - rich) star? Jennifer Hudson? Nah! No intellectual property involved, so our American Idol folks are not really fair game.

Seriously, it is precisely this kind of decision (to sellout in this manner or not) is what (IMO) defines a pro before they are a pro. It is about integrity. It is a kin to asking a plumber (with any first name) to fix your toilet and if it ever breaks again, to come and fix it for free. Or asking your butcher for a fine steak, but once you eat it, you have the right to come back for free steaks anytime in the future. And your descendants or assigns can also grab his meat. ANd why do some feel it is different with songwriters and composers? Our product has far more use and long lasting value and just as much preparation, time, sweat, blood and tears go into the creation. Yet some F---kface wants it for free or so cheap as to be insulting.

I say f---k 'em. I have learned to temper my anger on this board, but this subject really gets my goat. It literally takes the bread out of my loved ones mouth, puts my mother on the street and prevents me from buying health insurance, gas, and other essentials (and non-essentials) of life. Are the guys and gals who run these contests "doing without?" You bet they are not.

F---k 'em. Those bastards!

Man, I fel sooooo much better now!

[MIDI Life Crisis]

Michael! That is so awesome. That incident is probably one of several that you could relate that is inspiring. I wish aspiring composers, songwriters, etc. had more people like you counseling them in these matters.

Let's talk about the spinoffs. The person I licensed to sold the rights to the picture (but not the music) to a 3rd party. The original licensee did not have the right to excerpt the films (all PD silents) and use my music except in its entirety. The third party (in France) in turn licensed an excerpt from the picture to a 4th party - a major TV company in Paris. Party 4 made a documentary and used about 25 seconds of my music, and in turn struck a worldwide licensing deal with a major US network - party 5 - who were chomping at the bit to sell these DVDs ASAP.

Bottom line? 25 seconds of music cost them $25k. So for those who doubt the value of a copyright, read that again. $25k for 25 SECONDS of music and I signed away nothing in the process. Of course, I'm leaving out the good parts (yadda yadda yadda... but what is important is the power you have by retaining your copyrights. Initially, the folks who used my music said I would get nothing for its use.

Now... WHO wants to give away all rights, title and interest in their intellectual property?

FOOLS! That's who.

PS-No Jim, I am NOT calling you a fool. I respect and understand your view, but I feel it is bad advice to suggest that someone agree to this sort of scam. Copyrights are very powerful instruments and if the work has any value at all, it should be retained by the creator. I do have a buyout price, but if they have to ask, they can't afford it.

[James Steele]

Well, interestingly (or not), I get an unsolicited message on MySpace from a local radio station's MySpace account in connection with this big San Diego song contest that's going on right now. There are commercials for it every day on the TV sttion that is sponsoring it. This radio station happens to be a co-sponsor. The message is about the contest and encouraging artists to submit songs. They contest actually has a stipulation that you must be an unsigned artist and without any sort of management contract of any kind to enter. It sounds like they are trying to make sure that you are legally clear to hand over your rights.

Anywhoooo.... I replied to this solicitation message from the radio station and responded that it sounded interesting and I had JUST the song about San Diego that would be perfect. However, in very polite language, I expressed concern that the rules required that by entering I must agree that if I win I will assign my copyright to the contest sponsor... especially because this isn't necessary and that a very amicable license would protect both the sponsor and the author. I actually did get a response from them that basically went "Gee... ummm... we're just promotiong it so we don't know about that, but we'll ask about that for you."

No word yet. I don't think really this thing is aimed at people who actually READ contracts.