Sep 23, 2020·1 reply
Yevini see what youre saying, which is why id say the label owning the masters for a few years at most is fine. what the issue is that artists usually arent able to get their masters back EVER . why should the artist still be paying the labels 90% of their music income 50 years after their prime?
I agree. I think you’d should legally be able to buy back something you made over 50% contribution on, provided you met the contractual obligations to the label who owns it.
Sep 23, 2020stfu op
Sep 23, 2020feudalism type beat
Sep 23, 2020Idek where to start with this capitalist propaganda
Sep 23, 2020Tomtom2I understand all artist want their masters for the money that it provides. However, most of these artist catalogs are worth what they are because of the label.
The label promotes, hires producers, hires writers, pays for radio play, streams, videos etc...
I get they are the talent but the label fronts cash so they can be popular. Signing the contract makes you an asset to the label that they in turn invest in. Then as in any business, they will want and deserve a return on investment.
Why should the artist after the label makes them popular just feel entitled to their masters.
Almost everything u listed saying the label pays for/covers, the artist has to pay back
kainie 🌌Sep 23, 2020
NiggamortisUniversal invading ktt
post is hilarious in hindsight
Bernie X 🙊Sep 23, 2020Yevini see what youre saying, which is why id say the label owning the masters for a few years at most is fine. what the issue is that artists usually arent able to get their masters back EVER . why should the artist still be paying the labels 90% of their music income 50 years after their prime?
- Sep 23, 2020·2 replies
There needs to be some sort of compromise for both parties tbh
- Sep 23, 2020Sinewave
Lmao
op is a landlord for sure
Sep 23, 2020Man stfu
- Sep 23, 2020Nozuka
There needs to be some sort of compromise for both parties tbh
Publishing or distribution deals are good compromises.
- OPSep 23, 2020·2 repliesZezima
I agree. I think you’d should legally be able to buy back something you made over 50% contribution on, provided you met the contractual obligations to the label who owns it.
Fair enough but if you part is singing the words that someone else wrote and the label forms your whole style, production, etc... how much are you really a part of the success
Sep 23, 2020Tomtom2Fair enough but if you part is singing the words that someone else wrote and the label forms your whole style, production, etc... how much are you really a part of the success
at the end of the day is it about the success or the right to own what you create?
- Sep 23, 2020
soccerfanjY’all want people to be slaves so bad
"no one is forcing you to sign!" - op
Sep 23, 2020lmao labels make tons of money without the masters
- Sep 23, 2020CKL TML
A record deal is a mutual agreement between company and artist. Artists should try to get better deals or just dont sign. Ktt wants labels to pay for everything and get a thank you
- Sep 23, 2020·1 replyZezima
All labels should be required to offer a buyback plan for your masters after you have completed your contractual obligations. I get the label profiting during the time of the recordings and while the artist is dependent, but if you made more than half the artistic contribution to a song you should at some point be able to own the song in my opinion. Again after contractual obligations are met. No you shouldn’t have your masters in the middle of your contract unless you were able to broker that kind of deal.
they shouldn't be required to do anything imo
- Sep 23, 2020Tomtom2
Fair enough but if you part is singing the words that someone else wrote and the label forms your whole style, production, etc... how much are you really a part of the success
That’s why I said you need to have contributed more than half of the songs content, whether that be writing, producing, mastering etc.
You definitely should not own the masters if all you did was sing something prewritten and pre-produced.
- Sep 23, 2020·1 replySnow Tha GOAT
they shouldn't be required to do anything imo
I believe they should as a way to protect artist.
- Sep 23, 2020·2 repliesZezima
I believe they should as a way to protect artist.
no one is making them sign
- Sep 23, 2020
^
- Sep 23, 2020·1 replySnow Tha GOAT
no one is making them sign
Libtards debunked!
Sep 23, 2020NiggamortisUniversal invading ktt
- Sep 23, 2020·1 replySnow Tha GOAT
no one is making them sign
living off music without a label is pretty rare even these days
- Sep 23, 2020blonded
Libtards debunked!
💀💀