living off music without a label is pretty rare even these days
u can just release through united master distro kid etc
Okay who makes more money the guy selling d**** on the corner or the guy who provided him the d**** to sell...
Are you telling me the guy selling the product should make more money than the guy providing him the product?
That never happens in real life because its bad business and dumb. The dealer needs the supplier to make money.
music lawyers who draft up these contracts for the labels use misleading language on purpose as a predatory tactic, so op is wrong
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
I mean sure but there is a clear leverage issue here
Okay who makes more money the guy selling d**** on the corner or the guy who provided him the d**** to sell...
Are you telling me the guy selling the product should make more money than the guy providing him the product?
That never happens in real life because its bad business and dumb. The dealer needs the supplier to make money.
Economic theory debunked
Marxist communists destroyed
Libs owned
music lawyers who draft up these contracts for the labels use misleading language on purpose as a predatory tactic, so op is wrong
I am wrong because artist don't understand what they are reading and are trusting the wrong people.
Which has happened for decades now. Yet I'm wrong
Like this isn't a new concept yet artist keep doing the same thing.
hmm overall I don't agree but the point about producers and songwriters is interesting. doesn't mean that the label should necessarily own the masters but it is worth noting that most artists don't do it all on their own so it's a bit more complicated than simply owning "your art". where do producers and songwriters fit in with owning masters? if the artist owns their masters, should the artist then pay out of pocket for beats?
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.
If I pay you to make my house. I provide all the supplies materials, etc.. but you create the design and build the house. It's still my house right?
So if the value increase and I make a profit off of it why would I give the builder a dime of the money made off of my house
I am wrong because artist don't understand what they are reading and are trusting the wrong people.
Which has happened for decades now. Yet I'm wrong
Like this isn't a new concept yet artist keep doing the same thing.
for all the time artists have to smarten up, labels also have that same amount of time & adjust accordingly, and the labels have decades of experience in these specific legalities already too. just shut the f*** up, you’re an embarrassment.
for all the time artists have to smarten up, labels also have that same amount of time & adjust accordingly, and the labels have decades of experience in these specific legalities already too. just shut the f*** up, you’re an embarrassment.
Yet artist still sign deals they don't understand because the label smartened up or the artist is just blinded by fame.
Just because your favorite artist isn't smart about business and you don't understand it either isn't my fault
Ex. If I you pay me to make me something. You then own my work. The value increases so you sell it. Would you give me any extra money?
Yet artist still sign deals they don't understand because the label smartened up or the artist is just blinded by fame.
Just because your favorite artist isn't smart about business and you don't understand it either isn't my fault
Ex. If I you pay me to make me something. You then own my work. The value increases so you sell it. Would you give me any extra money?
don’t reply to me again until you understand the Labor Theory of Value
Okay who makes more money the guy selling d**** on the corner or the guy who provided him the d**** to sell...
Are you telling me the guy selling the product should make more money than the guy providing him the product?
That never happens in real life because its bad business and dumb. The dealer needs the supplier to make money.
Incredibly stupid a***ogy
Literally ban OP