Writer/Producer doesn't deserver ROYALTIES???

j.troup

j.troup

New member
So FP, I got a situation, and I want your opinions on it...


I have a non-music industry client, who I've written and produced (recorded/mixed/mastered) a song for that they are VERY happy with. I said that the terms for the song would be an up front fee for $X, plus 50%, and I'd split the song royalties 50/50 with the artist.


The client seems to think that since I got an up front fee, that I shouldn't be entitled to 50% of the back end. To which I explained to them that this isn't the way that music works, and that the people who wrote the words and the music are entitled to share in the proceeds from the song, as a matter of law.



How would you go about getting them to understand and accept my 50/50 proposal (which I feel is more than generous)?
 
j.troup said:
So FP, I got a situation, and I want your opinions on it...


I have a non-music industry client, who I've written and produced (recorded/mixed/mastered) a song for that they are VERY happy with. I said that the terms for the song would be an up front fee for $X, plus 50%, and I'd split the song royalties 50/50 with the artist.


The client seems to think that since I got an up front fee, that I shouldn't be entitled to 50% of the back end. To which I explained to them that this isn't the way that music works, and that the people who wrote the words and the music are entitled to share in the proceeds from the song, as a matter of law.



How would you go about getting them to understand and accept my 50/50 proposal (which I feel is more than generous)?
Click to expand...



Easy.


Give them back the advance and demand 50% of the back end royalties.

People sleep on royalties because they take a long time to come in. But all of the successful people have a writer's share and a publisher's share of royalties.

I have learned that publishers that control of the copyright of songs make >>>> more than songwriters if the know how to hustle.

Make sure you get half of the writer's share and a part of the publisher's share, even if you do not get control of the copyright. Publishers get a check before songwriters. I got a publisher's share check 3 weeks before I got the equal share from the writer's portion from some songs that I had licensed.

You are smart. You already know what to do. These guys like to intimidate people, but play hardball. You already know your worth. Do not settle for anything less than what you want.

It is not about what you deserve; it is about what you negotiate!
 
Do whatever you can to explain it to that man in as friendly and logical a way as possible lol
 
treaten them with the law, that is if you copyrighted your work

simply treat to sue them for copyright infringement, if you haven't copyrighted it there isn't much you can do, besides punching him in the face
 
Desire Inspires said:
Easy.


Give them back the advance and demand 50% of the back end royalties.

People sleep on royalties because they take a long time to come in. But all of the successful people have a writer's share and a publisher's share of royalties.

I have learned that publishers that control of the copyright of songs make >>>> more than songwriters if the know how to hustle.

Make sure you get half of the writer's share and a part of the publisher's share, even if you do not get control of the copyright. Publishers get a check before songwriters. I got a publisher's share check 3 weeks before I got the equal share from the writer's portion from some songs that I had licensed.

You are smart. You already know what to do. These guys like to intimidate people, but play hardball. You already know your worth. Do not settle for anything less than what you want.

It is not about what you deserve; it is about what you negotiate!
Click to expand...




I think you misunderstood what i meant...



These are NON MUSIC INDUSTRY CLIENTS.


aka, a 16 year boy and his parents.



I wrote the song. I produced the song. I already have 100% of EVERYTHING. All the client did was SING.

I'm GIVING them 10% of the writers share because the song was their idea. And I'm splitting the royalties from the song right down the middle, 50/50.




And giving the advance back is crazy talk.
 
Maaan. Regardless of how this turns out (I do hope it works in your favor), this is the kind of stuff that should be taken care of before you do the work, no?

I'd politely ask him to go around and ask other professionals what they'd charge him and how they'd charge him for the work. This way, he gets the news from neutral parties.

Peace.
 
To be honest I agree with him...

In the music industry your not going to get 50 percent of the royalties. Your going to get an advance, and then a percentage of royalties that is far lower than 50.

But your not in that setting, so let's just think logically. If you did half of the work, you deserve 50 percent of the royalties. That's understandable.

But, you took an upfront fee, and then you want 50 percent of the royalties? That means you believe you did more than half of the work...

Is this true? If so, tell him.
 
Wedges2 said:
To be honest I agree with him...

In the music industry your not going to get 50 percent of the royalties. Your going to get an advance, and then a percentage of royalties that is far lower than 50.

But your not in that setting, so let's just think logically. If you did half of the work, you deserve 50 percent of the royalties. That's understandable.

But, you took an upfront fee, and then you want 50 percent of the royalties? That means you believe you did more than half of the work...

Is this true? If so, tell him.
Click to expand...



In the music Industry I'd get about 5 - 10x the advance that I took as well.



That's the justification for the 50% on the back end.




In the music industry, there would be a machine behind the song and the artist, pushing them to radio, pushing them with a nice budget.



There isn't that here. So back end money is basically a pipe dream.

---------- Post added at 01:19 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:17 AM ----------
RedBeerd said:
Maaan. Regardless of how this turns out (I do hope it works in your favor), this is the kind of stuff that should be taken care of before you do the work, no?

I'd politely ask him to go around and ask other professionals what they'd charge him and how they'd charge him for the work. This way, he gets the news from neutral parties.

Peace.
Click to expand...




You're right...and usually it would be. But this was an experiment for me, to see if me taking a client that wasn't necessarily of my choosing, and to see if I could cut a good record with them.


If it failed, then no harm, no foul.



But it worked. Worked really well. Now I want to cover my ass so that I don't get REBECCA BLACK'D.


(80 Million YouTube views, and a court fight over who actually owns the song)
 
That's on them to decide. They have a choose to do it your way or not. You are providing a service. You can explain it, pull out a book, or whatever.....that's still your contract for them to sign.

But other than that man that is more than fair. 50/50........the upfront is probably mixing and mastering alone........not even including the music, writing, production. lol! What are you asking for.........20 geez up front?
 
I know you realize its best to establish points in pre production, you should just reiterate that you are actually playing more than one role. You are being paid as a producer and a song writing. When speaking of royalties you are entitled to 50 percent however it you dont have any split sheets or pre production contract its kinda hard to demand these things, sometimes lesser experienced artist budgets began to dwindle and they start thinking bout how much money your earning then try to cut your profits. After building the initial vibe with the artist you must get business in order. Contracts can kill deals but you can also have Yoko Ono money with the right contract. Your quote was fair. Just use your tact. If you need to a good example of a pre production contract I can send you the one I use. But i'm sure you got something...
 
j.troup said:
In the music Industry I'd get about 5 - 10x the advance that I took as well.



That's the justification for the 50% on the back end.




In the music industry, there would be a machine behind the song and the artist, pushing them to radio, pushing them with a nice budget.



There isn't that here. So back end money is basically a pipe dream.
)
Click to expand...

All very true.

So what if, in the music industry, there is no money made on the back end? Will they take your advance away? After all, I've heard it said countless times that the advance is really just a loan.

I ask because if it's true, the situation is quickly becoming harder to compare to a music industry setting, which makes it harder to justify your proposal.

---------- Post added at 09:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:41 PM ----------
DjPolair said:
so you basically think that your work isn't worth to get half of the revenue ?
Click to expand...

If it's in a music industry setting: Bigger advance, smaller cut.

If it's just someone else and me: small advance, bigger cut.

It gets tricky with the latter because there probably isn't going to be any money on the back end, so the only reason for an advance is to make up for that. But what if there is money on the back end? Then your making more than your partner.
 
I am curious how this will end. I don't know how I would handle this at this point. I would have worked out all of those details before we even went to the studio because now if they back out and remake your work then you did all of your work for nothing and will end up having to sue them for copyright infringement ect ect when this should have all been in writing before they even came to the studio so we were all on the same page.
 
Wedges2 said:
If it's in a music industry setting: Bigger advance, smaller cut.

If it's just someone else and me: small advance, bigger cut.

It gets tricky with the latter because there probably isn't going to be any money on the back end, so the only reason for an advance is to make up for that. But what if there is money on the back end? Then your making more than your partner.
Click to expand...


See, that's my rationale too. I'm not gon tax em on the front end because they aren't a record label. It's a kid and their parents wanting to put out some music to get them some traction. I understand that.

I didn't just make the beat for this record..I PRODUCED THIS RECORD. You know, "hey, I need you to give me X emotion on this part. Make your voice do this".

The lessons that the kid learns here, he's gonna take into other studio's and use them to make the records he does in the future, better. It's basically artist development as well.


For real, I could call a reference singer, pay them $100 to sing the song, and keep everything. I can put it out on some David Guetta shit, and keep EVERYTHING.


As far as the back end goes, a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. So I'm not even counting on back end money.


Plus, if the song does decent, this kid could be doing shows for a couple grand a pop. That's money I don't get, even though they are getting traction from MY SONGS.
 
Wedges2 said:



If it's in a music industry setting: Bigger advance, smaller cut.

If it's just someone else and me: small advance, bigger cut.

It gets tricky with the latter because there probably isn't going to be any money on the back end, so the only reason for an advance is to make up for that. But what if there is money on the back end? Then your making more than your partner.
Click to expand...

i feel you, but the producer should always end up with more money, producing music is much harder and more work than performing the vocals

anyone who diagrees doesn't kno shit

and i believe that this apply's to people on a professional level, dre took in 52 mil in one year cuz of several hit songs and selling some shares
 
DjPolair said:
i feel you, but the producer should always end up with more money, producing music is much harder and more work than performing the vocals

anyone who diagrees doesn't kno shit

and i believe that this apply's to people on a professional level, dre took in 52 mil in one year cuz of several hit songs and selling some shares
Click to expand...



See, I don't believe that. I think the artist should end up with the lions share of the money. Because they are the ones who have to do the real work to make the record a success. They have to do the media rounds, they have to interact with fans, they have to do shows, etc, etc, etc.

But again, the lions share of the money is going to come mostly from SHOWS. Because the show money is gonna probably be 10x what the sales money is.


And I'm cool with that. The show isn't so much about the music, as it is about THE SHOW. So the artist SHOULD get that money.


But if you're selling my work, then I want my just due. I think a set price to get a record done, and then split the royalties 50/50 is quite fair for an artist who doesn't even so much as have ONE RECORD done.
 
j.troup said:
See, that's my rationale too. I'm not gon tax em on the front end because they aren't a record label. It's a kid and their parents wanting to put out some music to get them some traction. I understand that.

I didn't just make the beat for this record..I PRODUCED THIS RECORD. You know, "hey, I need you to give me X emotion on this part. Make your voice do this".

The lessons that the kid learns here, he's gonna take into other studio's and use them to make the records he does in the future, better. It's basically artist development as well.


For real, I could call a reference singer, pay them $100 to sing the song, and keep everything. I can put it out on some David Guetta shit, and keep EVERYTHING.


As far as the back end goes, a bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. So I'm not even counting on back end money.


Plus, if the song does decent, this kid could be doing shows for a couple grand a pop. That's money I don't get, even though they are getting traction from MY SONGS.
Click to expand...

Tell them all of this!

They could pay for a commercial studio session, pay someone for a beat, have it recorded with no instruction (the studio has no vested interest), and mixed.

OR

They could go to you, get a tailored beat, have the lyrics written for them, coach their child on how to properly sing the song, teach him lessons he can take with him for the rest of his career, mix the whole thing, and all for one flat, cheaper, fee. All you ask in return is for back end money.
 
j.troup said:
See, I don't believe that. I think the artist should end up with the lions share of the money. Because they are the ones who have to do the real work to make the record a success. They have to do the media rounds, they have to interact with fans, they have to do shows, etc, etc, etc.

But again, the lions share of the money is going to come mostly from SHOWS. Because the show money is gonna probably be 10x what the sales money is.


And I'm cool with that. The show isn't so much about the music, as it is about THE SHOW. So the artist SHOULD get that money.


But if you're selling my work, then I want my just due. I think a set price to get a record done, and then split the royalties 50/50 is quite fair for an artist who doesn't even so much as have ONE RECORD done.
Click to expand...

every hit song is based on the instrumental

look at these young direction kids or justin bieber, they have producers and songwriters telling them what to sing and when, and all they do is show their cute faces with their gay haircuts to make those teenage girls horny, this pisses me off, when a justin bieber makes more money than his songwriter and producer
 
^^^One Direction and Justin Beiber are the shit. I said it.

Seriously though, both of their latest albums good.
 
DjPolair said:
every hit song is based on the instrumental

look at these young direction kids or justin bieber, they have producers and songwriters telling them what to sing and when, and all they do is show their cute faces with their gay haircuts to make those teenage girls horny, this pisses me off, when a justin bieber makes more money than his songwriter and producer
Click to expand...



Not true. That's something producers like to say to make themselves feel better. Hooks and melodies sell songs. They have since the beginning of time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top