Re: Disney Terms of Use

[sgs4u]

Personally, (no I'm not a lawyer) I see this as contract language for 1 musical piece. They want al the publishing, and rights to it. Nothing else that I can see. If you want to re-do your piece, you have to assign your new piece to them. This deal is only about once piece of your music. If (when) Disney wants something of mine, I won't hesitate. I have hundreds more pieces of music tho. It's good to read thru this gobbledygook. I get they are saying mostly (with Item 4), is that you wrote it, every one that co-wrote it or worked on it, sees you as the seller and is comfportable(inwriting) with that. Gotta go. Others will help.

[rivercitymusic]

I'd ask for a representative in the legal field to look at this but i have done the following:In the submssion i had sent in, i noted in my submission that the work was the property of my publishing company and that i could not offer the rights to any entity but was the representative of my publishing company and could negotiate. They no doubt returned it to me.Therefore i believe that they want full control and not guarantees to you for anything including payments.So get a legal beagle to give you some insight.Ya'll quti fussing!Doc

[andreh]

Dec 4, 2008, 12:23pm, cjdenecia wrote:Dec 4, 2008, 12:14pm, andreh wrote:Steve is correct that cross-posting is generally considered poor forum etiquette...not just on this forum. Perhaps the OP (original poster) was not aware of that, however, so we'll let him off with a light slap on the wrist... @ cj: Many of us use the "100 most recent posts" button in the Info Center at the bottom of the forum home page, so we see messages from all forums (and all cross-posts several times).AndréI understand that, but from what I've seen a lot of people do have what they feel are "urgent" matters and might just be a bit more important (to them) than whether or not a few others have to tolerate a triple legitimate post .... but whatever, it's ya'lls game ... the fact is, I, personally don't necessarily go into a lot of the other threads on a frequent basis and thus far, it seems I'm the only one to bother to actually look at the contract they sent kitz?what do you get out of that item #4 andre?Anyone is welcome to violate forum etiquette at any time if they so choose...in this case, Steve & I were merely helping kitz to make an informed decision.As for contributions to the OP's question, perhaps giving forum dwellers at least an hour (or a day, more realistically) to respond is reasonable? André

[benjamine]

Dec 4, 2008, 11:58am, sgs4u wrote:Dec 4, 2008, 11:54am, kitz wrote:I have a question about this document.http://disney.go.com/corporate/legal/terms.htmlIf I submit material to these guys. Do they own it? Is that what this is saying? I'm looking at section 4?KitzSorry I posted all over but I really need some input here.You really only need to post this once. Especially because it's be easier to read the responses you get, if they're all on the same thread. Posting the same thing in 3 threads, makes people feel LESS like responding, and that's not what you want at all is it? I never fail to be amused by the amount of argument about the argument rather than the point of argument,on this forum.If you don't understand my argument then argue it out between yourselves.

[andreh]

Dec 4, 2008, 12:36pm, mazz wrote:They also want you to be a member of a PRO, which means that they would file a cue sheet and you'd get performance royalties as the writer.Although this may be true, I don't see anything in the contract to that effect...in fact, they specifically mention their lack of obligation to pay for, or even INFORM the submitter of, use of submitted materials.This contract is written broadly enough to cover submissions of ANY type of content...not just musical. The problem is that the music-specific wording doesn't go far enough to protect those submitting songs or lyrics.I wouldn't submit music through this channel with any expectaction of maintianing ownership...at least not without an expensive fight. If your material is solicited, then perhaps you could contact your Disney rep a ask for more direct means of submission for consideration of material.André

[mazz]

I understand kitz's sense of urgency and why he or she posted in multiple places. But in matters like this, I would hope that kitz was exploring all avenues and not relying solely on the TAXI forum and it's members for legal advice!! This community is pretty knowledgeable about a lot of things but in every post I've ever seen that included legal language, most of the responders recommended consulting a lawyer if there's any doubt at all. I recommend that anyone submitting to TAXI listings educate themselves on how the business works with any of the great books available out there. We spend our lives writing music but a lot of us ignore the business aspect until a contract is staring us in the face! Thats not the time to start learning the business! It's like practicing your scales or your writing and it's actually much easier than writing a good song or piece of music. If you can do that, you can understand how the business works! So woodshed on the business chops so at least you can have an intelligent conversation with a library or publisher when they call. Act like you are going to get a deal. What would you do then? How would you act? What preparation would you need?And find an entertainment lawyer, hopefully you'll need one from time to time!! Mazz

[cjdenecia]

Dec 4, 2008, 2:30pm, mazz wrote:I understand kitz's sense of urgency and why he or she posted in multiple places. But in matters like this, I would hope that kitz was exploring all avenues and not relying solely on the TAXI forum and it's members for legal advice!! This community is pretty knowledgeable about a lot of things but in every post I've ever seen that included legal language, most of the responders recommended consulting a lawyer if there's any doubt at all. I recommend that anyone submitting to TAXI listings educate themselves on how the business works with any of the great books available out there. We spend our lives writing music but a lot of us ignore the business aspect until a contract is staring us in the face! Thats not the time to start learning the business! It's like practicing your scales or your writing and it's actually much easier than writing a good song or piece of music. If you can do that, you can understand how the business works! So woodshed on the business chops so at least you can have an intelligent conversation with a library or publisher when they call. Act like you are going to get a deal. What would you do then? How would you act? What preparation would you need?And find an entertainment lawyer, hopefully you'll need one from time to time!! Mazzall true. all good advice. personally, I got a bit of education from some guy who's not around any more I guess ... peter knickles ... or knuckles ... I don't recall - I have my seminar books somewhere .. the "doing music and nothing else" course from back in the early 90's... they were some of the first that were really preaching some of what I go by - the "face the facts" look at the industry. and there's so little that we actually know about the biz as a whole ... trademarks, copyrights, how royalties really work etc ... how if you really are serious and have the chops, you must build support teams - which unfortunately include abigados ... and yeah, you're right on that first post mazz, from anything I've ever seen, which is few actually - that contract is not that far off the norm. major companies DO demand your right arm. and by god if somehow every son of a bitching musician in the world would tell them to suck donkey dick, maybe they'd be forced to stop treating all of their suppliers like shit. (sorry ... I lived 50 minutes from orlando and disney for quite a long time and I have no love for them)but as I've seen written in a different thread, there's so many out there and somebody will succumb to the deal. hell, steve said he would. and apparently he's relatively accomplished in this aspect of the industry. personally, those are the people I would hope would be most likely to tell these idiots to screw off but I don't make the choices for anyone but myself (and a few other minor players).I agree with andreh, I wouldn't sign. unless there was some big money guaranteed despite the contract. on principle alone. hell, I guess it was casey that said he'd sold some stuff over the last few years and made what? $200? yeah, he also feels that the "in" is worth it ... so be it ... but "in" don't feed the kids. so the 2 bills didn't really do much for him in the short run and there may be no long haul ... I've seen a lot of businesses that run based on volume. how I see that is quantity not quality. works for some industries for sure, killing off the quality across the board in the process ... I sure wish that wasn't the case in music but I know I'm not joined in theory by a vast majority in all the various outlets of the music biz ... and that, in a nutshell, is why so much music you hear in so many venues today, just sucks balls....ooops ... sorry .. did I just fall off topic and rant a little ... can we forget I just typed all that?

[sgs4u]

André & John, correct me if I'm wrong. But after reading that Disney language, it doesn't seem like they are asking you to sign over all the income from the song. You assign the publishing (exploiting rights) to Disney, they make a non-exclusive deal up for ya. They still have to register it with a PRO, and you still get your writer's share. If, after consulting a lawyer, he advised me that no writer's royalties would ever get to me, then I probably wouldn't sign that contract. It does seem confusing, but I really don't think they're asking you for your entire earning potential for you song. Just the standard publishing half.Matto, Casey Dave or Vikki probably can add more clarity to the issue. Again, from my perspective, every song is a dart I throw at the dartboard and hopefully one of 'em hits a bull's eye sooner or later. I'm Ok if I sign a song to someone, and it never makes me anything. I have lots more.

[sgs4u]

Dec 4, 2008, 4:25pm, heinsite wrote:...but man, i am ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTED WITH SOME OF MY FRIENDS WHO CHOSE TO LECTURE HIM INSTEAD OF ANSWERING HIM! i just don't get it, and i believe HE DESERVES AN APOLOGYAND YES INDEED STEVE AND ANDREH---THIS is one of the rare times that i am with my capital letters--I AM YELLING! SHAME on some of you.warren heintaxi member, friend and dude who tries like hell to be honest.Warren, relax. Your honesty, could use a little fine-tuning. hehe You know I'm the first guy to apologize when I'm outta line. Kitz posted the same, very LEGIT question in 3 places, which might make his question less likely to get the attention it needs. It's now getting lots of attention. Is there really a problem here worth shouting about? And we should feel shame for what we wrote?... and you want to yell at us about it? Hmmm... Thank you for your opinion. Shame is not what I feel right now, nor can you force me to feel anything, so get over it, or not. I'm Ok with either.

[ideascapes]

kitz,I'm not an attorney, but have signed dozens of publishing and production contracts. I'd have to say this one is pretty strange and I wouldn't do anything on it without consulting legal counsel. Although the language does stipulate that they won't accept "Unsolicited Submissions," it does also indicate they they take copyright ownership (publishing control, for music) of anything submitted, whether it was solicited or not. The only loophole I can spot, in terms of what rights you'd be giving up, is that it appears they are only claiming the right to publish on WDIG sites--their web sites. In theory, that could mean that they couldn't use your submissions--songs, lyrics--in other media (e.g., TV, film), without a signed agreement from you.Hope this helps add to the discussion here.Vince