Writers Contract...fair deal?

[Pinkstar]

I got approached by a an owner of a music library at the ASCAP Expo. He seemed really cool ans well connected, works with a bunch of bigger libraries that have a ton of placement on all the major networks. He wants to collaborate with me, said he'd supply the music and wants me to do vocals and lyrics.

I told him before we start working, we should write up a little agreement and that I usually do an equal split with my current collaborators. So he sent me an agreement.I'm not to sure about part B and C. I'd love to hear your input. I want to make it a win/win, a true collaboration this however doesn't sound like a true collaboration or a fair deal. Maybe I'm off?

Agreement

"Employer seeks to employ Songwriter for purposes of writing songs to be used by Employer in its business;

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth, Employer and Songwriter hereby agree as follows:

A. In consideration as set forth herein, Songwriter hereby confirms that he has been contracted by Employer to create, write, compose, arrange, perform and produce the recording and mixing of Various Musical “ R&B, and Pop” Themes for use by Employer in its music business.

B. Songwriter hereby confirms that all compositions and Master Recordings delivered to Employer pursuant to this agreement shall be work made for hire of Employer and Songwriter shall have no rights whatsoever to the Compositions and Master Recordings except as may be set forth herein.

C. In the event that such Compositions and Master Recordings shall be deemed not to be works made for hire, then Songwriter hereby, sells, assigns, and transfers to Employer, and releases and quitclaims to Employer, all right, title and interest in and to the Compositions and Master Recordings for the United States and throughout the world, forever, including and all copyright terms, and all extension terms of copyright, for all uses and purposes, free from payment of any royalty or further compensation except as may be provided for herein, to wit, the “writer'’ share of public performance royalties.

D. Songwriter herein warrants and represents that he has not sold, transferred, assigned or otherwise disposed of any right, title or interest in or to any of the rights, referred to in this Agreement.

E. The Work is and will be new and original and does not and will not infringe upon, or unfairly compete with, any other works, compositions, arrangements or material.

Songwriter will receive there writers share of public performance royalties directly from the performing rights society.

2.1 Employer agrees to pay to Songwriter the sum of $1.00 upon the later of commencement of your services or execution of this agreement.

3.1 This Agreement and any attachments constitute the entire understanding between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof.

[Casey H]

Hi Jacqueline
Obviously, this is not a collaboration agreement, it is a pure work-for-hire arrangement. It sounds like you were thinking more of collaboration when this discussion started.

It mentions you receive the writer's share of PRO royalties. I assume that means half of the writer's share, since he wrote the music and you did the lyrics.

Really, the deal is what it is. (Not judging it, just being factual)... You do lyrics and vocals as work-for-hire for no money up front, give up rights to the recordings, and if the songs get placed collect 50% of the writer's share. The work is speculative just as anything we pitch to libraries-- the tracks may or may not get placed and earn money. So it comes down to whether YOU think it's worth the effort based on what the potential return might me. Do you have the time? Would it take away from other projects you feel are more important? Do you feel his good connections make it very much worthwhile?

You could ask him if he's willing to pay a relatively small up front fee per song, maybe $50 or $100. Session vocalists typically get $150 per song (last I heard) but then again they don't collect any royalties as writers.

And... nothing wrong with trying one out to see how it goes. You are under no obligation to do anything more if you don't want to.

Good luck!
Casey

[Pinkstar]

Thank you Casey. That's true, I guess I could give it a try. I'm just not to thrilled about giving up all rights to the songs but yes, I rather get royalties that get paid for hire.

[Tree]

I agree with Casey. It seems this guy had a different idea of what the collaboration would be. If he has his own library is he planning to work the songs in his library or in a bigger library? Were his placements through his own library or different places?

It's fine as a work for hire agreement, but only getting royalties and not any other rights to the songs or payment seems kind of weird IMHO. Will he be getting licensing fees for the songs? If so I would think you should have a right to 50% of those as well. If the only money he's expecting to get is through back end I guess it would be fair. I would definitely make sure the contract says that you get 50% of the writer's share.

It's a good thing you asked for a contract first before any misunderstandings after you did the work.

[mazz]

The only thing you might consider is trying to get a portion of any sync fees and/or a portion of the publishing.

Another way to think of it is this: if you and I collaborated on a piece and we decided to try to license it to a library, we'd split the writer's share of the performance royalties 50/50 and the library would get their 100% of the publishing with the sync fees either subject to negotiation or if we decide to sign without negotiation the sync fee, whatever the library is offering.

As I see it, the only difference in this deal is that the library owner is also the collaborator.



Could be a good thing!

Mazz

[Casey H]

From a purely financial POV, the deal is no different than if you and I co-wrote a track, signed to to an exclusive library, in perpetuity, that doesn't share master/sync license fees. Our income would be a split of the writer's share of PRO royalties.

If they would be willing to share in license fees, even 25%, that would make it better financially. At 50%, it would be (financially) no different than many exclusive library deals.

One reason I suggested asking for a small up-front fee such as $50 is they may not want to share license fees and you are doing the vocal session. I'm not sure that would fly since they'd be putting out money with no income yet whereas a share of license fee comes from actual income. It can't hurt to ask for either of these, though I'd ask about the license fees first. If he says no to that you COULD ask about the small up-front fee or just let it go if you think it could put him off. Negotiating is a always walking a fine line.

That was about the financial side... Then there is the relationship side. Collaboration and work-for-hire are not the same as far as the relationship. With collaboration, you generally have more artistic freedom as an equal partner in guiding the direction of the song and track. With W-F-H, you may or may not have that. It's a job and you take direction from the boss. HOWEVER, it is more likely that this is a POSITIVE here.... Are you better off "in bed" with a peer or a well connected library on a track? I would think the latter. The experience of doing commissioned work might be a great learning experience for you and certainly can only help your resume.

And as we said earlier, it's not like you are commiting to doing 10 tracks in 3 weeks or anything. The agreement (as I see it here) only applies to actual work you do and you can decide later if it is working for you or not.

Good luck!
You wouldn't have this offer if you weren't so talented!

Casey

[Pinkstar]

Thank you guys for the input and advice!

[Kolstad]

Hmm, I don't know a lot about the legal stuff, but I'm a songwriter and have perfectly fine common sense.

I think first off, you should carefully check this connection. At http://musiclibraryreport.com/ or even better, with someone who's done business with this person before. If you have an option for a legal check, I think you should do this as well.

Right off, you should check into what's the deal with this? Work-for-hire vocals are between 100-200$ a piece, when I have to get them as a songwriter, so when you are doing this for free, there has to be some return for you.

As a ground rule, you never give up mechanical royalties in a work-for-hire situation, but here you are asked to provide lyrics (which are copyrightable), and give away your copyright, and all future claims to them. Again, I can't see what the deal is for you?

If this IS a really well connected person, and you get something out of it, it can be worth doing it, as all you can loose is some vocal tracks and some lyrics.

On the other hand, if you don't get paid for your vocal work, you don't get any publishing, you give away copyrights, and you don't get a share of the licensing, I have a hard time getting when you will get any returns.

As I see this, it is not a collaboration, and from the wording here, it's hard to see what's your return. Make sure there's a deal in this for you as well, that's all Im saying.

And this is not legal advice, this is just common sense.

[Casey H]

We have some folks here who do work-for-hire for a little daytime TV show. I hope we get some more input from them since they are very experienced with W-F-H whereby you don't own the tracks but collect the writer's share of PRO royalties.

I'm always cautious with statements that start with "never give up [this or that]...". I used to read where people said they would never give up their publishing, not willing to get 50% of something instead of 100% of nothing. Others say "never sign a deal with no reversion clause" and while I personally tend to stick to that philosophy, clearly other people have made a lot of money entering deals like that. "Never" is the "in perpetuity" of the artist's side, LOL...

Casey

[matto]

I think first off, you should carefully check this connection. At http://musiclibraryreport.com/

I would NOT recommend trusting any info posted on that site...it's mostly a bunch of misinformed wannabe's, many with with grudges against the companies they post about because they have unrealistic expectations and are generally ignorant about the production music market...
Yes there are exceptions but unless you have a pretty solid understanding of the market yourself how are you gonna separate the wheat from the chaff...

JVB, it's hard to advise you how to preceed, but aren't you glad you asked for something in writing? Cause now at least you know that you and your potential co-writer had entirely different ideas of what the relatinship would look like .
Personally I would want a little more information about exactly what he intends to do with the songs, echoing basically what Tree said above. If you're gonna sign a relatively stringent WFH agreement like this, you should at least know which library is gonna pitch the songs and what their level of success is etc...

M