PDF Summary:All You Need To Know About the Music Business, by Donald S. Passman

For those aiming to make it in the music industry, All You Need To Know About the Music Business by Donald S. Passman is an invaluable resource. This guide provides an in-depth look at the business side of music, covering everything from artist contracts, royalties, copyright laws, distribution deals, and music publishing to live touring and merchandising.

Passman breaks down the complexities of record company roles, contract details, intellectual property, royalty earnings, and the shifting influence of streaming platforms and new distribution models. He also explains how to navigate the financial aspects of the music industry—album advances, royalty calculations, and the intricacies of 360 deals that tie into touring and merchandising revenue. A must-read for aspiring musicians seeking to protect their interests.

(continued)...

Contracts in the music industry specify how often royalties are paid out, describe the processes for calculating these payments, and establish the artist's right to review and verify the accuracy of the financial reports. Artists typically receive their royalty earnings in two distinct annual disbursements, generally distributed within a couple of months after the conclusion of each half-year period aligned with the calendar year, though some companies may follow non-standard semi-annual schedules.

When determining recording royalties, one must consider the possibility of returns. To protect against financial losses from inventory that isn't sold, record companies hold back some of the artist's royalties to cover the possibility of retailers sending back unsold albums and requesting a complete refund. Passman clarifies that the reserve acts as a protective measure for music labels to lessen the financial risks associated with releasing a large number of records and the possibility of having to recover overpaid royalties if there are substantial returns.

Passman advises artists to carefully scrutinize the provisions of the audit clause in their recording agreements. Artists have the right to hire an independent accountant to examine the music label's financial records to verify the accuracy of the royalty statements they receive. Artists with substantial income should meticulously verify and document their royalty payments, even though acquiring the expertise needed is expensive and the accounting practices of record companies are intricate.

Drafting agreements that delineate the allocation of songwriting royalties and income.

Recording contracts not only focus on the performers but also ensure that the individuals in charge of production, mixing, and music composition are acknowledged and compensated appropriately.

Producers usually earn their royalties from the share allocated to the artist, thereby offsetting any advance payments.

The music recording's final sound is significantly shaped by the record producer, who is responsible for both the creative vision and the technical details. Royalty rates for them are typically stated as a percentage of the Published Price to Dealers (PPD), similar to the compensation allocated to musicians. However, Passman highlights a crucial distinction: Producers are compensated with royalties from each album sold that are not subject to deductions for recording costs, in contrast to artists whose royalties are consistently diminished by these expenses. The producer begins receiving royalty payments after the advance and any agreed-upon recoverable costs are earned back, starting with the record's first sale.

Artists should strike a balance between their upfront payment, the cost of recording, and their royalties, whereas producers typically use a different method to recoup their financial gains derived from royalties. Passman describes the standard practice in which the producer starts to earn royalties once the artist has recovered the expenses for recording, and after these costs have been balanced out, the producer receives royalties from subsequent sales, including those sales that were initially used to recover the recording expenses. Difficulties can occur when the income generated by the artist is insufficient to offset both the production costs and the upfront payment received by the producer.

Mixers receive upfront payments rather than calculating subsequent royalties.

Mixers play a crucial role during the final stage of production, blending and fine-tuning the individual components recorded during a session to create a cohesive and polished end product. The compensation they earn is shaped by elements like their proficiency, reputation in the music business, and the nature of the task, whether it's creating a new piece or modifying an existing one. Passman details how mixers are compensated through a combination of upfront payments, a percentage of the profits, or a hybrid of both methods.

Audio engineers typically receive a predetermined amount for their contributions to the production of each individual track. The intricacy of the project and the skill level of the mixer are crucial factors that can result in differences in these expenses. The artist's share typically diminishes due to initial payments, since these are viewed as costs that the artist's royalties need to offset prior to the artist receiving any disbursements.

Some mixers opt for a compensation structure that grants them a share in royalties, similar to the traditional agreements established for producers. The agreement might specify that, should royalties be part of the deal, they are determined as a certain percentage of the Published Price to Dealers (PPD) or a set rate for each unit sold, and the recovery of costs begins with the first sale of the record, after accounting for the mixer's advance. Passman highlights that, akin to other types of compensation, the gathering of producer royalties generally commences after the recoupment of initial costs from the revenue of the debut recording.

Royalties paid to songwriters are split into distinct shares, one of which goes to the publisher while the other is designated for the songwriter, and both shares can be reclaimed to offset advances.

Songwriters are responsible for creating melodies and words that captivate their audience. Songwriters secure monetary compensation through contracts that transfer the ownership of their song copyrights to a music publisher, which then shares a portion of the revenue generated from their compositions with them. Passman highlights the general practice where the publisher shares all income equally with the writer, with the exception of profits from sheet music and concert performances, which necessitate additional negotiation. (Passman, 217).

Funds allocated to the publisher are used to cover administrative costs, which include the registration of copyrights, licensing of songs for various uses, and the collection and distribution of royalties to songwriters. The latter half represents direct remuneration for the creative contributions of the composer. Agreements for songwriters usually specify the costs a publisher is allowed to recoup before distributing royalties to the creator of the music.

The Influence of Comprehensive Agreements: Recording Companies Pursue Wider Avenues for Income Generation.

Record companies are expanding their partnerships with artists to include a variety of income streams beyond traditional record sales.

Record labels maintain that obtaining extensive rights is essential for boosting the market value associated with a musician's brand.

The music labels justify their reliance on extensive agreements by highlighting the substantial investment they make in nurturing, publicizing, and selling the work of musicians, as Passman notes. They argue that their responsibilities have grown to encompass more than what is traditionally expected of a record label. Our firm has redirected its efforts towards nurturing and advancing the individual brands of artists. In the past, it was common for record labels to focus on producing and distributing recorded music, with artists independently managing contracts for live performances, merchandise sales, and other revenue streams. In today's music industry, with diminishing record sales and artists earning substantial income from various channels, record labels are more and more seeking to share in all the revenue streams of a musician to recoup their investments and share in the success they help create.

Musicians often feel uneasy about the implications associated with "360 deals," which can limit their control over career choices and may lead to reduced income.

Record labels argue that contracts covering various sources of income offer a more comprehensive strategy for supporting an artist's development, yet Passman observes that artists often express concerns about relinquishing command of their career choices and the possibility of substantial reductions in their overall income. Donald S. Passman notes that artists are concerned about record labels demanding such rights as part of an improved contract, but these occurrences are quickly becoming less common due to the industry's fast-paced evolution. Artists often worry that when a label gets involved in various aspects of their careers, it could hinder their artistic freedom and limit opportunities to explore projects outside the traditional realm of record company activities.

Artists often worry about the allocation of their earnings among various activities such as live performances, composing music, and selling merchandise, particularly in light of the significant share taken by record labels. Discussions regarding the allocation of these percentages, the terms under which costs are recovered, and the level of involvement from the record company are crucial in determining whether a 360 deal is beneficial for both parties or disproportionately favors the record company.

Exploring the intricacies of 360 agreements that cover how earnings are distributed, the terms for paying back advances, and the difference between active and passive entitlements.

Ensuring that the record label can share in a wider variety of income sources is crucial, yet it's equally important to protect the musician's control over their artistic direction and financial well-being. Passman offers a variety of tactics to help musicians and their agents skillfully maneuver through intricate bargaining processes.

The record company gains financially from a diverse array of income streams, not limited to the sales of records alone. Passman notes that the specific royalty rates may vary widely depending on the bargaining power and the variances between companies, but they typically range from 10% to 35%. Artists should carefully scrutinize the contractual terms that define "net income," as this determines the expenses deducted before the record label takes its share.

Musicians must evaluate whether the label plans to take a hands-off approach or engage actively in various aspects of their career development. The firm secures a portion of the performer's earnings without modifying the core contracts, as outlined by Passman. In some 360 deals, the firm might exercise its authority to mandate that the artist signs agreements with its affiliate companies for offerings that include publishing and merchandising. Artists should thoroughly scrutinize the terms within their contracts to ensure fair compensation and adequate protection of their creative freedom.

Other Perspectives

• While understanding contracts and financial structures is important, some artists may succeed without this knowledge by relying on trusted managers or lawyers.
• The standard royalty rates mentioned may not reflect the diversity of deals that can be struck in different markets or with independent labels.
• Advances, while described as essential for artists, can also lead to debt if not managed properly, and not all advances are beneficial to artists in the long term.
• The necessity of negotiating for better terms on subsequent albums assumes that artists have the leverage to do so, which may not always be the case, especially for new artists.
• The importance of understanding payment timelines and accounting practices might be overstated for artists who have professional representation to handle these aspects.
• The role of producers and mixers is described in a way that might oversimplify the variety of arrangements that can exist, and not all producers or mixers may have the same opportunities to negotiate favorable terms.
• The assertion that songwriters share royalties with publishers could be nuanced by noting that many songwriters retain a larger share or all of their publishing rights.
• The criticism of "360 deals" may not acknowledge that some artists benefit from the comprehensive support of a label in all aspects of their career.
• The idea that extensive rights are essential for record companies to boost a musician's brand might be challenged by the success of artists who maintain more control over their rights.
• The view on 360 agreements may not consider the potential for these deals to provide artists with substantial upfront investment and support that could be difficult to secure independently.

Intellectual Property involves the establishment of copyright regulations and the authorization for their utilization.

Understanding copyright is fundamental in the music business, as it protects the creative works of songwriters and artists, dictating who owns the rights, how those rights can be used, and how creators are compensated for the exploitation of their works.

Fundamental Principles: Possession, Sole Privileges, and the Duration of Copyright Protection.

Copyright grants creators of original works exclusive control over the use and distribution of their content, thus protecting their entitlements under the law.

Securing a copyright and understanding the advantages of its registration

Passman clarifies a common misconception by explaining that the moment a musical piece is recorded, the person who created it is granted copyright protection. While it's not a requirement to register your creation with the U.S. Copyright Office to obtain the initial rights, doing so is strongly advised for those who wish to gain commercially from their work, since it offers extra legal benefits not accessible without registration.

Upon registration, you secure important legal advantages such as establishing a public record of your copyright, the right to sue for infringement to protect your ownership, and the potential for receiving statutory damages and attorney's fees should you win the infringement lawsuit. Donald S. Passman emphasizes the importance of securing ownership rights to your work before sharing it with the public, especially if it will be used for commercial purposes.

The exclusive rights also encompass the production, public performance, distribution, and creation of new works based on the original.

Copyright grants creators a bundle of exclusive rights, giving them control over how their works are used, copied, and distributed. Passman unequivocally stated that the rights include the initial aspect. Reproduce the work... Disseminate the work by distributing its copies... Publicly execute the performance of the work... Develop a piece that draws inspiration from an existing creation. Display the work in a setting that is open to the public. Holders of copyright have the authority to authorize or prohibit various applications of their work, including the production of adaptations, recording of the material, live performances, and the development of derivative works.

The music industry's financial bedrock is established on these particular entitlements. Artists have the ability to generate income from their original works by overseeing the copying, distribution, and public display of their copyrighted material. Artists, songwriters, publishers, and record companies must possess strong negotiation skills to ensure they receive fair payment for the use of their copyrighted works in licenses and contracts.

Copyright protection extends throughout the life of the creator and continues for seventy years after their death; the length of this protection can differ for commissioned works.

Upon the expiration of the copyright protection's set term, the work enters the public domain, allowing unrestricted access to all without the need for permission or payment. Passman elucidates the duration of copyright protection in the United States, emphasizing that it persists for the entirety of the author's life plus seventy years for creations made post-January 1, 1978, and for materials disseminated before that time, the protection remains effective for ninety-five years following their first publication.

Understanding the duration of copyright protection is crucial for creators and those intending to use copyrighted works. The length of these exclusive rights impacts how licensing agreements are formed, the organization of one's assets for bequeathal, and the lasting value of intellectual property. In the case of works produced under a work-for-hire arrangement, the span of copyright protection is based on the release date instead of being linked to the lifespan of the actual creator, since the entity that commissioned the work is recognized as the holder of the copyright.

The Influence of Compulsory Licenses on Income Derived from Mechanical Royalties.

Compulsory licensing regulations signify a significant departure from the creator's exclusive rights, allowing specific uses of copyrighted material when predefined conditions are met and a predetermined charge is instituted.

The production of phonorecords and their digital distribution necessitate a mandatory mechanical license.

The mandated conditions for mechanicals are a fundamental component of the U.S. copyright framework, significantly impacting the recording sector. Passman clarifies that for the replication and distribution of recordings or digital phonorecord deliveries of their non-dramatic musical compositions to be authorized, copyright holders require adherence to certain conditions and the payment of established fees.

Upon the debut of a song's initial authorized rendition, the copyright proprietors no longer maintain the sole authority to decide who may create future versions of the song, due to the mandatory licensing provision. This license plays a crucial role in guiding negotiations concerning the compensation for the reproduction of songs that publishers and record labels must agree upon.

Discussions often center on the set rates determined for the payment of mechanical royalties.

A compulsory license establishes a fixed royalty payment for mechanical reproductions, commonly referred to as the statutory rate. The responsibility for periodically revising this rate, with considerations for factors like inflation, changes within the industry, and the economic condition of the music sector, falls to the Copyright Royalty Board. Musicians and composers often face limited leverage in negotiating higher per-track earnings due to the mandatory licensing system, yet Passman provides insightful strategies to address this challenge effectively.

Passman highlights the tendency of music labels to seek direct agreements with music publishers instead of depending on the compulsory license, which they find more cumbersome due to its rigorous accounting and reporting obligations (Passman, 213). This creates an opportunity for artists and their representatives to negotiate more favorable terms, such as higher rates for specific configurations (like CDs), reductions in free goods deductions, and improved accounting practices.

The influence of mandatory licensing agreements on discussions regarding royalty payments.

The mandatory licensing agreement establishes a cap on the sum that recording companies consent to pay out for mechanical royalties. Passman characterizes the standard for determining mechanical royalty rates as the "statutory rate." The reasoning is that the 'statutory rate' sets the ceiling for discussions regarding mechanical royalties once a song has been recorded.

The discussions about recording contract provisions related to controlled compositions are significantly impacted by this limitation. Passman describes controlled compositions as musical pieces that the artist, and in some cases the producer, owns or has creative authority over. To mitigate their financial exposure, record labels frequently include provisions in agreements that set a maximum on the per-song mechanical royalty rate as well as the total rate for the entire album. Passman provides comprehensive strategies for artists and their representatives to navigate negotiations, ensuring fair compensation for their artistic contributions while acknowledging the need to account for the financial risks faced by record companies.

Collaborative Creations and Commissioned Works' Shared Copyright

Determining the ownership of a creative work's rights can frequently present a complicated matter. Understanding the intricacies of copyright law is essential when multiple people are involved in a collaborative effort, especially concerning joint authorship and commissioned works.

When individuals engage in creative partnerships, they frequently end up with joint ownership and collective authority regarding the licensing rights that are not exclusive.

Passman sheds light on the legal principles related to the joint creation and the statutes that regulate copyright for collaborative musical works. In a collaborative effort, the resulting work is considered a joint creation, where each collaborator possesses an equal share of the copyright for the entire work, regardless of the size or significance of their individual contributions. The melody and lyrics are jointly owned, with one individual composing the tune and another writing the lyrics.

Each co-owner has the right to grant non-exclusive permissions for the utilization of the entire work and may proceed with this without the consent of the other co-owners, as long as they ensure the appropriate portion of the earnings is shared. Conflicts between joint owners concerning the allocation and scheduling of their creation can result in complex situations. In the absence of formal agreements, the distribution and safeguarding of rights are governed by intellectual property legislation.

The idea that an employer holds the authority over 'works for hire' and their associated rights plays a crucial role in the ability to end those rights.

Passman clarifies that when a composition is classified as a "work for hire" according to copyright laws, the employer is recognized as the author. This concept is common in the entertainment industry, particularly for music created for movies and television programs. Film studios and producers frequently engage composers and songwriters to craft original music for their productions, with the agreement that copyright ownership of these musical works will be held by the studio.

The doctrine of work-for-hire stipulates that despite recognition and remuneration for the original music creator, copyright ownership is not retained by them. Passman outlines the specific conditions that a composition must satisfy to be classified as a work made for hire, such as tracks composed for film or television, which require a documented agreement confirming the composition's purpose for these types of works. He also underscores that creations made under a work-for-hire arrangement do not involve a change in ownership, thereby preventing the original creator from reclaiming copyright after a certain duration.

Further Exploration: Delving into the Complexities of Concluding Contracts, Extending Durations, Employing Electronic Sound Bites, and Possessing Rights to Audio Recording Ownership.

Intellectual property laws encompass a range of complex issues that go far beyond the basic concept of sole ownership. Advancements in technology have led to innovative concepts that challenge traditional viewpoints and require adaptations to protect the entitlements of those who create intellectual property.

Termination rights: regaining control of copyright after 35 years (or 39 for pre-1978)

Authors and their descendants can reclaim their copyrights following a certain period, even if they previously transferred the copyrights to a publishing entity. Passman clarifies that, under the Copyright Act of 1976, individuals who hold rights have the ability to regain control of their property thirty-five years after the original assignment, highlighting that this recovery can take place while they are still alive, without the requirement of their demise.

Composers frequently deem it crucial to possess the power to end contracts, particularly when they have previously committed to unfavorable publishing agreements at the onset of their careers. However, Passman details how publishers attempt to circumvent termination by including clauses in their contracts that require songwriters to relinquish their termination rights. He emphasizes that the Copyright Act expressly prohibits such advance agreements.

Donald S. Passman explores the changes in the right to terminate copyrights that were introduced with the enactment of the 1998 Sony Bono Copyright Term Extension Act. The legislation offered a second chance to regain control over the extended two-decade copyright duration for copyrights that were set before 1978, even if the original termination opportunity had been missed. To safeguard historical copyrights, strict compliance with the timelines and procedures outlined in the copyright legislation is essential.

The case of Mills Music set precedents regarding the limitations on adapting works once the original rights have lapsed.

A major challenge presents itself when seeking to enact termination rights because derivative creations stem from the initial work. Passman describes a derivative work as an original and unique piece that incorporates elements from an earlier copyrighted work, exemplified by the adaptation of a book into a movie, the creation of a new musical arrangement, or the translation of a work. Passman analyzes the significant ruling in Mills Music v. Snyder, highlighting the way a publisher can benefit from new versions of compositions after the original copyright term has concluded.

Even after a songwriter regains copyright over their original work, a publisher retains the right to make use of earlier licensed adaptations, such as recordings. Once a publishing agreement concludes, the publisher is barred from creating further derivative works.

Subsequent court rulings have progressively narrowed the scope of this specific exemption. Passman clarifies that court rulings have set the precedent that fresh editions of sheet music and reissued master recordings, identified by unique catalog numbers, are not considered derivative works, and therefore, the original copyright holder maintains ownership of these rights. The ongoing legal conflicts highlight the complex aspects of legislation related to intellectual property, where judicial systems endeavor to balance fairly the interests of original creators aiming to regain control of their work with those of organizations that have benefited from previous adaptations.

Obtaining the required legal permissions to use recorded music and compositions in samples.

Digital sampling has become a ubiquitous element of contemporary music production, allowing artists to incorporate portions of existing recordings into their own compositions. To legally use samples, musicians must secure consent from the proprietors of the original track as well as the underlying composition.

Passman emphasizes the increased focus on sampling in modern music, a trend that has been greatly influenced by key legal rulings establishing that unauthorized sampling constitutes a breach of copyright laws.

Negotiating these rights involves careful dialogue concerning remuneration, profit sharing, and terms with the individuals responsible for the record production and ownership of publishing rights, all the while balancing negotiating power, creative freedom, and financial considerations. Passman emphasizes the need to secure permissions for samples, which can significantly affect the production budget and impact the level of control over the end product, as well as the financial obligations for royalties and upfront fees.

Copyrights for sound recordings serve as a safeguard against unauthorized reproduction.

Passman offers a thorough examination of the evolution of legal protections for sound recordings, highlighting that prior to 1972, these recordings were not covered by copyright laws in the United States. Entities that were not involved in the initial creation of the music could duplicate and monetize the work without offering monetary rewards to the creators or their music production companies.

The music industry suffered significant financial damage due to the rise of "legitimate copiers," who essentially created unauthorized copies of popular music albums. Passman delves into the way these companies leveraged the obligatory mechanical license to capitalize on popular recordings while maintaining respect for the song's copyright.

The 1972 Sound Recording Act addressed this disparity by establishing legal protections for audio productions, indicated by the ℗ symbol. The record company is granted exclusive rights to duplicate and distribute the track, which serves as a safeguard against illicit reproduction.

Other Perspectives

• Copyright laws can sometimes stifle creativity and innovation by making it difficult for artists to build upon existing works without facing legal hurdles or financial barriers.
• The duration of copyright protection, which extends for the creator's lifetime plus seventy years after death, may be excessively long, potentially limiting the public's access to cultural materials and hindering the entry of works into the public domain.
• Compulsory licenses, while intended to balance interests, may not always provide fair compensation to creators, especially in an era where digital streaming has significantly altered the landscape of music consumption and revenue.
• The statutory rate for mechanical royalties may not keep pace with the changing economics of the music industry, potentially disadvantaging songwriters and composers in the digital age.
• The concept of joint ownership in collaborative works can lead to disputes and legal complexities, especially when contributions are not equally distributed or when there is a lack of clear agreements.
• The 'work for hire' doctrine can be seen as unfair to creators who produce significant works but do not retain ownership rights, which can affect their long-term income and control over the work's use.
• Termination rights, while designed to return rights to creators, can be complex to navigate and may not always result in regained control due to various legal and contractual obstacles.
• The requirement for legal permissions to use samples can be a barrier to artistic expression and may disproportionately affect genres like hip-hop, where sampling is a foundational element.
• The protection of sound recordings since 1972 has created a dichotomy where works before this date are treated differently, potentially leading to inconsistencies in the application of copyright protections.

Engaging in live performances, setting out on tour circuits, and marketing merchandise.

Artists can interact with their audience, develop their reputation, and generate significant revenue from concerts, promotional events, and the sale of merchandise bearing their brand.

Touring: Orchestrating a Successful and Profitable Tour

Performing live is crucial for a musician's development, as it offers chances to engage with fans in person, hone their stagecraft, promote their tunes, and turn recorded songs into revenue-generating live shows.

The team consists of a range of professionals such as a personal manager, an agent, and a business manager, all fulfilling unique roles.

The success of a tour hinges on the collective contributions of the team, with each individual playing a vital part in planning, executing, and managing the financial aspects of the event.

Other Perspectives

• While live performances and tours can generate revenue, they also involve significant costs, which can sometimes outweigh the profits, especially for emerging artists.
• The idea that performing live is crucial for a musician's development may not hold true for all artists, as some may find success through other avenues such as digital platforms or studio work.
• The effectiveness of merchandise sales is highly variable and can depend on factors like the artist's brand strength, fanbase size, and the quality and appeal of the merchandise itself.
• The necessity of a team of professionals for a successful tour might not apply to independent or emerging artists who may manage their own tours due to budget constraints or a preference for a hands-on approach.
• The assumption that live shows are a direct translation of recorded songs into revenue may not account for the complexities of live performance, including the need for adaptations, the potential for technical issues, and the unpredictable nature of live audiences.