#1
and he's played on studio recordings of the band that haven't been released yet, but will be at some point. but you wrote the song as far as chords and vocals go, but he still added lead guitar that he wrote over that song.

What's the deal on that? If there were hard feelings and he was pissed off can he say "No you can't include my lead on that cause I wrote it." or is it pretty much whoever wrote the core basic part of the song has that has say on what gets released? Or could he say "Ya you can release the song, but you have to go back in the studio, take off my lead, and re-record your own lead."

and just cause he wrote lead, would you include his name in the "Composer" credits or no? or just on the side like "Joe Smith- lead on tracks 3 and 5"

i may need to know but i don't know yet.

any ideas?
My username is old, don't judge me (but old 311 is good)
#2
Give him songwriting credits. If the album is released commercially, I believe he is to receive royalties from each copy sold. (Might be wrong on this).
#3
What was your initial contract with him before you went into the studio?
#4
Copyright only covers melody and lyrics. It doesn't sound like he's contributed to either of these, it sounds like he's played a traditional session musicians role, contributing his line and moving on. I would say that you owe him no songwriting credits.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#5
this whole band is in shambles at the moment...the drummer had to leave because of a full time gigging band he got. If you do release an EP, is he, the drummer, supposed to get a cut from any earnings?

i would include him normally, but since he left you know...

I just think of how Radiohead does it and in composer credits it says "Radiohead" no matter what. and I kind want to do it that way, seems very fair and nice to everyone involved, but I'm torn when the band is splitting up.


but i guess I'm just wondering how The Beatles and other bands do it. That was Lennon/McCartney on most everything, but Harrison clearly wrote most of the lead guitar he played on their tracks, so how did he get payed? and how do other lead guitarists in bands who don't have songwriting credits get payed?

and i say the lead guitarist is leaving, it's almost a mutal thing cause he was complaining and saying his place was shakey in the band so we're just thinking of telling him he's out. so that's why he might be lame about things.

now that yall know everything i guess here are the rest of my questions, cleanly shown

- Should the drummer who left get paid if the EP makes money?

- Should the lead guitarist who 'may leave/get kicked out' get paid if the EP makes money?

- Does the lead guitarist have any say on what the rest of the band can release that has his lead that he wrote, on it? as in could he actually say "no you have to go back in and re-record the lead, i'm not putting my work on your EP". or did once it hit the recording it became the bands?

- Lastly, how do most lead guitarists, drummers bassists etc, (anyone who's not in the songwriting credits) get paid? i assume they don't get the royalties, so how do they get paid?


thanks for all the help
My username is old, don't judge me (but old 311 is good)
Last edited by Three11Rules at Jun 25, 2010,
#6
Your best bet would just be talking to him about it and seeing if you can come to some sort of agreement, but I would definitely give him songwriting credits if he wrote the leads to the songs.
#7
Performers on recordings who don't have songwriting credit are usually paid by a flat fee (in the case of a session musician). Otherwise they are entitled to performer's royalties. Performer's royalties are generally a very small amount, and in most cases it would be a financially better position to accept a case of beer instead.

But you have found a flaw with the whole "credit the entire band" thing. It doesn't really work if the players are going to leave without promoting the album anyway.

Oh so applied to the Beatles (to the best of my knowledge);

George received performers royalties for the songs he played on, and songwriting royalties for the few songs that he did write. The record company would have given him some sort of wage/bonus on top of that. In most bands the main source of income is touring, and that would have been so during the early Beatles, when they actually played gigs.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#8
Quote by AlanHB
Performers on recordings who don't have songwriting credit are usually paid by a flat fee (in the case of a session musician). Otherwise they are entitled to performer's royalties. Performer's royalties are generally a very small amount, and in most cases it would be a financially better position to accept a case of beer instead.

But you have found a flaw with the whole "credit the entire band" thing. It doesn't really work if the players are going to leave without promoting the album anyway.

Oh so applied to the Beatles (to the best of my knowledge);

George received performers royalties for the songs he played on, and songwriting royalties for the few songs that he did write. The record company would have given him some sort of wage/bonus on top of that. In most bands the main source of income is touring, and that would have been so during the early Beatles, when they actually played gigs.


Really appreciate the info! Very interesting...

and I'm not sure if you answered the question about the lead guitarist and the say he has in what can and can't get released though...if I wrote the song (chords, vocal melody, lyrics), but he wrote the lead guitar for it, can he say I have to go back and re-record lead for it if I want to release it? can he demand songwriting credit?

I guess you're saying i shouldn't give him songwriting credit, other people are saying I should...does it really just come down to a moral thing?
My username is old, don't judge me (but old 311 is good)
#9
legally if he's under 18 he has no legal right to own absolutely anything:d
just a handy little tip there
#10
Quote by Three11Rules
can he say I have to go back and re-record lead for it if I want to release it? can he demand songwriting credit?

I guess you're saying i shouldn't give him songwriting credit, other people are saying I should...does it really just come down to a moral thing?


You can't "demand" songwriting credit without threatening legal action. Based on what you've said, I don't believe that he would have songwriting credit. I definately wouldn't give any of my band members songwriting credit for songs that I wrote without them, nor take credit for songs written by other people.

Can he stop you from releasing the recording? I don't think so, because he wouldn't have songwriting entitlements. But you'll have to make sure, the copyright sticky above may help you.

Is it just a moral decision? Well it looks like a lot of people here are saying that "he played in the band, he should get credit for writing the song". That seems unfair to me. I have quite a few songs that I've played for a while, through a lot of different bands. Those are my songs, I wrote them entirely by myself. Should I then credit whatever band I record them with? Of course not. They're mine. And that's a moral decision, you can't just expect to take credit for my songs. I can't just show up on your doorstep, have a quick jam on one of your songs then take songwriting credit. It doesn't work that way.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#11
It sounds to me that he doesn't justify any writing credit.

But there are a few things at play here... you have:
-the composition
-the performance
-the recording

It was written by you. He has no claim on the composition.

The other two gets a bit nebulous. Did he pay for the recording? If he did, and he wasn't paid back, he could lay claim to some ownership of the master tape. If he owns a controlling portion, he could say, "yeah, use the song, but you'll have to re-record it." It doesn't sound like that is the case.

A performance is a tricky thing. Who owns it?

Well, if he was compensated for the performance - either by cash or services or whatever, then he has been paid for his work. Sure, you made the McDonald's burger, but since it is part of your employment and you've been paid for that employment, you have no personal claim to it.

If he has not been compensated for his performance, then he could possibly demand fair payment for it, or ask that his parts be removed from the recording. Sometimes people take their toys and go home, and the parts need to be re-recorded by someone else.

To answer your question about the Beatles or whoever like that, you're right. The writing credits generally go exclusively to Lennon/McCartney. Harrison and Star performed their parts, and in return, had a reasonable expectation that they would tour with the Beatles, and be paid for that as part of the package. If they had been replaced by touring musicians for the live show, you can bet they'd probably have been pretty pissed.

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#12
Quote by josh_salty
legally if he's under 18 he has no legal right to own absolutely anything:d
just a handy little tip there


I'm not completely clear on US law, but if this is so, it's probable that the parents would then legally own the rights, and could enforce them on their child's behalf.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#13
well the band is all 20-25, so the under 18 thing doesn't apply here haha.

Quote by AlanHB
You can't "demand" songwriting credit without threatening legal action. Based on what you've said, I don't believe that he would have songwriting credit. I definately wouldn't give any of my band members songwriting credit for songs that I wrote without them, nor take credit for songs written by other people.

Can he stop you from releasing the recording? I don't think so, because he wouldn't have songwriting entitlements. But you'll have to make sure, the copyright sticky above may help you.

Is it just a moral decision? Well it looks like a lot of people here are saying that "he played in the band, he should get credit for writing the song". That seems unfair to me. I have quite a few songs that I've played for a while, through a lot of different bands. Those are my songs, I wrote them entirely by myself. Should I then credit whatever band I record them with? Of course not. They're mine. And that's a moral decision, you can't just expect to take credit for my songs. I can't just show up on your doorstep, have a quick jam on one of your songs then take songwriting credit. It doesn't work that way.


Wow you really gave me some perspective on the matter. thank you. I can see exactly what you're saying, especially if you're not sure about the bands survival.

Quote by axemanchris
It sounds to me that he doesn't justify any writing credit.

But there are a few things at play here... you have:
-the composition
-the performance
-the recording

It was written by you. He has no claim on the composition.

The other two gets a bit nebulous. Did he pay for the recording? If he did, and he wasn't paid back, he could lay claim to some ownership of the master tape. If he owns a controlling portion, he could say, "yeah, use the song, but you'll have to re-record it." It doesn't sound like that is the case.

A performance is a tricky thing. Who owns it?

Well, if he was compensated for the performance - either by cash or services or whatever, then he has been paid for his work. Sure, you made the McDonald's burger, but since it is part of your employment and you've been paid for that employment, you have no personal claim to it.

If he has not been compensated for his performance, then he could possibly demand fair payment for it, or ask that his parts be removed from the recording. Sometimes people take their toys and go home, and the parts need to be re-recorded by someone else.

To answer your question about the Beatles or whoever like that, you're right. The writing credits generally go exclusively to Lennon/McCartney. Harrison and Star performed their parts, and in return, had a reasonable expectation that they would tour with the Beatles, and be paid for that as part of the package. If they had been replaced by touring musicians for the live show, you can bet they'd probably have been pretty pissed.

CT

well remember he wrote the lead over it. I wrote the chords/structure, vocal melody, lyrics

I paid for all the recording all myself. The lead guitarist is actually one of my roommates/friends as well. So it's not like he was a session musician. but I'm afraid he might be kinda sore after all is said and done, we'll see...

Hmm, compensated for the performance...I mean I guess he wasn't, but there never was a like thing we said "I give you this because you played on this" it was more just he was in the band and was recording the lead he wrote for the song then recorded it in the studio and now we have raw recordings/early rough mixes...

So even if I paid for the recording he's really still able to say go back and re-record it?

and for future reference if the EP does make money and I want to pay him, i guess I'd be paying a performance cut, what exactly would that percentage be around?
My username is old, don't judge me (but old 311 is good)
Last edited by Three11Rules at Jun 25, 2010,
#14
When I last checked it was 2-4% per performer. So if you are selling your cds for $5, around 10c-20c would go to him per copy. You can see why the slab of beer is tempting - in Australia that's equivalent to 200-400 copies sold
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#15
Quote by AlanHB
I'm not completely clear on US law, but if this is so, it's probable that the parents would then legally own the rights, and could enforce them on their child's behalf.


No, the child would own all the rights in the U.S. However, he'd be unable to enter into contracts unless he's been emancipated. So he'd either have to be emancipated or have his parents sign the contracts.

As for copyright, *somebody* gets a copyright as soon as an expression of an idea is affixed in a durable form. If you write down a piece of music, record it, whatever, you immediately gain copyright unless you've already entered into a work-for-hire agreement with an employer, in which case they immediately gain the copyright. So each person will own the copyright to each piece of the process.

That makes it nearly impossible to use anything legally, which is why contracts and clearinghouses are used so heavily in IP-based industries like the recording industry. Contract law trumps copyright law--if the band members signed a contract with some label granting the label permission to publish the music, then it's a done deal and quitting the band doesn't change anything. Think Guns n' Roses, for example.

If, on the other hand, a bunch of guys who neglected to sign a band charter and haven't been signed to a label just record some stuff and one of them quits, the other members will need his explicit or implicit permission to use his material (and it would be up to a court to decide what implicit permissions were given in a particular set of circumstances).

Moral of the story: formalize everything. Asking people to sign a band charter/contract doesn't make you an uptight jerk; it prevents people from becoming uptight jerks.
Quote by xadioriderx
you should just mount a really big chunk of wood


Quote by Wisthekiller
How does one safely remove the smell of a corpse from a banjo?
#16
Quote by BasementCat
No, the child would own all the rights in the U.S. However, he'd be unable to enter into contracts unless he's been emancipated. So he'd either have to be emancipated or have his parents sign the contracts.

As for copyright, *somebody* gets a copyright as soon as an expression of an idea is affixed in a durable form. If you write down a piece of music, record it, whatever, you immediately gain copyright unless you've already entered into a work-for-hire agreement with an employer, in which case they immediately gain the copyright. So each person will own the copyright to each piece of the process.

That makes it nearly impossible to use anything legally, which is why contracts and clearinghouses are used so heavily in IP-based industries like the recording industry. Contract law trumps copyright law--if the band members signed a contract with some label granting the label permission to publish the music, then it's a done deal and quitting the band doesn't change anything. Think Guns n' Roses, for example.

If, on the other hand, a bunch of guys who neglected to sign a band charter and haven't been signed to a label just record some stuff and one of them quits, the other members will need his explicit or implicit permission to use his material (and it would be up to a court to decide what implicit permissions were given in a particular set of circumstances).

Moral of the story: formalize everything. Asking people to sign a band charter/contract doesn't make you an uptight jerk; it prevents people from becoming uptight jerks.



all understood, but what if he didn't write the actual chord, structure, or lyrics/vocals, on a song, just the lead guitar. Does still get to say what gets released and what doesn't?
My username is old, don't judge me (but old 311 is good)
Last edited by Three11Rules at Jul 9, 2010,
#17
He might successfully be able to push it and force you to have someone else come in and re-do a solo.

Otherwise, no.

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#18
I see...now I have a new question. this is a reality, we are letting this guy go so now I need to know.

If this guy was with us in the room, writing a song with us, but the only contribution of his that made it in the song was one sentence of lyrics, out of a whole song, does he still get writing credit? probably does huh...
My username is old, don't judge me (but old 311 is good)
#19
Yeah, he might get a writing credit, but what.... 2%?

Not enough to give him any control of the piece. That would be 50%. However, if you register the song with a Performing Rights organization or a mechanical royalties licencing agency and have to list the writers, his name would need to appear. However, most sources that require this information also ask for a proportion.

So, what it comes down to, is if the song makes any money, he is entitled to somewhere around 2% of the income. Have fun with that. haha.

But he can't prevent you from using it in any way, shape or form, so long as he is compensated appropriately.

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
#20
Realistically, unless you're a touring band on a label or something, none of this will REALLY matter.
Quote by Strato-Massacre
yeah you shouldnt have told the pit to rape your mom.

Quote by Kensai
It's not sexist, girls are just too stupid and weak to hold up doors and stuff for themselves.
#21
Quote by axemanchris
Yeah, he might get a writing credit, but what.... 2%?

Not enough to give him any control of the piece. That would be 50%. However, if you register the song with a Performing Rights organization or a mechanical royalties licencing agency and have to list the writers, his name would need to appear. However, most sources that require this information also ask for a proportion.

So, what it comes down to, is if the song makes any money, he is entitled to somewhere around 2% of the income. Have fun with that. haha.

But he can't prevent you from using it in any way, shape or form, so long as he is compensated appropriately.

CT


haha, I see. wow...

thanks you for all the information, i really appreciate it, while we're at it do you have any preference on BMI or ASCAP?

Quote by Lt.DanHasLegs
Realistically, unless you're a touring band on a label or something, none of this will REALLY matter.

mmmmhmmm and what if we're selling the EP at shows and its making money in various ways, like CDbaby or something? and it's on ASCAP or BMI? I mean I think everyone getting paid or credit or whatever is important, so I'd like to cover our bases ya know..
My username is old, don't judge me (but old 311 is good)
Last edited by Three11Rules at Jul 12, 2010,
#22
BMI vs. ASCAP - I could be wrong, but they're both performing rights associations and do not deal with mechanical royalties. For that, in the US, you're looking at Harry Fox or something.

I'm in Canada, so I belong to SOCAN for my performing rights royalties and have my songs registered with the CMRRA for mechanicals.

Performing rights covers situations when your material is used, say, on radio or TV, etc.

Mechanical royalties are paid when someone wants to record a cover of one of your songs.

If your songs are making money in some way, the best thing to do is the *right* thing to do, and that is give him the credit he deserves.

Alternately, you could offer to buy him out for a fixed price. "If we give you $100, can we buy the song and all associated rights from you outright?" Old Time Rock and Roll was bought out for just that amount. Seriously. I bet that poor sucker kicks himself every single day he wakes up and sees that the sun is shining once again.

OTOH, chances are, with his share of the writing credit, he will never make $20, never mind $100. Anything above and beyond that is just a convenience fee for you so you don't have to keep administering his rights.


CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.