Category: Uncategorized

Available Aid to Artists during the Pandemic

We are living through an unprecedented historic event which is having far reaching negative effects on everyone and every industry.  Obviously artists are effected in a direct and clear manner with the prohibition on public gatherings the main source of revenue has vanished almost over night.

Thankfully there has been a rush to try to put together various aid packages for the entertainment industry.  From not-for-profit organizations like MusicCares to federal and state backed stimulus and loan programs, there is aid out there for artists and those that work within the entertainment industry.

There are a lot of resources out there to help guide the search for relief.  We will keep posting updates but in the interim, please take a look at the following links to see if you can apply for aid:

http://www.tkhlaw.com/blog/2019/9/27/financialreliefcovid19

https://3arts.org/artist-relief/

What to do During a Pandemic (for musicians)

So much has been written already about the devastating effects that COVID-19 is having on our industry.    Social distancing, whether suggested or mandated, means no live performances.  No live performances means no money for venue owners, security and staff, ticketing companies, the artists and their teams.  Without live performance revenue all of these individuals are without the revenue that normally pays their bills.

While some of the potential and actual legislation and ordinances put forward by government officials will look to help our industry, specifically bartenders, wait staff and other hourly workers, the musicians and their teams will likely not benefit from the same.  As we have highlighted so often, the music industry has shifted in such a way where the majority of musicians who make a living via music depend almost entirely on live performances and the merchandise and sponsorship opportunities they afford them.

We, like the rest of the world, do not have an immediate solution to make up for the loss of income caused by COVID-19.  However, our experience allows us to make a few suggestions specific to our musician friends and clients to help during this uncertain time.

1.  Create more content.  This should really be the primary focus of all artists right now.  Take advantage of this odd period of time where the world is forced to stay at home to give your fans new content to consume.  There is no doubt that people will be glued to their devices now more than ever.  Fresh content can keep current fans engaged and introduce you to a new and bigger audience.  Whether it is releasing new music, creating video content or streaming live on the ever growing digital platforms like Twitch, Mixer or Caffeine, keep active and keep in front of your fans. Maybe accelerate that release plan and delay that tour schedule.

2.  Plan ahead.  Hindsight is always 20-20 and it is far easier said than done to save money for a rainy day or a pandemic, but take this time to plan out the rest of your year.  Plan financially as well as creatively.  While very few people expected this type of event to occur on a global level, now that it is here, we can all plan for it to happen again.  Get with your team, including your business management or financial planner, and figure out where you stand and how to maximize revenue for the future.

3.  Review your current status.  Remember those contracts you signed last year or the year before?  This would be a good time to review them and see where you stand.  Are you recouped?  Have you delivered everything you were supposed to deliver to satisfy your obligations?  Is it time to request an accounting or an audit to find the royalties that still haven’t arrived?  Take this time to talk to your counsel and look at your contractual situation.

We are living in a crazy time right now. Focusing on what you can control rather than the unknown is solid advice for everyone at a time  like this.  For musicians and creatives, controlling their careers by following some of these suggested steps is a great way to start taking back some of the control that has been lost due to COVID-19.
PLEASE STAY SAFE AND CONTACT US WITH QUESTIONS, CONCERNS AND IDEAS.

Independent Contractor No More? (and why that matters to musicians)

There is a key distinction in the law that differentiates between an employee and an independent contractor.  Employees are entitled to certain benefits and protections that contractors are not; chief amongst them, wage protection (minimum wage requirements and overtime benefits etc.), health insurance and paid time off.   Contractors, on the other hand, are viewed as hired guns that can be paid lump sums, do not qualify for overtime and are not eligible for insurance coverage offered to employees.  The music industry is dominated by contractor relationships.  Think of studio musicians, managers, dancers, producers, writers, roadies, back up singers etc.  All of which, until recently, fell squarely in the independent contractor category.

California, the largest hub for the entertainment industry in the world, took a different take on the employee versus contractor feud.  In recent legislation signed by Governor Newsom, CA AB5, Californians will be considered employees unless and until their employer can show that the work that they perform falls under a specific set of criteria.  Specifically, a worker is an employee under AB5 if his or her job forms part of a company’s core business, if the bosses direct the way the work is done or if the worker has not established an independent trade or business.

While the law was a direct result of the so-called “app” industry (e.g. Uber, Lyft, Postmates etc.), the repercussions could clearly spread across other industries.  So what does this mean for musicians and the industry as a whole in California?

As written, AB5 would arguably classify a recording artist as an employer and her manager, tour manager, guest artists, choreographer etc. would all be her employees.  This would require the artist to set up a payroll system, withhold taxes, set hourly wages, pay for overtime, potentially offer insurance and everything else that a normal company would provide to an employee.  Anyone in this industry knows that this shift would be a monumental change and frankly, is just not practical.

Unlike other industries, music industry organizations (RIAA, A2IM and others) lobbied to ban the legislation altogether rather than seek an exemption.  Doctors, accountants, travel agents, real estate agents, cosmetologists and other sought and achieved carve outs so as to not fall under the new qualifications of AB5.  Alleged in-fighting amongst music industry leaders resulted in full inclusion under the law rather than a potentially helpful exemption.

The fear that AB5 will gut the entertainment industry in California is real.  Other states are already looking to capitalize by attempting to lure “contractors” to within their borders.  Still other states are looking to model their own laws after the California law and touting their own version of employee protection.

The law does not go into effect until January 1, 2010.  Until then there will most likely be litigation that may delay its start date.  We will continue to monitor the situation and provide updates.

SoundCloud Listened (to us)

Sometimes speaking out works. listened and modified its new artist contract.

Thanks to some solid journalism (take that #fakenews), and the power of artists and their representatives (like yours truly), SoundCloud revised its new artist monetization agreement.  The program introduced by SoundCloud four years ago allowed select artists to earn a share of ad revenue and subscription fees by monetizing the use of their music.  Finally ready to go to the masses (and keep up with competitors), SoundCloud announced the ability for all Premier Members to monetize.  With the announcement came a long form, click-through, agreement.  That agreement left quite a bit to be desired.

The biggest outcry from the artist community was over a “Covenant Not to Sue”.  Basically this means that if SoundCloud screwed you in some way, you would have no right to seek retribution in court.  We were less concerned with that clause as we were with the completely ambiguous payment schedule, the improper method for notifying artists of changes to  payment terms and the extremely short amount of time to review statements (if and when the statements were ever delivered).  While the Covenant Not to Sue is concerning, there was arbitration language included which offered artists the ability to challenge any issues with SoundCloud through the arbitration process rather than in court.  There is a definite difference between a law suit progressing in court versus a matter in arbitration, but it is not extremely unusual to have this type of clause in this type of agreement.

The ambiguity was far more concerning to us.  How can anyone agree to enter into a business relationship where the party who is owed money has no idea when or how they are going to get paid?  How could you agree to enter into an agreement when you aren’t sure if the agreement has been modified and you could actually be earning less than what you originally agreed to?  To us, these types of unclear and unfair terms were the main issues with the SoundCloud artist monetization program.

With the help of @verge and others, SoundCloud, took heed and modified its agreement.  Unlike our current government, when the people are outraged and nothing gets done, SoundCloud reexamined its agreement, agreed there were fundamental flaws and took the necessary steps to make the needed changes.  Kudos to a company who caters to musicians for actually listening to musicians.  I hope this trend continues.

MMA Still Fighting its Way Through Congress

Previously we reported on the Music Modernization Act, a bill proposed to ensure digital music services pay fair royalties to the copyright holders, and where it stands during its process to be become an enacted bill. As we are aware from the timeless SchoolHouse Rock classic “I’m Just A Bill”, in order to enact a bill it takes time and votes from different levels of Congress. The bill passed the House unanimously April 25, with a revised and amended version coming out of the Senate Judiciary Committee June 28. If the bill passes a Senate vote, it goes back to the House for a final sign off.

The bill seemed to be moving full steam ahead with no objections from any party until lobbyists discovered how much control private entities would lose to the newly formed MLC, Mechanical Licensing Collective. These offered amendments from the private sector have put the bill in danger of not passing. Technically, this copyright bill has until the end of the year to pass but legislators are targeting Oct 12 as the deadline. This date is before Congress adjourns for the midterm elections because after Congress goes on vacation, nothing new will be passed.

First the MMA received push back from The Blackstone Group, owners of SESAC and The Harry Fox Agency. They proposed an amendment that would allow the current mechanical licensing organizations to stay in control of mechanical royalties collection and administration. The Blackstone Group questioned why a government-commissioned mechanical licensing body was necessary, when these organizations already exist. After negotiations, the reps for the MMA clarified the restriction on what licenses can be administered by the MLC, which include sync, lyric and performance licenses. This allowed groups like SESAC and Harry Fox to maintain their clientele and continue business as usual, thus still allowing the MLC to collect data and administer mechanical royalties.

After putting out that fire, the MMA  is now seeing restraints from another organization. SiriusXM is fighting a portion of the bill’s CLASSICS Act provision which calls for digital and satellite radio to pay royalties for playing pre-1972 master recordings, while terrestrial radio would be exempt.

The SiriusXm CEO has criticized the bill for expanding the royalty requirements for satellite radio without also expanding the requirements for terrestrial radio. Traditional radio doesn’t pay for the broadcast of any sound recordings and this bill does nothing to change that. During a period in which SiriusXM paid 2.2 billion for the use of post 1972 works, terrestrial radio paid nothing. The future of radio is digital and it would be wise for the drafters of the MMA to carve out language to fairly compensate artists in both the digital and terrestrial areas. At this point, neither side has figured out a solution and they only have a couple months left to do so.

Moving forward, the Music Modernization Act has only three paths to move through the Senate: 1. by speedy unanimous verbal consent, which would require all 100 senators to vote yes; 2. the more difficult floor process, which includes time for hearings and would require support of at least 60 Senators (46 Senators have signed on as co-sponsors); or 3. by attaching the MMA as a rider to another piece of legislation that is sure to pass. 

Please continue to follow along the MMA’s progress (or lack thereof) here at L4M, @l4m, tkhlaw.com, @TrogliaKaplan or email us for more info.

STREAMING LIKE CRAZY.

Just some quick stats for your Monday.  According to Nielsen’s US Music Mid-Year report, the United States is consuming more music via streaming platforms than ever before.

Key stats from the report are:

“On-demand song streaming activity is reaching new milestones, with volume surpassing 400 billion, which is offsetting declines in album and track sales. On-demand audio streaming volume is up 45%, having already exceeded 268 billion so far in 2018, and on-demand video streaming volume is up 35% year-over-year.”

Some of us have noticed that the introduction of new record labels popping up all over the place.  A few years back reading that a new record label was opening up was on par with an announcement of a new Blockbuster Video opening its doors; it just wasn’t going to happen.  Not surprisingly, a lot of the labels that are popping up are actually old shuttered labels that closed their doors a decade or so ago when they were unequipped to handle the digital music revolution.  Now, with their parent companies (read the opening of a new label announcements with some skepticism, as they are often funded by a pre-existing major) finally reaping the benefit of deals struck with streaming platforms and the overall ease for consumers to stream music, revenue for labels is catching up.  With a better formula in place to collect revenue from the streaming platforms and with the number of consumers steadily rising, it is not surprising to see a renaissance of sorts  for record labels.

Let’s just hope that they have learned from the past and that the structure of deals for artists that are clamoring to sign are fair (or at least close to it).

The Songwriter Curse (Avoid the NOI(d))

It seems to be a constant battle for songwriters to economically receive what is rightfully theirs. First, fighting with labels over rights and royalties, then finding a publisher (big enough) to collect those royalties, now going after digital service providers to payout those royalties, and the government for providing an obnoxiously low rate for reproductions rights and an outdated statute that can’t seem to keep up with the technological age. Yes, it has been a rough one as these factors are often working together in perpetuating this curse more commonly known as the compulsory license.

A compulsory license for sound recordings was created by Section 115 of the Copyright Act and allows anyone to reproduce and distribute a composition that has been released to the public either by digital or physical means with the copyright owners permission. (sounds good). Most of the time an artist records the composition, the label sends the created recording to its distributor and the distributor sends it to the digital service providers or DSPs (Spotify, Amazon, Google, iHeart, you name it) who in exchange receive dollars through subscriptions, ads and downloads. It seems like DSPs should be giving songwriters a call right? (Because they are reproducing the composition and saving it to their platforms to be streamed or downloaded.) Shockingly, they don’t call.  In fact, if you are an independent songwriter (not represented by a major publisher), it is unlikely that you are paid mechanical royalties from any of the DSPs. Why? Because of the compulsory license and these evil excel spreadsheets called “author unknown” NOIs.

If you want a compulsory license, Section 115(a)(2)(b) of the Copyright Act requires you to serve the copyright owner of the composition with a notice of intention (or an NOI). However, IF there is no registration or public record filed with the Copyright Office of your ownership of that composition with an address where the licensee can serve you the NOI then you are considered an “author unknown”! (insert evil laugh). Basically, did you file and pay the Copyright Office to register your copyright that you already own (even though under no law are you required to register your copyright to validate your ownership) for the purpose of getting paid a royalty that, by statute, you are rightfully entitled to? That’s some hardcore bs, right? In fact, instead we are going to give DSPs and whoever else, an out to not pay you. Just submit an “unknown author” NOI to the Copyright Office, which is basically an excel spreadsheet with the title of the song, the DSP info, and unavailable written across the columns for any type of songwriter info. It doesn’t matter if the song is registered with a PRO, if you submitted the metadata to the label to give to the DSP, it probably doesn’t even matter if you call Spotify up and say “hey I’m your missing songwriter!” Nope, after a copyright search you are done. Also to add more bad news, if you file for your copyright tomorrow Spotify, Google and Amazon are not required to back pay on any of those royalties as long as they submitted an NOI to the Copyright Office.

Although a bummer, we will end on a positive note that this curse has not gone unnoticed and some are choosing to do their part to help. Insert Sound Exchange NOI database! (Superhero sound!) A simple system that organized the unknown author NOIs submitted to the Copyright Office so that you can easily discover who is not paying you and for which song. Although its not exactly putting the money you are owed into your pocket, it is getting us a step closer considering the Copyright Office database for NOIs is next to impossible to navigate. It consists of huge excel spreadsheets submitted by DSPs that often are not even downloadable without a zip compressor. If you are able to download the excel sheets, you will see DSPs list hundreds sometimes thousands of songs in no particular order that are submitted daily! It is an absurd waste of time. So thank you Sound Exchange for making it easier for the songwriters out there. I encourage all songwriters to sign up (its free) and search for any NOIs here. We at L4M are going to do our best to keep on this fight and find best practices to get these royalties paid out for our clients. We will keep you posted, but feel free to comment with suggestions and success stories as we want to keep songwriters informed on how to avoid those unknown author NOIs!