... I'm pretty sure the label can't take away their right, and if they do because of a unread contract I'm equally sure they can gain it back in court on grounds of a miss understanding since they are given it directly by US Copyright law.
Anyways... Do you really think a label would risk saying that they owned everything the artist created.... It would make already very upset fans even more upset.
Although they may have a lot of control it's not the kind of control you just throw out into the crowd because of even a large dispute. Even though the may say they will drop the artist I doubt they would when things are all said and done... After all any half decent artist can pull in millions of sales in a very short time. I don't know about a record company but even while I have others doing the same thing I wouldn't want to lose ALL the CD sales because of a dispute over a few thousand not being sold because people download them instead.
KaZaA sues RIAA for copyright infringement
Moderators: Big-O Ryan, Big-O Mark, Matt, jester22c
You must remember. Very, very few of todays recording artists actually write the complete piece they are performing. Many of the artists that have made claims to have written their entire album have later been embarrassed when it was found out that they "contributed" to it. I know this is a bad example, but *NSYNC almost become extinct when they tried to escape the tight grip of Lou Pearlman. Why? Because he owned them. He owned their name and their recorded music. Many of the exact details of the court case were not made available, but Justin Timberlake and the boys ended up prevailing, but it was very, very costly.
Much of the music we listen to today is an artist singing a song written by another individual (or team) and the label has purchasedd that song (or a library of songs) from that writer. The label, through that purchase owns the rights to that song and therefore the copyright.
Much of the music we listen to today is an artist singing a song written by another individual (or team) and the label has purchasedd that song (or a library of songs) from that writer. The label, through that purchase owns the rights to that song and therefore the copyright.
Ray
"Everybody needs friends. No one wishes to be without them. But never lose sight of the fact that it is your friends who will lead you along the paths that you will follow."
—Gordon B. Hinckley
"Everybody needs friends. No one wishes to be without them. But never lose sight of the fact that it is your friends who will lead you along the paths that you will follow."
—Gordon B. Hinckley
- Anthony
- Moderator
- Posts: 1532
- Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 5:10 am
- Location: Rochester, New York
- Contact:
I think that falls into trying to have Garth Brooks sing some Backstreet boys song and then have the Backstreet Boys sing some Garth Brooks song, and have it written by the same person...
In other words just because you can write it does not mean you can get someone that can sell it. There for the artist does own it.Now I''m no judge but I'm sure because of that simple fact the artist would prevail in court. Having cases already that have been ruled on in favor of the artist only makes thing more simple.
I am not saying a artist would go out against their label (In fact any one with half a brain (or not a really large amount of cash at hand)) would do this.
Artists like Maddona, and any other artist with a very large cash flow have diffrent morals then the people that have less money. If you notice the people still making less then millions a year tend to be for P2P while artists that are making millions a year just on their CDs are for it... Wouldn't you be?
In other words just because you can write it does not mean you can get someone that can sell it. There for the artist does own it.Now I''m no judge but I'm sure because of that simple fact the artist would prevail in court. Having cases already that have been ruled on in favor of the artist only makes thing more simple.
I am not saying a artist would go out against their label (In fact any one with half a brain (or not a really large amount of cash at hand)) would do this.
Artists like Maddona, and any other artist with a very large cash flow have diffrent morals then the people that have less money. If you notice the people still making less then millions a year tend to be for P2P while artists that are making millions a year just on their CDs are for it... Wouldn't you be?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests