31 Oct
2003
31 Oct
'03
11:26 a.m.
Now, some music giant, say Sony Music digs my work
(yeah, right...)
and they go 'Oh, we can distribute this guy's work and make
millions off him without paying him a cent!' But they have to
include my license agreement with their product, my artwork (on
which I have my contact info) etc.
Just imagine that this record company doesn't understand or care about
your licence, and neglects to include this information. Your only
recourse would be to sue, and that might not be practical or
affordable.
Or worse, they do understand your licence, but it gives them the right
to redistribute your music commercially without paying you. They
would then have the upper hand in any negotiation, since they aren't
going to invest in promoting your music without first having got you
to sign something.
How many people will actually
buy it if they see that they can download it for free
That's exactly the position that labels are in now with conventional
CDs, and they are still selling.
I don't see how anyone could make money on this...
You're probably right - I think most labels would be very reluctant to
sign any 'open licenced' artist at the moment.
And why would I be unable to charge money for _my_
work, even if it
was distributed by a 3rd party is beyond me. If they distribute
it, they have to do it on the terms of my license so they cannot
claim exclusive distribution rights.
They don't need exclusive distribution, they just have to be able to
do it better and cheaper than you!
If, on the other hand, Sony Music hands my CD to some
hot shot
producer and they use it, sample it, modify it and sell a billion,
they still have to credit me and make all derivatives under the
same license.
Again, I think it would be more likely that they would negotiate a
royalty, just as they do for conventional samples. But if you've
already declared that your work can be sampled gratuit, then you're
not likely to get a cut.
Cheers
Daniel