label exclusivity - TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- label exclusivity
Pages (2): « 1 [2]

Posted by Looney4Clooney on Nov-03-2011 17:55:

that would be a publishing issue.

look it is quite simple

all music contracts are exclusive deals. That is the point. Now there can always be certain mitigations say if someone was a singer and an actor. Or if you had 2 well known names and you make a deal but exclusivity is the point a label invests in an artist. All contracts are different but if you think exclusivity is weird, well i don't know what to tell you. That is the point of a contract. TO make you exclusive. IT isn't that the label doesn't ever want you ever having anything to do with anyone else, it is about control. And given that they are investing in you, a high risk investment, i mean is it really that draconian ?

During the pre CD bust. 5 bands out of 100 on a major label made a profit. if you looked at the actual numbers, the money labels would front for something that was pretty much going to lose money, you would understand that it isn't that crazy.

I would be more worried if the deal was not exclusive. It shows the label has no fucking idea what they are doing. A contract is never a first draft thing. So if they don't state their intention before you haggle, well they don't really give a fuck or are just too fucking stupid. Why are you not running the other way ?

Posted by sleeping on Nov-04-2011 05:31:

something i noticed is that some labels includes a paragraph saying that
that the next one /next two productions under the same artist alias must be first sent to the label for refusal before signing with some other label.

Posted by Storyteller on Nov-04-2011 07:29:

Those are called options and are fair, depending on who you're working with. All of this stuff being discussed is very much depending on context.

Pages (2): « 1 [2]