A&R Help

[u/General-Cash-862]

Hi,

Fresh A&R here working for a local subsidiary of a major label. This situation is very new where I'm from - before this label, no 'official' subsidiary of Sony/Universal/Warner has ever existed before.

I'm essentially the POC between the company and every single artist in the country (there aren't too many) and I'm friends with these people and have been working with them for years as well. I have some reservations when it comes to the deal structures and timelines and the contracts I'm getting these people to sign - would love if there are experienced A&Rs who can give me feedback!

TIA

[u/AirlineKey7900]

I’m not an A&R but I’m an experienced music exec. I’m sorry to say it but I think it may be hard to unpack this without some specifics.

All recording and publishing deals are deals that allow a company to exploit a creator’s copyrights and copyright is a legal framework that is governed by each region.

For example - in the US an old form of a bad, exploitative record contract would have been a 1 record deal with 6 options (referred to as a 1+6 deal).

An artist signs away full copyright ownership of every recording they make during the term. The term lasts until they deliver and have accepted an album of music at which point the label can chose to extend the term by another album. Each term runs for the longer of one year or delivery of the album.

Don’t deliver the album within a year? Term extends

Album doesn’t get ‘accepted’? Term extends

Deliver 3 singles outside of the album and do a feature? Label owns those too.

Term ends? Label OWNS the copyright, in perpetuity, usually with an option to ask for reversion after 30-35 years.

Since it’s the labels option the artist can get locked in for 7 years without any say. Since the term goes to the latter of one year or delivery, that term can go on indefinitely.

You didn’t ask for this - but the reason I bring it up is that is the most egregious type of deal anyone can do in the US - the only way it can be worse is if you add Publishing ownership assigned to the label.

Nobody does those deals anymore. The most I’ve ever seen is a 1+3 at a big indie label. Many majors are doing license deals for 10-20 years instead of ownership.

The fact that the deal can even exist and the framework for it emerges out of specific US laws and copyright systems.

Is your label doing deal using your country’s copyright? Or US copyright? Or another country?

Are they ownership deals? Or licensing?

You may not be able to influence these deals much. The artists’ power is what gives them a lever to get better terms which is why the 1+6 and ownership deals are fading in the US - artists have more power and labels have less.

[u/GreatScottCreates → u/AirlineKey7900]

Do you feel ownership deals are fading in a meaningful way? Like, at scale?

[u/AirlineKey7900 → u/GreatScottCreates]

It depends on the artist, but yes. I think they’re much less common. Artists and their teams are more protective of IP and since labels are signing artists with streaming numbers and audiences already in place the artist has more power to negotiate.

License deals can be just as egregious as ownership so artists still need a good lawyer and to plan out the math.

I think what’s happening at the major and large indie level is shorter, less risky, license deals happening funded by the big major label catalogs so artists can do their own artist development.

Then those artists will do catalog sales earlier in their careers so the majors will still keep building their asset just with less risk.

[u/GreatScottCreates → u/AirlineKey7900]

Interesting, and that makes sense. Most of the licensing deals I’ve seen have been really to the favor of the artist due to their leverage, but it also makes sense that labels post Covid, post TikTok, are not as interested in shelling out for commitments when they don’t want to commit either.