{"id":4008,"date":"2014-01-30T13:26:11","date_gmt":"2014-01-30T13:26:11","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/skylight.gr\/administrator_wordpress\/index.php\/2014\/01\/30\/why-labels-are-sitting-on-a-time-bomb-of-youtube-lawsuits\/"},"modified":"2014-01-30T13:26:11","modified_gmt":"2014-01-30T13:26:11","slug":"why-labels-are-sitting-on-a-time-bomb-of-youtube-lawsuits","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/skylight.gr\/index.php\/2014\/01\/30\/why-labels-are-sitting-on-a-time-bomb-of-youtube-lawsuits\/","title":{"rendered":"Why Labels Are Sitting on a Time-Bomb of YouTube Lawsuits\u2026"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/upload.wikimedia.org\/wikipedia\/commons\/thumb\/0\/06\/YouTube_logo_2013.svg\/800px-YouTube_logo_2013.svg.png\" border=\"0\" width=\"213\" height=\"84\" \/><\/h2>\n<h2><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/upload.wikimedia.org\/wikipedia\/en\/thumb\/0\/01\/YouTube_Homepage_Dec_7_2012.png\/270px-YouTube_Homepage_Dec_7_2012.png\" border=\"0\" width=\"217\" height=\"117\" \/><\/h2>\n<h2>A warning to labels: Based on the way your artist contracts likely  read, you may be setting yourselves up to be sued by your artists over  YouTube money.<\/h2>\n<p>The issue: distributors issuing YouTube  synchronization licenses and collecting YouTube synchronization money on  behalf of labels are mixing two distinct and separate types of income  streams together;   <!--more-->  distribution money and synchronization money. The  distributor is then applying the label\/distributor contractual distribution terms, deductions and payments as opposed to the label\/artist synchronization contractual terms, deductions and payments.<\/p>\n<p>As labels cannot use the distributor-provided royalty calculation for synchronization money, it creates two big problems.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">1) The label must pull apart and redo the  entire distributor statement to accurately calculate the  synchronization royalty for the artist.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">2) If synchronization money is owed to  the artist (i.e. the artist has recouped their advance) the label needs  to come up with the money as the distributor is withholding the label\u2019s  money.<\/p>\n<p>These two problems are occurring as the right of \u201cdistribution\u201d and the right of \u201csynchronization\u201d fall under different contractual legal provisions and copyright uses:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">\u2022 The right of Distribution for the sound recording<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">\u2022 The right of Distribution and Reproduction for a license to synchronize a sound recording with a moving image<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<h2><strong>Understanding the Issue: The Royalty Rate From The Sale of  Pre-Recorded\u00a0Music Vs. The Royalty Rate from Synchronization Licensing<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>In most traditional label recording contracts there are two royalty rates for the artist:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">1) A royalty from the money made from the sale of pre-recorded music; for example, the sale of a CD or a download.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">2) A royalty from the money made from the  synchronization license of the music to a third party; for example, the  license of a master recording allowing it to be \u201csynchronized\u201d with a  moving image like a movie, TV show, commercial, YouTube video etc.<\/p>\n<p>The percentages that are paid out to the artist by the label for these two different royalties are dramatically different.<\/p>\n<p>For the sale of the music on a CD or a download, artists typically receive 12% to 18% of the list price.<\/p>\n<p>For the license of a master recording allowing it to be  \u201csynchronized\u201d with a moving image like a movie, TV show, commercial,  YouTube video etc., the artist typically receives 50% of the payment.<\/p>\n<p>In both cases, the money gets paid to the artist only if the artist has recouped any advances paid to the artist by the label.<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<h2><strong>The Royalty Rate From The Sale of Pre-Recorded Music<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>Money calculated and paid to the artist by the label from the sale of  pre-recorded music works as follows, and applies only to the sale of  pre-recorded music \u2014 not to synchronization income.<\/p>\n<p>The artist signs a deal with a label stating the label will pay (on  average) between 12% to 18% of the list price of the pre-recorded music.<\/p>\n<p>The label signs a contract with a distributor to have the distributor  place the label\u2019s music onto the shelves of the digital and physical  music stores.<\/p>\n<p>In the physical world (yes, it still exists), the stores order CDs  from the distributor at a wholesale price, mark the CDs up and pay the  distributor the wholesale price for the CDs they sell.<\/p>\n<p>In the digital world, a song is downloaded and the distributor collects the money from the download.<\/p>\n<p>In return for this service the distributor takes a percentage of the  money it collects. This percentage is called a \u201cDistribution Fee\u201d and is  usually somewhere between 17% to 30% of what is paid to the  distributor.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, every CD shipped out by the distributor to a store can  be returned by the store to the distributor for a credit against future  purchases (Returns are a moot point in the digital world). Because of  the returns, there is a provision in the label\/distributor agreement  called a \u201cReturn Reserve\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>The \u201cReturn Reserve\u201d allows the distributor to take its \u201cDistribution  Fee\u201d and then pay the record label 70% to 80% of the money it collects.  The other 20% to 30% of the money is paid to the label in equal parts  every 90 days over the next 12 months. This \u201creserve\u201d protects the  distributor from overpaying the label for CDs that are returned to the  distributor for a credit. (This obviously does not happen with digital  download sales).<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<h2><strong>The Royalty Rate from Synchronization Licensing<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>Money paid to the artist by the label from the license of  pre-recorded music to be synchronized with a moving image usually works  as follows.<\/p>\n<p>Traditionally, the entity that wants to license the music to  \u201csynchronize\u201d with a moving image (like a TV show, film etc) pays a flat  up front fee directly to the label. This fee is usually split 50% for  the artist and 50% for the label. The artist only gets paid their 50% if  the they have recouped any label advances.<\/p>\n<p>That\u2019s it. No return reserves etc.<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<h2><strong>YouTube Money is Synchronization Licensing Money, NOT Pre-Recorded Physical, Digital or Stream Money<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>In order for music to be legally used in a YouTube video, there must  be a synchronization license granted from the label to YouTube as the  music is being \u201csynchronized\u201d with a moving image, in this case a  YouTube video. This even applies if it\u2019s just a static image of an album  cover.<\/p>\n<p>The problem is that some distributors are issuing synchronization  licenses on behalf of labels and collecting the synchronization money  from YouTube. The distributors treat the synchronization income as  distribution income and apply the distribution expenses and deductions  to the synchronization income described above. This is not the right  approach. For instance, if the TV show Mad Men wants to license a song,  it calls, negotiates and pays the record label (and music publisher).  The distributor is not involved nor does it receive or touch any of this  money.<\/p>\n<p>In the same way a label does not let a distributor take any revenue  or make deductions from a Mad Men synchronization license, the label  cannot let the distributor do so with revenue from a YouTube income  either. Thus the problem.<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<h2><strong>The Legal Liability Distributors May Be Creating for Labels<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>Because labels are not  contractually allowed to deduct distribution fees, returns and other  expenses from the artist\u2019s synchronization money, the label must go  through the extremely difficult task of reformatting and recalculating  the entire monthly statement received from the distributor in regards to  YouTube revenue. (For those of you who have not see a YouTube  statement, they literally can go on for millions of lines each month at a  song level. Now add this on top of all the other itemized sales  information from the distributor for downloads, streams and physical  sales as well as the itemized expenses across all releases by a label)<\/p>\n<p>To redo the statements each month, the label must:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">1) Manually identify and separate the YouTube synchronization money from all the other money and expenses<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">2) Add back in the \u201cDistribution Fee\u201d<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">3) Calculate and add back in the \u201cReturn Reserve\u201d (with no distribution fee)<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">4) Isolate and remove all the other  non-related expenses the distributor fronted and deducted  (manufacturing, advertising, returns, return processing, shipping, etc.)<\/p>\n<p>Once the royalty is accurately calculated it, if the artist is owed  money, the label has to come up with the cash as the distributor did not  pay all the synchronization money to the label.<\/p>\n<p>This creates the legal liability as the artist can sue the label if the label does not:<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">\u2022 Accurately calculate royalties<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 30px;\">\u2022 Credit and\/or pay the artist (if they are recouped) what they are owed.<\/p>\n<p>This is exactly what caused Eminem to sue <a href=\"http:\/\/nyti.ms\/1jwHOqq\">Universal<\/a> and a recent artist class action lawsuit against <a href=\"http:\/\/www.billboard.com\/biz\/articles\/news\/legal-and-management\/1567145\/warner-music-hit-with-class-action-lawsuit-over\">Warner Music<\/a>,  which Warner has just offered to settle. Although these cases were not  exactly the same scenario as the topic of this article, they are  absolutely about the label not calculating the appropriate royalty rate  on digital licensing income, and are thus worth noting.<\/p>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<h2><strong>The Solution:<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>First, labels should check their existing distribution agreements to  learn if they granted the explicit and specific right to synchronization  to the distributor for YouTube. If not, the label is within its right  to demand 100% of any YouTube money the distributor may have collected  along with the YouTube provided accounting.<\/p>\n<p>Next, the easiest and most obvious solution is to isolate the two  income streams so that distribution expenses and delays in payment are  not applied to synchronization money. Labels can do this by entering  into their own direct licensing agreement\u00a0with YouTube or using a  company like <a href=\"http:\/\/www.audiam.com\/\">Audiam<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>In both cases, the label will get clear and accurate accounting for  their YouTube synchronization money, and thereby allow it to calculate  the right royalties for its artists. In addition, no portion of the  money will be subject to distribution fees, return reserves or expenses  from other artist releases. This means a label does not need to find a  way to fill the financial gap to pay its artists (Full  disclosure:\u00a0Audiam, like SoundExchange (an entity that also works for  labels) takes an \u201cadministration\u201d fee for its service. Contractually, an  administration fee is different than a \u201cdistribution fee.\u201d)<\/p>\n<p>If a distributor would like to expand its services into  synchronization licensing, it should make certain the label understands  the rights grant it is granting to them. In addition, the distributor  should provide separate accounting for the synchronization money that is  not mixed with inappropriate distribution deductions and expenses.<\/p>\n<h3>If not, the distributor could be setting up the label to get sued by the artists that feed them both.<\/h3>\n<p>\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>Source: Digital Music News<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>A warning to labels: Based on the way your artist contracts likely read, you may&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"nf_dc_page":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[23],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4008","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-music-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/skylight.gr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4008","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/skylight.gr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/skylight.gr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skylight.gr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skylight.gr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4008"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/skylight.gr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4008\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/skylight.gr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4008"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skylight.gr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4008"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/skylight.gr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4008"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}