Does your label have the right to your masters?

cacti · Post by **cacti** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 3:48 am

My label wants the rights to the masters. Is this common for labels to do. Whats the pros/cons of this?
thanks.

tinymachines · Post by **tinymachines** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 4:22 am

I say boo to labels, but I'm one of those anarchist, anti-the extremely immoral system, let the record industry die types of musicians.

cacti · Post by **cacti** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 4:22 am

well its a small label. nothing major.

shuutobi · Post by **shuutobi** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 4:54 am

http://www.alankorn.com/articles/band_recordings.html

tinymachines · Post by **tinymachines** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:00 am

If you really want me to go into what I mean with that...

Believing the system we have to be based on theft, perpetrated either through coercion or direct violence, the system itself is immoral. Using money that was stolen is immoral. Therefore, using a court that costs countless tax dollars is immoral. There is no other way to uphold property rights in the modern world, than through a legal system that is based on violence and theft.
That's why I don't sign contracts that are meant to enforce for one side, or another, the terms agreed upon. If one doesn't comply, they are literally dealt with violently. That is the method used by a morally backward system.

People write music about peace, and love, and they produce it through a contract built on violence and mistrust. Ghandi said "You must be the change you want to see in the world." If you are looking for a world without violence, don't base your musical career on it.

luddy · Post by **luddy** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:24 am

The most usual thing is that if you have an artist contract with a label, then they 'own' the masters to the recordings they release for you. It doesn't matter as much as you might think. After all, they certainly have to have some kind of license to the masters in order to release and sell them etc. The main question is whether another label / online service can also license them without going through the label, i.e., directly from you. If you own the masters then you could sell licenses to two labels for example, say one for your own CD and a second one for a compilation. If the label owns the masters, to get a track on a compilation would require licensing from the label. Similarly, if a label owns the masters you can't simply pop MP3s of the recordings up on a web site for free download, etc. But in practice it would be odd to ask a label to distribute the recording and then circumvent them like that.

It's quite possible to license a label part of the rights, i.e., CDs but not digital downloads, or only distribution in Europe, etc.

Ownership of song (music and words) copyrights is a different thing altogether. It's not by any means automatic or standard for a label to own song copyrights. That would permit them to act as a publisher / agent for the songs, allowing other artists to record them for example.

-Luddy

tinymachines · Post by **tinymachines** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:41 am

luddy wrote:After all, they certainly have to have some kind of license to the masters in order to release and sell them etc.

Not at all. Only if property rights are being asserted through court of law do they have to have a license to release it.

stringtapper · Post by **stringtapper** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:55 am

tinymachines wrote:People write music about peace, and love, and they produce it through a contract built on violence and mistrust.

You've inspired me to write some music meant to incite violence and hatred and then lay absolutely no claim to it.

luddy · Post by **luddy** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 6:33 am

tinymachines wrote:
luddy wrote:After all, they certainly have to have some kind of license to the masters in order to release and sell them etc.
Not at all. Only if property rights are being asserted through court of law do they have to have a license to release it.

hmm?

All I'm saying is that most record labels will not release your music if you refuse to give them a license to do so, in writing.

-Luddy

alex.the.forge · Post by **alex.the.forge** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 9:13 am

don't sweat it man - like Luddy said, it's normal.

just make sure you're prolific and keep doing stuff so you're not too stressed about each track - better to get lots out there than to be so precious over everything that it stays in your bedroom….

chapelier fou · Post by **chapelier fou** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 11:05 am

cacti, for me it is simple :

did you produce your album by your own ? if it is the case, you are the producer, so you own 100% of the master.

Tarekith · Post by **Tarekith** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 3:44 pm

The whole point of a record label is to own your masters, so yes that's entirely normal. If you're really worried about it, ask them to insert a clause in the contract that states all rights revert to you if they go under or cease to operate.

tinymachines · Post by **tinymachines** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 4:51 pm

luddy wrote:
tinymachines wrote:
luddy wrote:After all, they certainly have to have some kind of license to the masters in order to release and sell them etc.
Not at all. Only if property rights are being asserted through court of law do they have to have a license to release it.
hmm?

All I'm saying is that most record labels will not release your music if you refuse to give them a license to do so, in writing.

-Luddy

This is exactly what makes record labels that require contracts violent.
Our system is so ass-backwards.

luddy · Post by **luddy** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 4:59 pm

tinymachines wrote: This is exactly what makes record labels that require contracts violent.
Our system is so ass-backwards.

Well, the good news is that it's still relatively easy to not sign a record contract.

-Luddy

tinymachines · Post by **tinymachines** » Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:23 pm

Yup, yet for some reason, so many people still do, supporting this violence.

Does your label have the right to your masters?

Does your label have the right to your masters?

Re: Does your label have the right to your masters?

Re: Does your label have the right to your masters?

Re: Does your label have the right to your masters?

Re: Does your label have the right to your masters?

Re: Does your label have the right to your masters?

Re: Does your label have the right to your masters?

Re: Does your label have the right to your masters?

Re: Does your label have the right to your masters?

Re: Does your label have the right to your masters?

Re: Does your label have the right to your masters?

Re: Does your label have the right to your masters?

Re: Does your label have the right to your masters?

Re: Does your label have the right to your masters?

Re: Does your label have the right to your masters?