What to do with Pete Best?

June 6, 2006 7:44 AM

Locally signed band ready to release their cd is about to fire their lead guitarist. He's performed on the cd and written two of the songs as well. Would like to know the legal ramifications of handing him his walking papers...

So, like the description says. Local band about to release cd - signed with an indie label (but my understanding is it was more of a handshake type deal than a 'contract'). The band wants to fire the guitarist but he's performed on all the tunes and written two. Although I think they'd be cool dropping his two tunes, what about his recorded parts on songs he didn't write? Since the cd isn't technically released yet, would the band have to get this guy to sign a 'permission to reproduce' doc or what? Given the nature of what's going on in this group, I feel it could be ugly. No contracts between members or the recording company/studio. Local act, no paperwork period - accords are made over a beer. So, does anyone have any ideas here? Thanks

posted by j.p. Hung to media & arts (12 comments total)

Hopefully, the band has some documentation from the deal, not just a handshake. Hopefully, the band is able to figure out what "percentage" of each track was played by the member they're about to fire. Hopefully, his two songs weren't the hits, because they have to pay royalties on those and will probably be better off axing them from the record.

And, hopefully, the band knows enough to go see an entertainment lawyer, this afternoon.
posted by jon_kill at 7:55 AM on June 6, 2006

i don't know what city you're in, but in the US many major (and minor) metropolitan areas have a Lawyers for the Arts group which provides pro bono or cut-rate work in exactly these circumstances. lawyers + arts +city

getting a lawyer involved always sounds dire, but often, when the parties are all mostly agreed, all it does is make things easier. when the parties aren't mostly agreed, it keeps things from being much worse.
posted by crush-onastick at 8:30 AM on June 6, 2006

has the cd been mastered yet? ... safest move is to ditch the two songs he wrote and rerecord the lead guitar parts

another question - why do they think they have to fire him? ... can they release the cd, put up with him for awhile and then fire him?
posted by pyramid termite at 8:33 AM on June 6, 2006

Generally the fact that he played on the album isn't very consequential and can be worked around for points on the sales.

It's harder to deal with what he's written because then you get into publishing issues which can be sticky. I'd dump the songs he helped write.
posted by bitdamaged at 8:33 AM on June 6, 2006

pyramid, my understanding is that the group doesn't want to keep him just to release it and then fire him. I guess they have some moral issue with going that route.

crush - thanks for the links, will look into that.
posted by j.p. Hung at 8:40 AM on June 6, 2006

Is this the kind of indie label that makes money, or the kind that is doing it mainly for the love of music?

If it is the latter, I'd suggest offering him a compromise: you get to use the recordings as is on the records for no royalty except for the two he wrote, which he can use at no royalty to promote his new band. (He's a songwriter; there will be another band playing those songs.)

If it is a money-making label, get to a lawyer and/or re-record those tracks to remove him.
posted by InfidelZombie at 9:05 AM on June 6, 2006

A band I was once in released an EP of songs I'd co-written and recorded shortly after I left the band. The sleevenotes said 'All songs written and performed by Band X. Band X is Person A, Person B and Person C', with absolutely no mention of Person D (= nylon). I found out after they sent me a copy of the EP (hey, here's a copy of our new CD), and I contacted them to tell them that this was well out of order, I was upset that they left me off the credits and that I'd like an equal share of the profits from the CD, but the response was 'but you're not in the band any more'. It was a small independent release (1000 copies, I think, or maybe 500), and no contracts were signed at any stage, so I'm shit outta luck.

Since you're talking about a similar small independent release with no paperwork, my feeling is that the guitarist would be similarly shit outta luck regardless of whether you released his songs or not, since it's hardly going to be worth going to court over - the expenses involved would far outweigh any royalty payments. Is he registered with a publishing company? If so, you'll likely have to give him some royalties in order for the disc to be manufactured in the first place. The MCPS covers that in the UK. If he is fired, he really ought to be mentioned in the credits, just out of common decency.

But I'm not a lawyer, and my experience is of the UK, where we're not quite so sue-happy.
posted by nylon at 9:34 AM on June 6, 2006

I think it would depend on if the member about to be fired is a full partner in the band (read corporation) or an employee of the band. If for example the band was paid to play gigs and the money was kept in a separate band account, and players received payment from the account then a case could be made that all members are employees of the band. In this case the songs which he only played on would require no additional payment. If individual writers received additional money for writing songs that the band plays then a case could be made that he was duly compensated for his contributions, and no further payment is necessary because the band owns the songs.
posted by Gungho at 10:14 AM on June 6, 2006

And THAT is why songwriters need to copyright first thing, before the cd is made!
posted by konolia at 10:28 AM on June 6, 2006

As far as I'm aware, the copyright in the sound recording is generally owned by whoever bankrolls the recording. In this case, if the indie label paid for the recording then it probably owns the copyright on it (that's denoted by the P in a circle you can see on the back of most CDs). So the recorded parts in all likelihood won't be an issue in this case.

The songwriting, though, is a separate issue entirely. The band members might need a music lawyer to sort it out if they can't do it amongst themselves.
posted by macdara at 11:18 AM on June 6, 2006

And THAT is why songwriters need to copyright first thing, before the cd is made!

Copyright is automatic.

Speaking of which, there's no reason he couldn't prevent the band from ever playing those songs again. Without any kind of contract, the copyright will stay with the original author.

If he was really pissed and hired a lawyer he might be able to really mess with you, I'm not sure.

If I were you, I'd not do anything until after you were signed. If I owned a record company, especially a small one I'd stay away from any band with any kind of acrimony.
posted by delmoi at 3:18 PM on June 6, 2006

Get thee to a lawyer. That's the only answer that's anywhere remotely useful, unless we have entertainment lawyers on askmefi.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 7:19 PM on June 6, 2006