The Stack Overflow podcast is back! Listen to an interview with our new CEO.
9

On 31 August 1992, Prince signed a new recording contract with Warner Bros. Records worth a potential $100 million. Which was more than several pop mega-deals struck earlier: Madonna's contract with Warners and Michael Jackson's pact with Sony Music, both estimated at $60 million each. The deal was made public on 4 September 1992. The specifics Advances ...


7

In the age of the internet - a platform in which you can be exposed to millions at once, why do record labels still exist? Record labels are basically your management staff and a bank. They pay advances, money to help you record your songs. They also help with publicity. There are hundreds of songs published everyday on SoundCloud and other sources that ...


3

No, not any more According to this Michael Jackson fan website http://www.mjjcollectors.com, this topic was specified in an agreement dated March 4th 1985. This letter signed by Michael Jackson states that the agreement lasted 18 months. USA for Africa shall be entitled to receive all such income accruing during the eighteen month period (. . .) no ...


2

I am pretty sure this has nothing to do with the recording company as they handle all licensing for their artists song repertoire through a PRO. Usually you obtain what is known as a "use license" from a PRO (Performance rights organization) and you pay a fee to them which goes to the original artist for the rights to use their song. Each case is different ...


2

Yes, very much so. I don't think that the previous answer is totally correct. The statement posted is valid enough, but it only extends to Jackson's own royalties due to him as a songwriter. It does not cover Lionel Richie's rights as co-writer, nor the record company' publishing rights. It's not clear whether this legal directive was binding on the 2010 ...


1

If a song is copyrighted, a recording artist does need to pay royalties to the owner of the copyright. This may be the original author(s) (not necessarily the artist who recorded the original version, as obviously many artits record songs authored by other people) or another entity (normally a corporation) to which the copyright was sold. As a far fetched ...


1

Completely agree with much of @Jacob Swanson's answer to why labels exist: the need for actual human beings promoting, distributing, marketing your music doesn't go away with technological advances (on the contrary one might argument). One note from me that might answer Bonus Q #1 is about the royalty split mentioned: thousands of labels do 50/50 splits on ...


1

I fully agree with topo's answer, though on many occasions I've known a remix to be done initially without any permission, just to see if the track will gain any traction on the dance floor, as a white label. Only if it does see some good feedback do the record company then go to the copyright owners for permission, based on the 'if it doesn't sell, no-one ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible