MySpace
myspace music my music  featured playlists  top artists  music videos  karaoke  shows  forums 


MySpace.com | rss | sign in
FallingN2



Last Updated: 12/3/2009

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe

Status: Single
City: Fayetteville
State: North Carolina
Country: US
Signup Date: 4/7/2006

Blog Archive
[Older      Newer]
 /  / 
Tuesday, December 01, 2009 

Current mood:  excited
Category: Music
The group Falling In Two has gone through many members over the years, as is usual when trying to write new original music and sell it.
 
Marketing opportunites seem to be popping up all over the place with new TV shows, movies and just an endless number of online digital tools, the business for musicians with the ability to record themselves is just a great opportunity.

The future for Fi2 is bright and full of many opportunities, our presents on a National Level we hope with these changes, will be dramatic, offering us as well as many bands the tools and outlets to promote and sell music like never before.

We are going to be writting and recording some new material over the next several months, we are always open to any and all musicians who would like to have their music offered up for licensing and publishing.  Or if you would like us to help on a collaboration.

Doran Palmer - Drummer has been on all of the music of Falling In Two and is a great studio drummer with perfect timing, and has no problem recording to a click.  If you need a drummer for studio work check him out, he is usually open to almost any kind of music.  

Additionally, Fi2 will be looking for a piano/keyboard player for some future projects, hit us up here if you are interested.  

Female and male vocals are always welcome.  Anyone wishing to be involved in the future works of Fi2 Music Publishing please contact us and give us a link to some of your work or send us your mp3 file, or wav.  Fi2@fallingintwo.com  

Anyone with original and creative music and you need additioanl musicians for just recording or support hit us up.  We have many contacts around the area, and a lot of these musicians are available and willing to help you.
 

12:42 PM 
0 Comments
(Add Comment) |
Translate
Sunday, November 29, 2009 

Current mood:  determined
Category: Music
If you have been a musician for any length of time, you more then likely have recorded any number of songs with bands, or artist or you merely supplied beats, or what ever.  Mainly if you ever played your instrument in a song. 

Bands because of many reasons will go through a lot of members while building the final member list.  During this time, you could of performed on a song and recorded it, put it on physical media such as an LP, CD, Cassette Tape, 8 track or other. 

If you have been investigating gaining a copyright for a song that you or your band has written you may have notice that it isn't as simple as you may have originally thought.

For one thing, it takes time and money to gain a copyright, but on top of that, you need more than one.  The copyright most people think of when getting their song protected is the copyright for the actual words or composition of the song.  This is important of course, but you will also need to obtain a copyright for the version of the song that you have written.  This means for the recording.  This may leave you with a little bit of confusion on who actually owns the song that you've just written.

Dealing with music and song copyrights can be really confusing, so let's start with the easy part, the actually written song.  The lyrics of the song, as you probably know, can generally be found inside the CD cover of most music.  This cover will also let you know if the song is copyrighted (which I'm sure it is) and who it is copyrighted by.  Basically who wrote the song. 

This can get a little tricky because the copyright will actually be to anyone who had any part in putting together the song.  That means even if someone in your band only wrote one line of a five minute song, they are a joint owner in the song.  No matter what happens though, unless the copyright is sold, the band members will always own this song.
 
The sound recording copyright is where things get really complicated and messy.  Essentially the recording of the song is going to be owned by whoever it was that paid the studio and recording fees. (Usually the band would pay for it) That said, this will need to be laid out in a contract.

Normally if you have a record company pay for the studio time, they will have a part of the contract that says they own the recording of the song.  Since they are the owners, copyright laws state that they have the authority and control over the recording and reproduce and sell that recording whenever they would like.

They are the exclusive owners of that piece of work.  If you aren't working with a recording studio, then it will be up to the band members (again, a good idea to state in a contract) who will be the owner of the particular recording.  It is possible, just as with the first copyright, for each of the band members to be joint holders in the copyright as well.  All of this is stuff that should be decided before the band ever enters the recording studio.  So be sure to talk about it with your band or record company.
 
It should be pretty easy to see why it is necessary for a piece of recorded music to have two different copyrights.  This situation can become even more complicated however.  If you write a song and obtain a copyright for it, then your record company buys your studio time to record it, they will own the copyright for that recording. 

However, if you leave that company and re-record your song under a different company, the copyright for that recording will now go to your new company, but the copyright for the lyrics will always remain in your possession. 
 
The joint copyright that you will end up getting with all of the members that had a hand in writing the song can be confusing as well.  As the US Copyright Law states, everyone who took part in the writing of the song, will have a joint ownership of the copyright.  This joint copyright or ownership of the song is indivisible.  That means that you can't divide up the ownership of a song.  Even if someone wrote that one line, they have full ownership of the song. 

This can cause a lot of problems among band members because with each person a full owner of the song, the other members can't stop them from doing whatever it is they want to with the song as long as he/she pays the other members an equal share if it makes any money. 

You can see how this could cause some serious problems and there should be some kind of a contract written up between the members of the band to ensure that one person does not take free reign over the song, even though he/she would be completely within his/her rights by doing so.

For those of you who have been friends of Falling In Two and have followed its music, you will have noticed many band member changes over the years.  The same goes on today, where one member desided to go their own way.

Prior to the member leaving we had been in the studio recording the bands first full length album.  This is all music which was previously recorded and written to physical media.  These original recordings although rough are the original copy righted physical media material and belong to each member who performed on them.  In other words, the originally recorded material are the original copy right.

If a member leaves and desides to rerecord these songs with different members, a new copy right is in effect for the new versions.  however, if no major changes, such as lyrics, are changed, you actually have a copy right infringment from the original copy right.  Or, if no changes are made at all, then basically the new version is just a recorded song of an existing copy righted song and again, becomes a copy right infringment.  Basically just like taking a cover song and recording it and claiming it as your own.  "Not Legal"

It's is in your best interest as an artist to know your rights.  Make sure the members of your band know them and you all agree to them.  If you ever record your instrument to a piece of work it belongs to you 100%, no other member can claim the song as theirs, unless you are paid money for the tracks you did, which is basically called a work for hire.  Then you have no right to the song or future royalties.

But, if any member, takes a song that has already been recorded to physical media, works out a deal on their own with a publishing company, record label or otherwise and makes money from it.  You are owed a royalty.  Which is why it is so important to make sure you have copies of any work you have ever done.  You just never know what the future may hold for that preticular piece of work. 

Remember, if you played on or had a part in writing the lyrics, or any instrument, you own just as much right to that song or work as anyone else in the band.  No one single member can claim the music belongs to them. 

The band Falling In Two wrote as a group, although different members changed over the years, 28 songs.  Not all of these were recorded to physical media.  But, all of the songs that the band wrote over this time, even though there were member changes, and were recorded to physical media are the original copy rights, if any of these songs, even if a member desides to leave and re-recorded them again, the original member who performed on the original copy right is owed a royalty if the new version ever makes money.  If you are the one making money from the song, its in your best interest to either get the other members to release their part of the copy right to you so you have exclusive copy right ownership, or you could face a lawsuit for copy right violations. 

If you are band and are hiring studio musicians, you should always make sure you pay them for their time and have them sign a contract stating they no longer have any claim to the song. 

2:58 PM 
0 Comments
(Add Comment) |
Translate
Sunday, November 22, 2009 
Actually a good question.  But, with Radiohead self publishing their next album, this very well could be the future business model for most or all artist.

EMI, Sony BMG, Warner Music and all the rest of the old-school industry elephants, are at a lose for words, or what to do. 

It doesn't stop there either, now you also have Jamiroqual and Oasis who currently don't have contracts, and rumor has it that these acts might be the next to follow Radiohead.

You also have Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails calling his band a "Free Agent, free from any recording contract with any label" and envisions a more intimate relationship with his audience as a result.

The Eagles are self publishing directly with Wal Mart, Madonna left Warner and is working directly with Live Nation, Paul McCartney and even Coldplay is said to be threatening to leave.

Record companies have always depended on the revenue and cash flow generated from platinum selling artist to finance new talent.  If that revenue stream disappears, how can they compete.

Another business model which will more then likely be studied in business schools for years to come is with Robbie Williams.  Williams managers, Tim Clark and David Enthoven of IE Music are probably two of the most business savvy, straight shooting entrepreneurs in the business.  They worked diligently to build Williams into a global superstar and then broke industry tradition by virtually creating a new music industry model, the "360" deal.  They formed a joint venture between Robbie and EMI, for the small amount of $157 million. 

This model has since been duplicated by Linkin Park, Madonna and many others, and has become the rage in the record label business affairs departments and hailed as the model that will save the industry.

If you are a big enough star, you just don't need a record label anymore.  In fact, even if you're an unknown, Clark and Enthoven have shown that you don't need a major record company behind you to be successful. 

I don't know if Williams will sign with another record label or not.  I really doubt it. "Says Clark" The bottom line is that music has lost its economic value to consumers.  But it still has emotional value.  People will never stop listening to music.  They've just stopped paying for it.  So the challenge comes in figuring out how to capitalize on that emotional value. 

The next major issue confronting the big labels is funding, which is now coming to a head for the indie labels.  For years, the indies were considered the ugly step child by the majors, but this playing field is beginning to become more balanced.  

Essentially the majors are paying radio stations to play their music.  Independent labels had long complained that these under the table practices had kept their music disproportionately off the airwaves.  

After years of small labels being given less money than the big labels for thier products, both Apple and Microsoft are at last agreeing to provide indies with a greater cut of the profits from online music sales.

This surge of headlines has left many in the independent label community feeling that they may be in the best position they've been in for years, with the playing fields both online and on the airwaves finally approaching something like level.

"I think we went from being invisible to being very quickly recognized in the market," said Peter Gordon, president of Thirsty Ear Recordings.  "If you look at the confluence of factors in the market, you have the majors retreating and trying to develop new stategies, and you have indies being able to expand in the market."

With a direct effect on small labels' often fragile bottom lines, the pay hikes from Microsoft and Apple's iTunes were immediately welcomed.  This news comes after years in which independent labels had complained about being treated as second class citizens by the big digital music services.  A2IM was formed in part to lobby for more equity with the big labels.

The industry is becoming a very exciting and ever expanding even playing field for all that are involved.  I believe in the near future, unsigned artist will be close to having this same sort of freedom and financial support as the indie and majors.  With new deals happening every day.  

Some things to be watching for are the subscription services that are going to be coming out, and changes that are in effect for violations from illegal downloads and distribution.  You more then likely will see some additional changes in copy right laws and if you don't keep up with them or don't have a clue in the first place, if you are a musician, artist, band or beat maker you need to be keeping up with these new changes.  Very recently a bill was past during the night with the support of the RIAA, that gave a copy right to anyone who remaster an already recorded work.  The Majors were trying to figure out a way, to stop losing their portfolios as artist contracts ended.

This was caught however and this law did not go into effect.  

The future looks very exciting for artist, the playing field with the majors, indies and  independent hopfully will be balanced, which would be very welcome in having a much broader assortment of music available on the airwaves and in the digital and brick and mortor stores.    

 

1:42 PM 
0 Comments
(Add Comment) |
Translate
Saturday, November 21, 2009 

Category: Music

US Senate Panel Approves Radio Royalties For Performers


By Fawn Johnson Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)-

The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved a bill to require radio stations to pay royalties to performers when their music is aired, a top priority for the recording industry.


The Senate committee vote marks the furthest congressional progress yet for the measure, although it is still far from becoming law.


Broadcast radio stations now pay song royalties to songwriters and producers, but they don't pay performance fees for playing the artists' music.


In contrast, cable, satellite and Internet radio pay performance royalties.


Under the bill, large radio companies such as Clear Channel Communications Inc. and Cox Radio Inc. would be required to pay negotiated royalties to performers for playing their music on the air.


The measure includes features to accommodate financial woes of smaller broadcasters. Broadcasters making less than $50,000 a year could elect to pay $100 as a flat fee to play all the music they want. Mid-sized stations also would have flat-fee royalty options on a tiered basis.


A similar bill passed the House Judiciary Committee earlier this year. Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., one of the lead sponsors in the House, has acknowledged that the measure isn't likely to see a House floor vote this year because it doesn't yet have enough supporters.


The National Association of Broadcasters has been lobbying aggressively against the bill and has garnered enough members in the House to stop the bill from becoming law.


The NAB argues that performers receive free promotions worth millions when their music airs on the radio.


Broadcasters also say the extra cost for the royalties would be devastating to their businesses. The Minority Media and Telecommunications Council and the National Association of Media Brokers told Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., earlier this week that the legislation would throw at least a third of minority broadcasters into bankruptcy.


The musicians' supporters - the Recording Industry Association of America and the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists among them - say the U.S. is the only industrialized country in the world that doesn't pay performance royalties. That disparity costs American musicians between $70 million and $100 a million a year, according to Leahy.


The bill also includes language to set the same general royalty rates across different broadcast platforms, a particular concern for Internet radio. Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., has asked for such changes, and further negotiation on those provisions is expected.


We will be keeping an eye on this and see where it goes.  Lets hope the majors are not trying to figure out a way to stop all the unsigned and indie artist from being able to self promote or have their music broadcast over internet or local radio with out the support or being signed to one of  the majors.  I think we all know this would be bad for the music industry as a whole.  Sounds like possibly greed is playing a big part in this whole concept.  That of coarse would just be my opinion.   
1:18 PM 
0 Comments
(Add Comment) |
Translate