Band advice wanted - Songwriting credit issues

[Ruiner]

Just wanted to gauge some opinion on something that's reared it's head recently in a band I joined last October.

I've been in a few bands over the years, and it's always been a case of once an idea/riff is brought forward and other members of the band start writing parts to it and arranging it (adding new sections/dropping sections) it becomes the 'bands' song (as in everyone has had a hand in making it what it is) and so unless you'd written every section of it, you wouldn't use the material with another band (and even if you had, you often wouldn't out of courtesy to the people who'd added their own parts and helped make it what it is)

After a few post-rehearsal pints in the pub, someone joked about not knowing if they could go through all the hassle of forming a new band if this one were to implode, and the guitarist chipped in with "well I'm ok, I can always just take 'my' songs and get another bass player and drummer" (we're a three piece).

After further, less jokey discussion, it turns out that our guitarist views the situation a bit differently to me. He sees it more as a case of, if he brings the idea/riff forward, it is essentially his song to do with as he pleases regardless of how we ultimately may have shaped them.

This makes me a bit uneasy. Maybe I've just been lucky in the past with other bands I've been in.

Sometimes ideas are brought forward that are completely changed into something different to the original idea, with us all bouncing ideas off each other. My viewpoint is, If myself and the drummer were not involved , the song wouldn't be what it is.

The guitarist suggests that the songs would end up different if he started a new band with different people playing them anyway (which I'm sure they probably would), but surely unless he's keeping a written log of who suggested what, who added which riff etc. for every song, there's going to be a situation where he's using material that we've written and claiming it as his own?

Is this how most bands operate?

[Twigman]

[quote name='Ruiner' timestamp='1333371663' post='1600663']


Is this how most bands operate?
[/quote]

In my experience yes, mostly.

in the bands I've been in whoever brings the initial idea gets the lion's share of the publishing.
The bands i've worked with, and there have been a few, generally have a split 40% initial idea, 40% lyrics, 20% balance split equally as 'arrangement' unless it is agreed that one individual has contributed significantly more.

[Lozz196]

In my view as both someone who has written the initial riff/idea/whole song, and as someone who has played in a band where someone wrote the initial riff/idea/whole song, whilst the end product is the bands, the song is essentially that of the person who came up with the riff/idea.

I`d have no problems with any of the guys I was in bands with playing the songs I wrote (usually from start to finish, including the structure) with whatever bands they have gone onto, but from a personal point, I wouldn`t feel comfortable playing songs on the other foot so to speak. If I really liked the song then I would ask the writer if they were ok with me playing it in a band without them, and respect their wishes either way.

As a footnote to this, in my early music career, I was always the person who never contributed to the writing, yet my opinions stem from that point, prior to writing anything. I`ve not suddenly gone "precious" about my song-writing and changed opinion.

[Alec 'Aleb' Mills]

I very much agree with you - It would only be 'his' song if he had orchestrated every part to such an extent, where if you change anything it doesn't fit the song. If its only a riff, then it is most certainly a bands song.
But then again it depends what is coming of the band and what styles the bands are aiming for, and how they use this riff.
I suppose it can be quite difficult sometimes.

Edited April 2, 2012 by Alec 'Aleb' Mills

[BigRedX]

Which is why if you're serious about what you do as an originals band you need to get some sort of song writing shares agreement in writing ASAP.

I've been in bands where song writing credits have been done both ways. My current band splits everything equally 4 ways between the members irrespective of how much or little input they have in the writing of each song. That way when it comes to deciding which songs to record/release there's no financial incentive to pick one song over another so in theory the best songs are used since everyone benefits equally from a financial PoV. However I've also been in bands in the past where the song writing credits have been limited to whoever wrote the lyrics and the main musical idea. Both approaches are equally valid so long as you agree on them at the outset.

IMO the important parts of the songs are the bits that the general listener uses the remember/recognise the song by. In practice that means the lyrics and vocal melody (and possibly any easy to hum instrumental tunes). Everything else is just the arrangement. Basically anything that you can leave out without rendering the song unrecognisable could be considered irrelevant to the song writing. No matter how good and essential you think your basslines are, unless they are up there with something like "She's Lost Control" or "Under Pressure" you're no going to be looking at a share of the credits (and royalties) unless it was your bass part that kicked off the creative process or you have an agreement in place that allocates everyone shares on the songs.

[MB1]

MB1.
...Is this how bands operate?
Words Morrisey/ Music Marr ?
without Mike Joyce and Andy Rourke surely your listening to The Arthur Smiths?

[jakenewmanbass]

By suggesting that songs would sound different with another band he is implicitly acknowledging that you have a creative input, if there is even a sniff of a prospect that there will be any revenue from your efforts GET IT IN WRITING!!!!
Some of the best 'friends' in the music biz have been brought to deep hatred stakes over this sort of disagreement. get it n writing, agree the terms, get it in writing, and finally get it in writing.
If there is no prospect of revenue then I suggest you just continue to have fun!

[brensabre79]

Unfortunately the Publishing rights are not very friendly to the drummers and bass players who lay down the groove that makes a track rock.
They are only interested in three things.
1. The Words
2. The 'top-line' melody (usually the tune that the above Words are sung to)
3. The Chords (least important of the three as sometimes the melody can work with alternative chords)

Everything else (and I mean everything!) is just arrangement/production - no publishing royalties for either of those unless names are specified for the arrangement, and the exact arrangement is used. Change the drum beat slightly, fiddle with the bass line - voila different arrangement, no royalties. Just the writer of top line and chords get royalties for publishing.

THIS is the single biggest factor in the splitting up of / fighting in bands, for 'Musical differences' read financial differences. Spandau / Smiths etc. etc. loads of high profile court cases about this exact issue.

More recently a lot of bands have become aware of the disparity in royalties, and where all members agree that they put the songs together as a whole they make an agreement on songwriting credits in advance. Hence you will see (all songs written by <band name>). This can reduce a lot of squabbles further down the line, but can create its own set of problems too.

My advice, whatever you do, get this sorted as soon as you can so that everyone in the band is happy and you can carry on without this hanging over your heads.

And don't forget to GET IT IN WRITING

[Bilbo]

There is a difference between composing and arranging. If composer comes in with fully written charts with all the parts written out, you are playing his song. If someone brings in a sketch of a composed song and then everyone else chips in their own parts, you would expect a token royalty (main composer gets 40%, everyone else 5%). If it is brought in as a set of chords and the singer adds a melody, the bass player a middle eight and the drummer an istrumental break then it is more likely to be a band song with 4 even shares. But its all open to negotiation and legal challenge. Best sort it out before you write Bohemian Rhapsody: The Return.

In jazz, it used to be very common for agents or bandleaders to get a share of the royalties of songs they had no part whatsoever in writing. Its a difficult area and fraught with pitfalls.

[oggiesnr]

[quote name='jakenewmanbass' timestamp='1333373242' post='1600696']
By suggesting that songs would sound different with another band he is implicitly acknowledging that you have a creative input, if there is even a sniff of a prospect that there will be any revenue from your efforts GET IT IN WRITING!!!!
Some of the best 'friends' in the music biz have been brought to deep hatred stakes over this sort of disagreement. get it n writing, agree the terms, get it in writing, and finally get it in writing.
If there is no prospect of revenue then I suggest you just continue to have fun!
[/quote]

+1

It may not seem important now but if one of the band's songs were to be covered etc etc then it could become a major financial issue. It also protects you if rather than supplying arrangements and ideas you happen to write the words and tune of a song that gets to be a hit.

Steve

PS If you are writing material there is always a chance of the prospect of revenue

[pietruszka]

There a couple of things you can do.
1. Agree around a table what should go to who in terms of chief songwriting credits. If the guitarist takes the material elsewhere with a different bassist+drummer and it sounds different then its a different song surely. Remember you can't copyright a chord sequence, so if the melody changes then its surely a different song.
2. Straight out agree that anything the band does is split 3 ways (in your case).
3. Credit the lyrics and instrumental writing to those relevant.
4. Get a declaration of trust drawn up by a solicitor.

Any way you go get it in writing as Jake says. This is absolutely crucial to avoid unnecessary disputes escalating.

We've all been there!




Dan

[derrenleepoole]

Man, this thread has given me some food for thought. My originals band from a few years ago had material written mostly by myself and the keyboardist. Either I would have a groove idea and the keyboardist would do the filling out, or he would have some charts and a melody and I would find a bass part to match. Quite often the drummer didn't write the music with the exception to offer ideas for arrangements etc. Now we're no longer together, I'd never given it much thought about what belongs to who. Mmm... no you've got me thinking and pondering.

[SteveK]

brensabre79's post pretty much covers it.
However, publishing today is not quite as simple and straight-forward as perhaps it once was. Coming up with a bass line, guitar part, keyboard part or drum part doesn't normally count as songwriting. As bs79 says, this is part of the 'arrangement' process. The writer of the melody and lyrics are normally considered to be the writers. BUT, if your contribution can be proved to have had a significant part in the records success, then you [i]may[/i] be in line for a share of the publishing.

[SteveK]

[quote name='jakenewmanbass' timestamp='1333373242' post='1600696']
By suggesting that songs would sound different with another band he is implicitly acknowledging that you have a creative input,
[/quote]That would be of little relevance in a dispute over songwriting royalties.
[quote name='pietruszka' timestamp='1333377609' post='1600800']
There a couple of things you can do.
If the guitarist takes the material elsewhere with a different bassist+drummer and it sounds different then its a different song surely.
[/quote]No! The only way that it would be a different song is if the singer sang significantly different words to a significantly different melody.

[musophilr]

Check out the MU for Partnership Agreements which cover this subject.

[Spike Vincent]

Something like this needs to be sorted out right at the start.The only genuine millionaire rock star I know - Ian Dench of EMF - did advise me on this.He had a 90% cut of the publishing and copyright,largely because he contributed 90% of the work.He is now a very wealthy man.The rest of EMF aren't.My understanding is that copyright exists automatically upon recording,(sound or written down) so if none of your old ( or current) bands material was recorded then no copyright exists,so anyone can do with it what they wish.There's plenty of examples of ex band members claiming their share of royalties,and failing,the afore mentioned Smiths rythm section,Spandau Ballet spring to mind,and of course Nirvana.If you're writing original material,get the legal aspect sorted asap..

[Gust0o]

[quote name='Bilbo' timestamp='1333374540' post='1600723']
There is a difference between composing and arranging. If composer comes in with fully written charts with all the parts written out, you are playing his song. If someone brings in a sketch of a composed song and then everyone else chips in their own parts, you would expect a token royalty (main composer gets 40%, everyone else 5%). If it is brought in as a set of chords and the singer adds a melody, the bass player a middle eight and the drummer an istrumental break then it is more likely to be a band song with 4 even shares. But its all open to negotiation and legal challenge. Best sort it out before you write Bohemian Rhapsody: The Return.

In jazz, it used to be very common for agents or bandleaders to get a share of the royalties of songs they had no part whatsoever in writing. Its a difficult area and fraught with pitfalls.
[/quote]

This is pretty much how we play it - as a result, we have a lot of 'band' tracks; with a smattering of those brought in by individuals... the bulk of them from me, pleasingly

But yes, sometimes it can feel a little forced or pushy to be discussing credits when you're in the early days of a band - you've other things on your mind; you're having fun; you've no idea where it all might go... but it's best to get some form of agreement in place, good and early.

Pity you had such a divergence with the guitarist. I'm not sure entirely where it leaves you with him, but I think you'll want to get it nailed - I mean, you wouldn't want him swanning off and assuming your best material is his to do with as he pleases, if it genuinely isn't.

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='SteveK' timestamp='1333379322' post='1600847']
That would be of little relevance in a dispute over songwriting royalties.
No! The only way that it would be a different song is if the singer sang significantly different words to a significantly different melody.
[/quote]
This is it. Song copyright commonly applies to lyrics and melody alone, anything else is arrangement. You can get paid for arranging but it's not songwriting.

[Ruiner]

Thanks guys, some great advice there and loads of information I had no idea about.

[quote name='Bilbo' timestamp='1333374540' post='1600723']
If it is brought in as a set of chords and the singer adds a melody, the bass player a middle eight and the drummer an istrumental break then it is more likely to be a band song with 4 even shares. But its all open to negotiation and legal challenge. [/quote]

This is generally how it is with this band 99% of the time.

I think a sit down chat is in order to try and clear this stuff up. If the guitarist still doesn't see the situation as an equal split (and isn't willing to get it put in writing) I guess I have no option other than to leave and start something else up. While I'm not overly keen on doing that, it's sure as hell better than getting 12 months down the line, being offered some kind of deal (i can dream ) and finding out then.

Once again, big thanks for sharing your experiences and advice.

[Twigman]

I believe that one of the reasons U2 have managed to stay together so long is that everything they do is split equally 4 ways.

[JTUK]

It doesn't really matter so much how you cut the cloth..just that you have an 'agreement' which might need to have a legal slant to it in some shape or form.

I've worked with drummers who think their drumming constitutes a writing credit and therefore a royalty and are VERY serious about that position.

[achknalligewelt]

We are in the process of restarting a band from the old days. At the time, the bulk of the material was written by me (then on guitar), our bassist and about half the lyrics by our singer. Our drummer didn't write, but always took the lead in the feel of the song as he was and is very gifted in that area.

Our processes were very chaotic, and what would emerge would be very much all our own work - words by one, chords by another, re-jigged and made into a workable live number by a third. These are your chords, half his words and putting it in 6/8 was my idea. If a song went through our pricess and came out the other end much the same as it went in, well, we all just agreed that this was the best thing for it. It's still a joint decision. I once tried to give our bassist a line that I'd transcribed for him, and although he very politely played it as I'd done it, he then asked me, with just a touch of menace, never to do it again. I concurred.

We just credited the whole thing to the band, because had we not I think we would have seriously negelected the work of non-writing members (which could have been any one of us on any particular song), and sticking it all on liner notes would have been utterly tedious both to compile and read. We know what's what. Most people don't give a damn anyway, and it's not as if we ever made anything from publishing anyway.

However, more recently I have been working with a friend on a set of songs that he has written, and apart from one middle 8 which I wrote, I haven't put anything creative in. He gave us total freedom with the parts we played, and quite a hand in arrangement, but we all understood that these were his songs, and his name will go on them and not ours. He is selling his songs, and I expect only a mechanical royalty on any play his versions get. If Adele picks one up, he'll be the beneficiary. But so he should be, I was just doing a job for a mate.

[TheGreek]

So this is the legal position!!??...seems a bit unfair really as my favourite parts in most of Spandau Ballet's songs are the Sax parts and Tony Hadley's voice - seems neither get any of my money though...explains why there was a punch-up outside the court..

Recently read Mick Karn's autobiography (hopefully he got paid for this at least) - he got paid very little for his contributions to the Japan/ RTC material which is the reason I bought the albums!! His inimitable playing style surely justified a decent %age of the royalties (I know that in reality this didn't happen..)

Do the horn section get royalties?? What about the Sax player in Papa's got a new Pigbag?? It's mostly sax and bass - or is this merely "arrangement". What about "Geno" by Dexy's??

Does this mean that, despite writing some of the best bass riffs ever, that Jameson didn't "write" any of the Motown stuff??

I don't see it as being as clear cut as the courts..

Edited April 10, 2012 by TheGreek

[fatback]

[quote name='brensabre79' timestamp='1333374196' post='1600716']
Unfortunately the Publishing rights are not very friendly to the drummers and bass players who lay down the groove that makes a track rock.
They are only interested in three things.
1. The Words
2. The 'top-line' melody (usually the tune that the above Words are sung to)
3. The Chords (least important of the three as sometimes the melody can work with alternative chords)

Everything else (and I mean everything!) is just arrangement/production - no publishing royalties for either of those unless names are specified for the arrangement, and the exact arrangement is used. Change the drum beat slightly, fiddle with the bass line - voila different arrangement, no royalties. Just the writer of top line and chords get royalties for publishing.

[/quote]

This is spot on.

[skankdelvar]

[quote name='musophilr' timestamp='1333380381' post='1600871']
Check out the MU for Partnership Agreements which cover this subject.
[/quote]

[/thread]

We all have our own (and probably differing) opinions about what might be 'fair', but there are a range of legal vehicles which encompass the different options.

Rather than reinvent the wheel, it would make sense to review the different possibilities and present them to the band as proven approaches which are unlikely to end up putting cash in the lawyers' pockets.

Even if bands don't break up over this sort of thing, it can lead to QC issues when lead writers charitably permit the less gifted to 'stick a couple of songs on the album' so they can earn a few bob.

Witness one of Mr Keith Moon's efforts. Did [i]this[/i] really improve The Who's second album?

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcpkUNqrjQU[/media]

Edited April 10, 2012 by skankdelvar