[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Sony seeks musician domain names for life



Just who owns your favorite band's name. Likely not them. Does this make
them artists or hired guns? Do artists have rights to their work and their
names? What does Mann say?


-------------------------------------------------------
Sony seeks musician domain names for life
By Beth Lipton
September 15, 1999, 1:40 p.m. PT
http://home.cnet.com/category/0-1005-200-120262.html

A controversial provision in Sony Music contracts is effectively asking
artists to sign away control of their official Web sites for life.

  Sony Music has added language to its standard contracts that gives the
company ownership over an artist's name--as well as any variation of
it--for use as a domain name. Moreover, the clause is written as a
lifetime provision that would apply even if the artist and Sony part ways.

  "Sony and its licensees shall have the exclusive right, throughout the
world, and shall have the exclusive right to authorize other persons, to
create, maintain, and host any and all Web sites relating to the artist
and to register and use the name '[artist name].com' and any variations
thereof which embody the artist's name as Uniform Resource Locators (or
'URLs'), addresses, or domain names for each Web site created by Sony in
respect of the artist," according to a copy of a Sony Music contract
obtained by CNET News.com.

  In addition, the contract states: "All such Web sites and all rights
thereto and derived therefrom shall be Sony's property throughout the
territory and in perpetuity."

  A Sony Music spokeswoman said the company does not comment on artist
contracts.

  The unusual clause runs counter to recent high-profile deals indicating
that the "Big Five" record labels are beginning to embrace the openness of
the Internet and relative freedoms the medium accords their artists. The
contract appears to reflect a fear at Sony that it may lose control over
its artists through the Web, according to lawyers and managers.

  At issue is what some say is the gateway to new forms of artist
marketing and distribution on the Web. Today, for example, when a CD is
sold in a retail store, the record company and artist don't get any
information about the buyer. But online, a record company or artist can
ask a consumer to register and provide valuable marketing information
before getting content via stream or download--such as demographic data,
email names, and home addresses.

  Then, when a new CD is coming out or an artist's tour is booked in a
particular part of the country, the information can be used to send
messages to fans in the area. That opens up a host of new opportunities to
the music business.

  "The URL encompasses everything related to an artist's career," said
John Parres, an Internet specialist who works with Artists Management
Group, a management company founded by Hollywood mogul Michael Ovitz. "It
is the key to everything. To make that a condition of the contract is way
beyond the scope of the contract. The URL is the relationship between the
artist and the fan."

  The language in the contract "has to do with control, not just making
money," said Bobby Rosenbloum, an attorney at the Atlanta office of
Greenberg Traurig. Among the firm's clients is hip-hop artist Canibus, who
is signed to Universal Music.

  None of the labels operated by Universal insists upon owning an artist's
URL, according to Larry Kenswil, president of global electronic commerce
and advanced technology for Universal Music.

  Web sites present business opportunities beyond commercial music.  
Canibus's site offers merchandise such as T-shirts and posts songs and
videos that he created on his own and are not part of his record contract.
The site also offers a place where fans can send Canibus email, which he
checks each week, according to the site.

  Artist Ice T, who has a deal with online music company Atomic Pop and
has formed his own label, dubbed Coroner Records, said his Internet
efforts have allowed him to forge valuable ties to his fans.

  He said in an interview that he has 200,000 fans on his email mailing
list, and "those are the people I'm going to push the album to because
they've already shown interest."

    Such overtures could be frowned upon by record companies such as Sony.
Studios that try to rein in artist Web activities want to stop the artists
from "doing anything that could even be perceived as competing with the
label," Rosenbloum said.

  Attorney Scott Harrington, a partner with Manatt, Phelps & Phillips,
noted that at issue is not so much an artist's name, but rather his or her
official Web site--especially because many bands are finding that their
names are already owned by someone else online. Still, he added, the
record companies have the right to be an artist's exclusive record
distributor but not to control the artist's official site.

  "I don't think they have any more right to this than they have over the
publishing or the merchandise or anything else that isn't their business,"  
Harrington said. He added, however, that the record companies "are not
saying, 'We own [the URL].' They're saying, 'We want it if you want to
give it to us.' It's not a right--it's a contractual thing."

  But Jeff Price, co-owner and general manager of NewYork-based
independent label SpinArt Records, pointed out that it can be difficult
for an artist to turn away a deal from a major record label, regardless of
the terms addressing the Web.

  "If you're a baby band and you're being offered six figures and you're
broke, it's hard to say no," Price said. "But you have no concept at that
time of what the value of that [URL] will be down the road."

  Ice T agreed, adding that using Web interests as currency in recording
deals is "a bad thing for any kid who signs a traditional record contract
now or in the next year. They're going to miss this whole Internet thing
because [the record company] owns them for the next seven years."

  Harrington--whose law firm represents artists such as Sheryl Crow,
Everclear, and the Wallflowers, as well as small labels such as Capricorn
and Thump--said the major record companies are realizing that the future
of their business in large part could rely on Web-based, "lifestyle"  
communities, which they ultimately want to control. But all they really
have the right to is sales of recordings an artist made while under
contract to them.

  "They don't really know what they're going to do" with control over
artist sites, Harrington said. "Maybe what they need to say is that in
perpetuity you always need a link to us to buy your catalog. But once you
leave the label they don't need to control your official Web site--they
have nothing to do with you anymore."

  Some artists view a Web site as part of the services that can be offered
by a record company, along with setting up the recording process, said
Jeremy Welt, head of new media for Maverick Records, which is a joint
venture with "Big Five" company Warner Music.

  "A lot of times, an artist will come to me and say, 'Can you register my
domain?' When I do that, I register it under Maverick," he said.

  Welt said Maverick has only had one artist leave the label, and in that
case Maverick kept the URL. Maverick continues to host and maintain the
site, but it is only used for marketing--no merchandise or CDs are sold on
it.

  "All these issues will be dealt with on a case-by-case basis," Welt
said, adding that Warner Music does not have a company-wide policy on
artist URLs either.

  Many within the industry say artists should create their own Web sites,
independent of any record company efforts.

  "Every artist should have their own site up because it gives their music
more exposure," Ice T said. "[An artist] can turn himself into a label. He
can use his site to promote other artists. So people come to his site to
check him out and he can say, 'Hey, check out this girl I'm working with'
and sell her records."