"Ain't singin' for Pepsi
Ain't singin' for Coke
I don't sing for nobody
Makes me look like a joke"
- Neil Young, "This Note's For You"
When Neil young released this song in 1988, his position was echoed by other well-known artists who were disdainful of the use of their songs in television commercials. But it seems that the anti-corporate sentiment that was once prevalent in rock music circles has softened in recent years. Many composers (along with their publishers) are now only too happy to receive the large paycheques and the extra exposure that come with licensing songs for use in motion pictures or television, radio and Internet advertisements. Much-loved tunes from classic rock artists like Led Zeppelin and Sting are featured prominently in ad campaigns for luxury automobiles like Cadillac and Jaguar. Moreover, some artists' entire careers have launched as a result of their licensing songs for commercial spots. Moby is an example of an artist who has achieved a high level of exposure through the sale of his songs to television commercials. Every one of the songs featured on his 1999 album, Play, has been licensed for use on a commercial for one company or another. Yet Moby has still been able to maintain his credibility as an artist. So, to many, the concerns Mr. Young cited above may seem a bit outdated at this point. But in fact the synchronization of songs for particular commercial uses is still very much a live issue in the negotiation of music publishing agreements. The scope of the restrictions which may be placed on the licensing of a songwriter's compositions in the agreement is a heavily negotiated point.
Some composers, those in the "indie" or punk genres, for example, request that certain restrictions be put in place in their publishing agreements over the type of products or causes that their songs may be associated with. When a songwriter, especially one who is also a recording artist with a high profile, has firm political or religious beliefs, these belief systems are very often tied up with their artistic identity and public image. It is therefore important that the songwriter and publishing company have an open dialogue as to which causes are at odds with the songwriter's identity, and what image the artist is trying to convey to the public. The parties will want to discuss this point before signing any publishing deal, so that the composer's integrity may be protected through proper wording in the agreement, and so that the publisher has a clear idea of how to promote the songs in a way that is consistent with the writer's particular image.
Of course, music publishers want as much latitude as possible in the ability to place their songwriter's compositions in television, Internet and radio commercials (not to mention to use them in motion pictures and as cover recordings). This obviously allows the publisher to recoup a songwriter's advance faster and turn a profit much more quickly. Nevertheless, most composers generally ask that their consent be obtained before their publishing company is able to exploit a given song for commercial purposes or in association with political causes. A typical clause may look something along the lines of the following:
"Publisher must obtain Composer's written consent prior to the use of any Composition in any advertisement relating to political campaigns, social causes, alcohol, tobacco, or intimate personal hygiene products, or any use in a motion picture which has been granted a rating of "R" or "X". Such consent shall be deemed granted if Composer does not respond within five (5) days after receipt of a written request from Publisher for such use."
It is easy to understand why many songwriters would be concerned about the use of their songs for political campaigns and certain social causes. These usages relate to sensitive topics, particularly for an artist who is known to have particular political leanings. Take Bruce Springsteen, for example. Ronald Reagan attempted to use Springsteen's "Born In The USA" as a theme song for his 1984 re-election campaign because he thought the song was meant to be a patriotic song and a tribute to American life. (In fact, the song was about the negative effects of the Vietnam War on America, and Bruce publicly questioned whether Reagan's campaign team members had actually spent any time listening to the song lyrics.). Similar concerns lie with artists who hold strong beliefs for social causes, k.d. lang, a longstanding vegetarian, would undoubtedly want the right to vet any use of her songs in meat-related commercials. Indeed, her professional reputation would suffer tremendously if "Constant Craving" were to appear in a McDonald's commercial. Yet another example might be a songwriter who is an advocate of anti-violence campaigns: such an artist would probably not want his or her song placed in a movie scene that had the effect of glorifying violence. At the other end of the spectrum, a politically right-winged songwriter would not likely want his or her music associated with left-leaning causes. The possibilities are endless. It is therefore important that if a songwriter or artist is intent on preserving a particular image, he or she should highlight such concerns with the publisher before the deal is concluded.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are not meant to substitute legal advice which should be sought in each particular instance. Lynn Burshtein is a lawyer and registered trademark agent at the law firm of Sanderson Taylor Entertainment Lawyers, which represents clients such as Avril Lavigne, Nelly Furtado, Sum 41 and Sam Roberts. For more information, please see www.sandersontayhr.com.
[Author Affiliation]
by Lynn M. Burshtein, B.A., LL.B
No comments:
Post a Comment