No, I made very clear I wasn’t giving legal advice. Read.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Would you sign this contract ??
- Thread starter mike buzzetti
- Start date
And?
I’m also a musician, a businessman, a cyclist, a father, etc. I think I was pretty clear I was giving my opinion based on practical considerations. And if you didn’t get it, hopefully you get it now and can spare us an extended back and forth about nothing.
Last edited:
The gig, and preparation for it, is a not insignificant amount of time and effort as it is. To me, spending the additional time and energy to renegotiate a contract this dense over $450 would be a ridiculous waste of time. That's handshake money.
I didn't give him a dollar so...
He may say some things but I didn't know he was a lawyer nor does that change anything here. We can take it or leave it as anything anyone says here. Like we normally do
Plus he hasn't said anything that some lay people haven't said already. What am I missing?
Maybe, but this agreement isn’t long or dense. It’s up to the performer if they want to deal with it or not. I would make a few changes and send it back, but it’s what I do for a living so I obviously get that YMMV
That's quite extravagant for a winery. You'd think they could afford to treat their bands well.
Oh, yeah, they probably pay poorly because some of us let them.
It is my fervent hope that they get what they pay for. Problem with that is that their clientele probably won't care.
I don't know how it works in the US. But in Belgium even if you play originals you need to pay royalty fees. You pay for playing music and it doesn't matter who's music.
If you wrote and play originals you get a cheque from the royalties organization. A non existing cheque if you're a small band or writer but still you get some cents a year..
The essence of this contract issue is that the venue/promoters reveal themselves to be clueless newbies by issuing an entirely non-standard, made up, left field contract for a run of the mill "bar band booking." Wineries and micro-breweries now book musicians. All of a sudden, they've moved over from their area of expertise into an arena where they know little or nothing, the live music-entertainment business. So they hire someone to handle this and, often, they have no idea whether this person knows what they're doing or not.
The fact that this thread reveals that the TB Hive members have rarely or never been presented a goofy contract like this one underscores what an outlier it is. That is the point I was trying to make when I said," ... Laugh and hand it back to them." Of course you can try to work with them, "negotiate away" the stupid clauses, if you really want this particular gig.
But something I've learned, the hard way, mostly, is that if there ONE thing that's totally wack about the promoter's approach, you can count on the fact that it's not the ONLY thing that's gonna be wack. In other words, this contract is Big Red Flag that things are not gonna be they way they're supposed to be on this gig. This goes for every aspect; publicity and promotion, production, hospitality, money.... everything! This is an "avoid" gig for me, not even close.
Like I said, if you really want this particular $450, you can work with this current regime. But I would run away. Sure, you can spend your time "negotiating away" the crazy stuff in the contract. But that wack contract is only the gateway to this gig. There's likely plenty more wack where that wack came from.
The fact that this thread reveals that the TB Hive members have rarely or never been presented a goofy contract like this one underscores what an outlier it is. That is the point I was trying to make when I said," ... Laugh and hand it back to them." Of course you can try to work with them, "negotiate away" the stupid clauses, if you really want this particular gig.
But something I've learned, the hard way, mostly, is that if there ONE thing that's totally wack about the promoter's approach, you can count on the fact that it's not the ONLY thing that's gonna be wack. In other words, this contract is Big Red Flag that things are not gonna be they way they're supposed to be on this gig. This goes for every aspect; publicity and promotion, production, hospitality, money.... everything! This is an "avoid" gig for me, not even close.
Like I said, if you really want this particular $450, you can work with this current regime. But I would run away. Sure, you can spend your time "negotiating away" the crazy stuff in the contract. But that wack contract is only the gateway to this gig. There's likely plenty more wack where that wack came from.
Yeah I was talking from a U.S. point of view. I'm certain the legality would be different in each locale. And I'm no lawyer, I just understand enough to know when to talk to one.
JazznFunk
Supporting Member
This is the same in the US.... provided someone with the venue, band management, or the band itself takes the time to submit their setlist to the proper performing rights organizations so that the royalties can be properly distributed. Most - if not all - places and artists don't do this on a local, bar band level.
It works the same in the US. But most musicians don't join one of the royalty groups because they don't know they can. There is also a strong sense of individualism that I believe makes us avoid joining groups that are looking out for "our best interest". It might also be the $50 registration fee that most won't earn back and so it feels like a loss of money even though it helps protect your music from being stolen.
There is an entire discussion/argument about "performing rights organizations."
I'm not going there. I will say, I'm happy it's not mandatory. I'm more than happy to just write my own music, and play it for family/friends. If I was forced to submit music every time, I think I'd quit writing. Which is a shame. I'm not going to be famous, so writing music is more a hobby and a soothing activity for me. Just my $0.02.
I am sorry. I went back and added some quotation marks before I saw this reply an edit to try to convey my point better about what constitutes your best interest. More or less trying to explain to a foreigner why it is a thing that doesn't get used much my most musicians here.
Ahhh - California. This explains a lot.
And a higher end winery...also explains a lot.
These people are a PITA. Skip them.
And a higher end winery...also explains a lot.
These people are a PITA. Skip them.
THis !! this exact contract was around a few yrs ago this guy found an old copy on the WEBS ! 90% of bands would not sign them so they disapeared , it will happen again.
#8 and #12 are deal breakers. If the owner is negligent, damages are capped at the $450 that the owner agreed to anyway. Ultimately the winery wants total control over everything, plus indemnity, plus band pays royalties for $450. Band on the hook for owner's out-of-pocket expenses if someone gets sick? Arbitration clause. Forget it. It's an adhesion contract where owner gets everything, band gets nothing for $450 divided how many ways?
