Archive for the ‘Venues’ Category

« Older Entries

HOW TO FIX EVERYTHING

Thursday, January 28th, 2021

EXPLORING NEW BUSINESS MODELS AND PRACTICES IN THE PERFORMING ARTS IN A POST-COVID WORLD

By Brian Taylor Goldstein

Aside from thwarting a clown car coup, 2021 is certainly not off to the auspicious start we all had hoped for. Nonetheless, it is with trepidatious optimism that we find ourselves crawling out from our burrows like traumatized cicadas as we look towards re-establishing and re-building the world of live performing arts.

We have lost treasured venues, ensembles, businesses, and colleagues. Much, if not most, of the scorched earth we find will be attributable to the ravages of COVID. However, much will also be due to old and outdated business models and practices that were just waiting for an unperceivable pufflet of wind to topple them, much less the ravaging hurricane of a global pandemic. As we survey the damage, now is the time to consider rebuilding and reimagining those business models and practices. There’s nothing like the opportunity of a disaster to build a toppled house back on a better and stronger foundation than that on which it was built before.

As such, it was with the greatest enthusiasm and exhilarating gratification that I have of late been asked to weigh-in on numerous proposals from various groups and interests within the performing arts industry wanting to change the way business is done. This has quickly been followed by the resounding despair and blinding dismay of having repeatedly found myself reviewing not imaginative and daring visions of the future, but attempts to re-clothe and re-animate the cadavers of the past. Proposal after proposal has been premised upon the belief that changing the business “model” in the performing arts industry means finding a way in which various parties—presenters, venues, artists, managers, producers, promoters, labels—can come together to agree upon common practices and contractual terms so that we can all go back to “business as usual.” There have been cries of “we need to change the way the business works” and “we need to get everyone together and implement new industry standards and practices to which the vast majority of people would agree to implement.”

 The prevailing thought appears to be that if we can all just agree on “standard” terms for things such as insurance, cancellations, minimum booking fees and formulas, recording rights, and even timing for issuing and returning contracts, then everyone can breathe a collective sigh of relief and go back to negotiating and focusing only on fees, dates, planning, and repertoire—in other words, the more inspiring and fulfilling parts of the business.  I’ve read proposals that include such suggestions as “all engagements should provide for deposits and rehearsal fees” (I agree) to “there should be standard media terms that would automatically allow for streaming rights and recordings” (I do not agree) to finding new Force Majeure language that would “…make sure future pandemic events are not cause for cancellation” (Seriously?).

None of these proposals focus on the true crisis before us: the exploration of whether or not the business structures, plans, and methodologies upon which venues, presenters, producers, managers, agents, labels, etc. are run and managed need to be re-thought and re-imagined for a new age and new realities. Instead, what I have seen thus far is not unlike neighbors in a beach community finding their homes devastated by a hurricane and deciding not to rebuild on stronger foundations further away from the shore, but to put everything back exactly the way it was before, except, this time, mutually agreeing to paint their shutters all the same colour.

These concept of implementing standards and practices that everyone will agree upon arises from the long-cherished delusion that there exists a legendary grimoire of industry standards and practices that merely needs to be dusted off, amended, and updated for the 21st century. If everyone merely agrees to abide by this book, then peace will be restored to the kingdom. The trouble is…no such book exists…and no such book has ever existed. The only industry standards in the performing arts industry are that there are NO standards! To be sure, there are opinions. Strong opinions. We’ve all encountered comments such as “this is how the opera world does it” and “this is not how we do it in jazz” and “that’s not how commissions work.” However, if you polled a cross section of any segment of the performing arts about any given topic, you will find a significant divergence of opinion as to what is and what is not “standard.” What any one person believes to be standard may simply be based on their own limited experience in their own tiny corner of the industry.

To be sure, there are ways to structure some deals and transactions that are more common than others, and there is no reason to reinvent wheels where others have already figured out reasonable ways to build them, but there will always be circumstances warranting different arrangements for different organizations, individuals, projects, and budgets. More often than not, the term “industry standard” is thrown about in lieu of admitting “this works for me and I’d rather not change.” Worse, it’s often employed as a form of peer pressure to circumvent negotiation or compromise by making the other party feel that they are either too ill-informed or ill-experienced to realize the absurdity of whatever very reasonable proposal they may have just made.

So, if there are no industry standards, why can’t we all just get together and create some? If enough people agree on common contract terms and procedures, then wouldn’t that compel everyone else to fall in line and do it the same way? If everyone agrees to abide by what we all agree is fair, doesn’t that take away the risk of anything being unfair?

First, there are the practical challenges of defining even sub-segments of an industry as diverse as the performing arts, much less getting them all together and mutually agree upon  common procedures for how anything works: bookings, recordings, commissions, rehearsals, etc. There are large and small venues and presenters. For-profits and non-profits. There are different genres. Different audiences. Different goals and missions. Commercial and non-commercial producers. Etc. Etc.

Second, but by no means least, in most countries this is also illegal.

Let’s say that we all agree amongst ourselves that artists should be paid deposits (which, again for the record, I agree with—if you can’t hire a wedding caterer or a building contractor without a deposit, why are artists expected to be paid only after work is done?) What if a huge, prestigious producer or orchestra offers an engagement, but refuses to pay a deposit? Are you going to walk away and refuse to accept the date? Probably not. The reality, of course, is that unless an artist has enough prestige and clout to demand their own terms, then there are always more artists than there are venues and presenters. This, naturally, gives stronger negotiating power to presenters, producers, and venues. This is also called “Show Business.” But what if all the artists or their representatives get together and agree that they will all demand the same terms for all artists? If all the artists and their representatives stick together, then venues and presenters will be forced to comply, right? Not so fast. If a group within any industry unifies to set standard terms and practices with which all members of the group will be required to abide and with the purpose of coercing or compelling other businesses to agree to such terms and practices or else be excluded, this is called “collective bargaining.” In the United States, at least, only authorized unions or organizations are allowed to do that. In addition, any group of businesses within an industry that teams up or forms a monopoly in order to set the terms and conditions within that industry can be held to be in violation of various anti-monopoly and trade practices laws. In the U.S., for arcane historical reasons, these are called anti-trust laws.

So, does this mean we all just throw our hands up and surrender ourselves to a world of unfettered, Darwinian capitalism where ticket sales and popularity alone determines the future of the performing arts? Absolutely not! It is and will always be critical for the various groups and interests that comprise the performing arts world to come together to discuss mutual concerns and issues and how best to address them collaboratively. However, in any business enterprise, whether it exists within the performing arts or any other business sector, exploring new business models means looking inward to how you currently conduct your own business—not someone else’s. What services do you provide or offer? Is there a demand for those services? What are those services worth? What are your streams of income and revenue? Are you too reliant on either passive or active income? Who is your competition? What is your sustainability? What makes you unique? Are you over staffed or understaffed? Do you need to learn new skills? Are there better ways to fulfill your mission, goals, or creative aspirations?

Exploring a new business model is not a group activity. It is purely an inward journey. An act of self-introspection and challenge that cannot be done by committee. It is done in the depths of the night, alone, often with Slipsmith gin and two olives. Any business facing an existential challenge of survival does not address the problem by reaching out to other businesses with suggestions of what they should be doing to help the field or make your life easier. Rather, what are YOU doing that may need to be changed, rethought, or reimagined and what can YOU do to help yourself? Are there treasured customs, practices, presumptions, and assumptions that you are loathe to give up? Perhaps it is YOU who needs to turn away from industry standards (whatever you believe them to be) and try something different. For example, are the traditional roles and services of agents and managers still relevant? Do we need to continue planning concerts and performances around a fixed “season?” Does an artist really need a label to release and promote a recording? Are there other ways to monetize and promote artistic and creative services to create more diverse streams of income for artists as well as venues, theaters, and producers? Are performing arts unions today advocates or hindrances for their artists? Is there a role for more immersive experiences in theatre and concerts? Does the commission model continue to make sense for artists and their representatives? Is there a continued role for booking conferences? Are you still sending out paper press releases? Are you ignoring the role of social media and other interactive technologies? Are there diverse faces and voices in your audiences or on your stages? Are there more ways for popular and less popular genres to collaborate? Should dysfunctional non-profit organizations continue to be the default business structure for certain artistic genres? Do all classical concert and recital halls have to be an anesthetizing mélange of browns and beiges? Perhaps the time has also come to bridge the ancient abyss between arts and entertainment and explore aspects of entrepreneurialism that can be borrowed to further the sustainability of our highest artistic standards and endeavors.

There are no right or wrong answers to these questions. In fact, these are all questions that have long been proposed, discussed, tossed about, disputed, debated, and then dismissed into the rubbish bin to be addressed another day. However, that day has come. This is it. The tide of COVID has swept our businesses off their foundation. Do we build them back better and stronger than before, or build them back the same, but with colour-coordinated shutters?

_________________________________________________

GG Arts Law provides a comprehensive range of legal services and strategic support for the performing arts, including: Artist Visas, Taxes, and Touring; Rights & Licensing; Negotiations & Representation; Contracts; Business & Non-Profit Organization & Management; Project Management; and Strategic Consulting & Planning.

VISIT OUR NEW WEBSITE: ggartslaw.com

 

 

__________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL LEGALESE:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty or threatening email to someone, filing a lawsuit, or basically doing anything that may in any way rely upon an assumption that we know what we are talking about.

 

Posted in Artist Management, Arts Management, Contracts, For Profits, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Non-Profits, Publishing, Recordings, Unions, Venues | Comments Closed

Please Consider Donating Cancelled Tickets Rather Than Seek Refunds

Friday, March 13th, 2020

I, like most of you, was ingrained with the paradigm that the show must go on no matter what—to the extent that I once performed a whole show the day after I had all four wisdom teeth extracted. However, these are extraordinary times.

The live, performing arts will not suffer more than any other economic blows that we all are going to suffer in every sector and industry. Nonetheless, I am putting out a personal request to all of you, as well as your patrons, friends, families, and audiences, to please consider donating any cancelled tickets rather than seek refunds.

For some, it may be easier to write of the commercial end of our industry. However, remember, that ALL artists, singers, musicians, actors, dancers, stage and tech crew, and everyone throughout the arts, for-profit and non-profit alike, from jazz to classical, from hip hop to folk, from Broadway and Carnegie Hall to the smallest regional arts centers, all rely on ticket sales to get paid and to survive.

For Broadway, the closures come at the peak of the Broadway season. While most producers I know will walk away from their investments to keep the performers and crew getting paychecks for as long as possible, many shows will not be able to survive and will close. Others will have delayed or closed openings. On the other end of cancellations, from the smallest to the largest, are artists losing their fees, along with their agents and managers (and entertainment lawyers. Wait! What?) Without a jazz club, where does the trio perform? Non-profits who have to cancel fundraising events face not be able to make their budgets. Small regional organizations, community theaters, and local arts groups may suffer the worst.

Some of the large ticketing organizations will automatically issue refunds. For those that do not, consider that the money has been spent anyway and allow it to be a donation.

Stay safe. Stay disinfected. And remember that, while alcohol is not a disinfectant, when taken orally it can be a cure-all.

_______________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, as well as to sign up for our newsletters and follow us on social media visit ggartslaw.com

________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL LEGALESE:
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!
The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

Tags:, ,
Posted in Acts of God, Arts Management, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Venues | Comments Closed

Never Rent Your Theater To Cannibals

Thursday, July 14th, 2016

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.   

Dear Law and Disorder:

We have a non-profit theater company with our own performance space. We are looking for additional ways to increase our revenue stream within the terms of the lease. Two questions: Can a non-profit collect revenue for rented space or must it take the form of a voluntary donation? Do you know off hand if there are tax implications?

Yes, you can definitely collect revenue for the rented space.  However, this is called Unrelated Business income (UBI) by the IRS, and it would constitute taxable income as it’s not related to you non-profit’s mission as a theater company—assuming, of course, that the missing statement filed with the IRS does not include running a catering hall. This might be different if you were renting the space to other non-profit organizations constituent with your own mission, such as local dance groups, community theater, theater camps, etc.

Regardless, I wouldn’t try calling the rent a “voluntary donation” to avoid the taxes.  It’s not voluntary if the lessee is required to pay it, and it’s not a donation if the lessee is receiving something of value in return for the money. Being entrepreneurial is admirable. Committing tax fraud is not.

In addition to considering the tax implications, you should also consider the liability and insurance implications as well. Regardless of who rents your space, should anyone be injured while on your property, your organization will be the one named in a lawsuit—especially if you will be renting it for any purpose that will involve children—the little darlings are pits of liability! While it’s a great idea to make any renters be responsible for any damages or claims, you need to require them to have insurance as well as obtain your own independent insurance. Making a renter contractually responsible does not mean they will actually pay.

Lastly, in additional crafting a well-drafted rental agreement (which means having terms that actually apply to your group, as opposed to borrowing a template from the strip club down the street that rents itself out for bachelor parties), you want to have specific written rules and guidelines as well as the ability to refuse to rent to any group or organization that you deem to be inappropriate—provided, of course, that such decisions are not made for discriminatory reasons. Just as people will blame your organization for any accidents or injuries that occur on your premises, people will associate you with tacit approval of any group or organization that rents your premises. So, hosting the North American Association of Cannibal’s Annual Banquet and Pot Luck may not be a wise idea.

__________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and other GG_logo_for-facebooklegal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.com

All questions on any topic related to legal, management, and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously and/or posthumously.

__________________________________________________________________

 

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

 

 

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Arts Management, Insurance, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Taxes, Venues | Comments Closed

Termination For Convenience

Thursday, April 28th, 2016

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.

Dear Law and Disorder:

I recently received the following clause from a performing arts venue in a contract they sent:

TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE: Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time upon written notice to the other party. If this Agreement is terminated before the performance, the University shall have no obligation to pay Artist. If this Agreement is terminated during the performance for any reason other than the Artist’s breach of this Agreement, the University shall compensate Artist on a prorate basis. 

I told them that, in my mind, this makes the contract virtually worthless.  They came back with this: 

TERMINATION FOR CONVENIENCE:  Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time upon written notice to the other party. If this Agreement is terminated before the performance, the University shall have limited obligations to pay Artist, as defined below. If this Agreement is terminated during the performance for any reason other than the Artist’s breach of this Agreement, the University shall compensate Artist on a prorate basis.  Under no circumstances will either party be liable to the other for indirect, consequential, or incidental damages, including but not limited to anticipatory profits. The University may from time to time, under such terms and conditions as it may prescribe, make partial payments and payments on account against costs incurred by the Artist in connection with the terminated portion of this contract whenever in the opinion of the University the aggregate of such payments shall be within the amount to which the Artist shall be entitled hereunder. 

I feel that I wouldn’t be doing my due diligence as a Manager to sign this, but it’s a very important venue to me and I do quite a bit of business with them.  But I think this is unconscionable. Am I wrong?

“Unconscionability” implies a certain level of moral indignation is generally unwarranted in a simple engagement negotiation. The venue is merely proposing terms that are in its own best interest, not demanding that you sacrifice a sack full of kittens! If acting in one’s own self-interest were unconscionable, then most artists would have an incalculable amount of karmic debt. However, you are quite correct that the terms they are proposing are unfair to your artist. I’ve seen more and more presenters and venues trying to give themselves the unilateral right to cancel. I get it. Times are tough. Tickets are hard to sell. But it’s unreasonable and unfair to expect an artist to bear the entire loss of a cancellation. The venue’s proposed compromise is basically to reimburse the artist for any out-of-pocket costs, but not to pay the artist for the lost performance or the fact that the artist may have turned away other engagements. That’s not exactly what I would call an equitable compromise.

Regardless, the point of a contract is not to provide some false sense of security or protection, but, rather, to enable the parties to identify any issues that need to be negotiated, evaluate the pros and cons of a deal, and determine whether or not to proceed. In this regard, this contract has proven to be extremely valuable in that the venue has made it quite clear that they want to have the right to cancel without consequences. You have done your due diligence in reading and evaluating the contract. Now comes the hard part. What to do? You need to determine whether or not to engage in further negotiations, to accept the venue’s terms and sign the contract, or walk away and find another engagement. Ultimately, the decision is up to your artist. Your job as the Manager is solely to evaluate and advise your artist.

All art requires risk. The performing arts business requires a certain amount of risk as well. As the Manager, its your job to help your artist evaluate reasonable risks from unreasonable risks. Obviously, I don’t know enough about your specific artist or the specific venue to render an opinion. However, I can tell you that what is completely irrelevant to the analysis is whether or not the venue is important to you and whether or not you do “quite a bit of business with them.”  As a Manager, the focus of all managerial decisions must be what is best for your artist, not you. Is the venue particularly prestigious or important to the artist? Is the fee is particularly large? Does the engagement offer your artist a particularly advantageous opportunity? Then it may be worth advising the artist to take the risk. Otherwise, the artist should decline the engagement. The impact of the artist’s decision on your own relationship with the venue, past or future, is beside the point.

If your ongoing relationship with the venue is more important to you than the relationship with your artist, then you should drop the artist. I have often heard Managers say that artists come and go, but venues are forever. However, I don’t necessarily believe this. In my experience, if an artist is popular and in demand, and especially if an artistic director wants the artist, the presenter or venue won’t care if the artist is represented by Satan himself.

_________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and otherGG_logo_for-facebook legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.com

All questions on any topic related to legal, management, and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously and/or posthumously.

__________________________________________________________________

 

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

 

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Artist Management, Contracts, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Presenters, Venues | Comments Closed

Dodging A Bullet With A Contract

Thursday, March 31st, 2016

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.   

Dear Law and Disorder:

I am a classical concert pianist and booking representative for my small ensemble. I just finished the negotiation of a performance contract with a presenter and, unfortunately, we could not reach an agreement. In my three years of working as a self-presenting artist, it was the first time when a contract became an issue. To summarize the situation, I didn’t agree to sign the presenter’s one-page contract because it didn’t have any terms dealing with such things as cancellation or the date we would be paid. So, I provided my own, more detailed, contract. I also provided a technical rider for such things as piano tuning and how much space our group needed to perform. The presenter claimed that their contract was “standard” and that they engage lots of artists and that no manager or artist had ever objected to their one-page standard contract. So, I offered to propose changes to their contract instead, but then withdrew their offer to engage us, saying that we were obviously too hard to work with and that they had dodged a bullet. Quite a number of series send us one-page agreements and some of them react with frustration when I present a more detailed contract. I start to have a feeling that maybe while I am building my network, I have to play by the rules of the presenter and just hope that everything should be OK. However, in some ways it contradicts what I have learned from reading your blog. It also doesn’t help if its true that most managers are happy to sign these simple contracts creating a way out for a presenter to say: “we never had a problem with our one-page contract” before.

I’d like to say that these are the perils of dealing with small, unsophisticated presenters. But, alas, you have stumbled into one of the dark corners of the entire performing arts industry: at all levels it’s a business run by people who prefer to pretend it’s not a business until someone doesn’t get what they want and then they will all pretend to be experts on business contracts.

In your case, the presenter’s claim that other artists or managers may or may not have had a problem with their one page contract should be disregarded for several reasons: (1) it may or may not be true; (2) many artists and their managers are so happy just to get an engagement that they are happy to sign anything; (3) many artists and their managers often know less about contracts than presenters; and, most importantly, (4) nothing is “standard”. As for your suggestion that you have “…to play by the rules of the presenter and just hope that everything should be OK”, I disagree.

A career in the arts and entertainment in inherently based on risk. So, yes, there may be instances where an engagement or an opportunity presents itself and you may just have to take a risk. However, you can’t make this your standard policy. You need to be judicious. The only way to evaluate the risks and advantages of any offer or opportunity—whether it is an engagement or a recording contract—is through the contract process. You may not always be in a bargaining position to get what you want, but the process itself can be vital. Even if someone refuses to agree to a specific request or a contractual you may propose, that information in and of itself can be essential in helping you evaluate whether or not proceed. However, any presenter or venue that won’t even take the time to discuss your concerns should be avoided.

Nevertheless, while its fantastic that you have taken the time to devise your own contract and technical rider, you also need to know your audience. Its very different to negotiate with Carnegie Hall that it is with a group that operates out of a church basement with a broken upright. If you don’t want to unnecessarily scare off unsophisticated presenters and venues, there are things you can do to make sure your concerns are being addressed without having to send a formal contract with a rider. One approach may be just to send an email or a list confirming your specific concerns. Or you can avoid email altogether and have an actual conversation. Remember, a contract does not have to “look” like a contract. At the end of the day, its less about the wording and format than communicating your concerns, expectations, and clarifications. In short, it doesn’t mean you have to be less flexible in what you need, but more flexible in how you communicate it.

Ultimately, I think you were the one who “dodged a bullet” on this.

________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and other legal, project management, and GG_logo_for-facebookbusiness issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.com

All questions on any topic related to legal, management, and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously and/or posthumously.

__________________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

 

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Agents, Artist Management, Arts Management, Contracts, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Presenters, Venues | Comments Closed

Who Has To Pay The Likes of ASCAP, BMI, Etc?

Thursday, February 18th, 2016

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.   

I haven’t found an example that matches the situation of a 501(c)(3) I am familiar with. They throw a once-yearly art festival that spans a weekend (2days). They don’t charge the public any admittance. They raise money by charging fees for booth (10×10) spaces for (visual) arts vendors to sell their merchandise. They raise money for: their operating expenses, student art scholarships, member art scholarships, honoraria for program presenters at meetings, a fund for a permanent “home” for the 501c3 where they can hold meetings and store various gear for the meetings between times. They also have an open air music stage at that festival where local musicians perform. The musicians are paid under $150.00 for a 2 hour performance that includes 5 minutes each for set-up, a break, and stage clear-off. Most, but not all of the pieces performed are written by the performers. The “audience” is anyone who wanders by and stays to listen for a while. So, who, if anyone, has to pay fees to the likes of ASCAP, BMI, etc.?

It sounds like the 501(c)(3) organization in your scenario is trying to raise money for some very admirable and worthy goals: art scholarships, arts education, and even providing a place for local musicians to perform. In fact, these goals sound so worthy that I’m sure you wouldn’t object to the organization using your house for meetings or taking your car whenever they needed it to transport students to art classes, all without your permission and without paying you any fees. While you might be more than willing to donate your home or car on occasion, my suspicion is that you’d at least like to be asked first. As a general rule, the involuntary donation of other’s property without their permission—even if it’s for a really good cause—is also called “stealing.”

A musical composition—just like a home or a car—is considered property. It is no less valuable—indeed, I would argue, it is of greater value—than anything else you are required to pay for that has a physical price tag attached. A musical composition belongs to the composer who wrote it and/or the composer’s publishing company. Under U.S. Copyright Law, whoever owns a musical composition also has the absolute right to control and determine all uses of the property—this includes the right to perform the music live, record the music, play a recording of the music for the public, change the lyrics, make arrangements, or just about anything else you can think of to do with music; including the right to determine whether or not to donate the use of the composition for a worthy cause or project.

This means that any time a musical composition is performed live or a recording of the composition is played—whether it’s at a theater, concert hall, or out-door street festival (for-profit or non-profit)—“someone” needs to obtain the composer’s permission and, in most cases, pay a usage fee called a “Performance License.” ASCAP, BMI and SESAC are not roving bands of brigands waiting to pounce on unsuspecting non-profits who are merely trying to promote the arts. Rather, these organizations are trying to promote the arts too—primarily by reminding people (including other artists) not to take music for granted as a valueless commodity. ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC are organizations that represent composers, issuing performance licenses and collecting fees on their behalf.

If musicians are performing original music they composed themselves, then they can certainly agree to perform their own music for free. That can be a condition of hiring them to perform in the first place. However, if a musician or band is playing (“covering”) music composed by others, then just because the musicians agree to perform for a reduced fee, or even for free, doesn’t mean that the composers have allowed their music to be performed for free as well. A performance requires a performance license.

As for whose responsibility it is to obtain the necessary license, its legally everyone’s responsibility. If an unlicensed song is performed at a festival (even a free festival), then the U.S Copyright Act allows all the parties involved in arranging the performance—the artist as well as the venue or festival, and sometimes even the promoter, producer, or booking agent—to be liable for copyright infringement. So, while you could require the musicians to obtain their own licenses with regard to any music they are performing which they have not composed themselves, in my opinion that is a foolish policy. Why? Because most musicians will simply not bother and elect to take the risk of not getting caught. However, if they do get caught, it is the venue or festival who will be liable as well. It doesn’t matter that the festival may have required another party to obtain the license. That simply entitles the festival to sue the other party. The festival itself will remain liable to the composer.

So, in your case, while there are a number of factors that can determine the cost of obtaining performance licenses—the size of the venue, the price of tickets (or lack thereof), the number of performances, etc.–ultimately, it’s in the festival’s or organization’s best interest to ensure that the necessary permissions and licenses are obtained. While it might be tempting to proceed under the expectation that no one will get caught or the publishers and copyright owners will not sue small artists or struggling non-profits, that’s the same as robbing a bank and hoping the police won’t find you. Not to mention, in an industry where so many purport to operate under the noble purpose of promoting the value of art and artists, I can’t imagine the rationalization of stealing it for any purpose, regardless of how noble.

__________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and otherGG_logo_for-facebook legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.com

All questions on any topic related to legal, management, and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously and/or posthumously.

__________________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

 

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Arts Management, Copyrights, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Liability, Licensing, Music Rights, Non-Profits, Presenters, Publishing, Venues | Comments Closed

It’s Time To Set Your People Free!

Wednesday, February 3rd, 2016

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.   

Dear Law and Disorder:

What would be your response to an artist who re-books themselves in venues that an agent previously booked for them? Is that legally allowed? We booked this particular group to a major venue 2 years back and now they have re-booked themselves at this same venue by contacting the presenter directly. I can’t really justify holding the presenter responsible or expect them to remember who they booked an artist through 2 years ago. I have been told by other managers and agents about respecting a “presenter of record”, but what about an artist having to honor the “agent of record”?  

If you have (or had) a contract with this group that gives you the exclusive right to re-book them at certain venues for a specific period of time, then my response would be that the group is in breach of your contract. If you have (or had) a contract with this group that entitles you to a commission from any re-bookings at venues where you originally booked them, then my response would be that they owe you a commission. On the other hand, if there is no contractual obligation for the group either to re-book through you or to pay you a commission, then my response to the group would be “well done!”

Other than the fiduciary obligations and duties imposed on agents and managers who represent artists, and the obligation for an artist to pay for services knowingly rendered and accepted, there are no other legal obligations inherent in the relationship. An enforceable obligation for an artist to re-book only through the original agent or to pay a commission for re-bookings must either arise contractually or it does not exist at all. In other words, concepts such as either “presenter of record” or “agent of record” have no legal consequence or validity. While some might argue these are, nonetheless, inherently ethical or professional obligations, the whole idea that someone inherently “owns” either a presenter or an artist is more of a quaint feudal concept than a practical one for today’s cultural marketplace.

I appreciate that it can be incredibly time consuming and laborious to sell an artist to a presenter or introduce an artist to a new venue. However, presumably you received a commission for doing so. That was your fee. Charge more next time or move on. If you want to require an artist to book only through you in the future or require a commission if they re-book at a venue where you first booked them, then you need to have a contract with the artist that spells that out. However, be forewarned that no contracts (not even the ones I craft!) are self-enforcing. If an artist elects to breach your contract anyway, you will still need to weigh the pros and cons of enforcement. In many instances, suing an artist only results in an un-collectable judgment and a waste of time that could have been better spent booking other artists.

_________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and other GG_logo_for-facebooklegal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.com

All questions on any topic related to legal, management, and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously and/or posthumously.

__________________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

 

Tags:, , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Agents, Artist Management, Contracts, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Presenters, Venues | Comments Closed

Understanding Legalese

Thursday, May 28th, 2015

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.   

Dear Law and Disorder:

Every time someone sends us a contract, its always a lengthy document with lots of legalese that no one understands. Is there anything wrong with having a simple, one page agreement that everyone can easily understand and will sign?

A lot of people mistake “legalese” for language and terms they either don’t understand or haven’t considered. They see words on a page and immediately assume they can’t possible understand them.

This is legalese:

The party of the first part, which party has previously and hereinafter shall continue to be referred to as the Presenting Party, in and for the mutual obligations, conveyances, and other considerations contained herein, the sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, does for itself and on behalf of its officers, directors, employees, agents, and assigns (hereinafter the “Presenting Parties”), which the Presenting Party does herein attest, warrant, and represent that it has the authority so to represent and bind under the terms of this agreement, does herein and hereby concur, agree, and consent to prohibit, prevent, proscribe and preclude, so the best of its reasonable ability, the degree and extent of such “reasonability” to be determined herein as the term “reasonable” is defined in this Agreement hereunder, the recording and/or memorialization through any and all visual and/or audio and/or audio-visual means and methodologies now existing or hereinafter discovered, invented, or devised, including, but not limited to photography, analog and digital sound recordings, videotaping, screen captures, and any other human or machine-readable medium, the performance of the party of the second part, which party has previously and hereinafter shall continue to be referred to as the Performing Party, including, but not limited to, the performance or any portion of the performance of the Performing Party, including, but not limited to, excerpts, samplings, moments, movements, scenes, rehearsals, outtakes, or other manifestations of the performance or any portion of the performance of the Performing Party, for any purposes of any kind or nature, including, but not limited to…well, you get the idea.   

 This is not:

The Presenter agrees to prevent any unauthorized broadcasting, photographing, recording, or any other transmission or reproduction of any performance(s) or residency activity of the Artist, or any part thereof, by any means or media now known or hereafter invented, including, but not limited to audio, visual, or audio-visual means, and including any “archival” recordings, unless the express prior written consent of the Artist has been obtained.

The difference is that the first example uses unnecessary verbiage, poor grammar, and confusing structure. The second example just has a lot of detail. Don’t confuse “legalese” with “detail.” Whereas you don’t want legalese, you do want detail. Why? Because the whole point of a written document memorializing the terms of an agreement (also known as a “written contract”) is to convey information—not just to have a piece of paper that everyone signs.

Too many people want contracts that are “simple” and “brief” so that the parties will sign them, but that’s pointless. Merely having a signed contract does not mean that an engagement won’t get canceled, that commissions will get paid, artists won’t leave, or that any number of nasty things won’t happen to you. Signed contracts are not self-enforcing. If a dispute arises that cannot otherwise be resolved, the only way to enforce the terms of a contract is with a lawsuit. Lawsuits, as you know, achieve nothing other than making trial lawyers ecstatically happy and wealthy. No one in the performing arts can afford that, either personally or professionally. You don’t want to wait until a dispute arises to find out that you and the other party had vastly different assumptions about what was and was not expected and allowed. Instead, you want to make sure that everyone understands all of the aspects of a project or engagement at the outset and, hopefully, can discuss and evaluate the risks, challenges, advantages, obligations, and expectations of the relationship before they agree to it. In other words, you use a contract to educate, not to enforce.

What determines the length of a contract is the complexity of the project or engagement itself. An agreement for a single artist to perform a single recital is going to be shorter than an agreement for an orchestra to perform a world tour. Similarly, an assignment or transfer of all rights is going to be less complex than a recording agreement or an agreement to re-orchestrate an existing work.

Our industry is blessed with amazingly creative and dynamic professionals who are second to none when it comes to creating imaginative collaborations and engaging performances. However, they become slightly less than stellar when it comes to understanding the business and legal arrangements necessary to effectuate these plans. It’s one thing to discuss dates, repertoire, scheduling, and fees. It’s quite another to consider all of the various details, challenges, and misunderstandings that might come into play: will music or other copyrighted materials need to be licensed? If so, whose responsibility is this? Can either party cancel? Under what circumstances? What if someone gets sick or there is a fire at the venue? Who bears the loss of expenses cannot be recovered? Who is responsible if an artist is injured? Who is responsible for someone in the audience gets hurt? Who is responsible if an artist or crew member damages property of the venue? Who is responsible if someone from the venue damages property of the artist or show? Will visas be required for any artist? Whose responsibility is this? Is the engagement fee to be paid in dollars, pound sterling, euros, or other currency? Which exchange rate will apply? Who is responsible for taxes? Are deposits non-refundable?

This is where a contract comes into play. Yes, it takes time to create and read all of this detail. However, a detailed contract can be filled with all sorts of interesting and mutually beneficial revelations. For example, when recently negotiating the terms of an engagement for one of our own artists, I presented our engagement contract to the presenter—which contains a clause, much like the one above, prohibiting any recordings, including archival recordings. The presenter wanted to make an archival recording and assumed, incorrectly, that these were always permitted. We were able to find a workable solution and adjusted the contract accordingly. We also discovered that while the presenter had not factored in meals and transportation into the budget, we had misunderstood when the presenter actually wanted the artist to arrive. We were able to adjust all of these issues, none of which would have been discovered had we not taken the time to think through all of the various details. In the end, it didn’t matter whether or not the contract was even signed because going through the process itself allowed the presenter and I to discuss all of the details. The contract served its purpose.

In short, a more detailed contract that makes people stop and say “wait, I didn’t agree to that” or “what exactly do you mean by this?” is far better than an artificially simplistic one that everyone signs now and then squabbles about later whilst lashing out such cherished and time-worn drivel as “but that’s industry standard” or “that’s the way its always done.”

_________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and otherGG_logo_for-facebook legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.

All questions on any topic related to legal, management, and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously and/or posthumously.

__________________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

 

 

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Agents, Artist Management, Arts Management, Contracts, Copyrights, Insurance, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Licensing, Music Rights, Presenters, Touring, Venues | Comments Closed

Don’t Be Shy About BMI

Wednesday, March 25th, 2015

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.

Dear Law and Disorder:

Hypothetical: A theatrical production company would like to produce a tribute musical production to a songwriter using only the songwriter’s music being performed by the cast of the production. The production would be held at a community theater which is not licensed by ASCAP or any licensing authority. The production company is unsure of its legal standing in carrying out this this production, and would like some general guidance. Where could they go to determine the requirements, if any.

If any? There are always requirements. I don’t know anything that doesn’t require something in return.

The production company has no legal standing to carry out this production without first obtaining the necessary licenses. If the songs are being performed as part of a “concert” style performance—that is, being sung without props or costumes and not as part of any plot, story, or narrative—then the producer would merely need to get a performance license from whichever one of the three major performance license agencies the songwriter belongs to: ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC. If the songwriter doesn’t belong to one of these (which is unlikely, but possible), then the licenses would need to be obtained from the songwriter directly.

It doesn’t matter whether or not the performance is being held at a community theater or whether or not the community theater holds a license with ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC. Performance licenses must still be obtained and either you (hypothetically, of course) or the theater must obtain them. There is no legal requirement that the venue be the one to obtain performance licenses. While its probably easier for the venue to obtain the licenses, it is the responsibility of all of the parties involved in a production—from the producer and performers to the venues and agents—to ensure that someone obtains the necessary licenses. Otherwise, everyone will be held responsible and, hypothetically, you don’t want that. Also, if this is a production which the production company envisions producing elsewhere, then it probably makes more sense for the production company to get the licenses itself.

If the production company wants to obtain the licenses, it would simply contact ASCAP, BMI, or SESEC directly. However, there are a few additional issues that could quickly change the simple to the sublimely complex:

1) If what you are “hypothetically” envisioning is not so much a concert “tribute”, but, rather, a “juke box musical” where the songs of one composer are used as the score of an actual musical drama or to tell a story (ie: Mamma Mia, Jersey Boys or Beautiful), then neither ASCAP, BMI or SESAC can help you. You will need dramatic licenses, not performance licenses. Dramatic licenses must be obtained directly from the songwriter or the songwriter’s publisher. If this is the case, you should be prepared for a resounding and thunderous “no.”

2) Even if you are planning a more traditional concert tribute such as Side-by-Side-by-Sondheim or An Evening of Andrew Lloyd Webber, many musical theater and other composers have restrictions preventing more than a specific number of their works from being performed as part of the same concert without obtaining additional rights directly from the publisher.

Nevertheless, contacting ASCAP, BMI and/or SESAC is always the best place to start on any licensing journey. Don’t be shy. They want to have their artists’ works get performed as much as you want to perform them. However, they also want to make sure their artists get paid, just like you do. Assuming, of course, that the production company expects to sell tickets, if any.

__________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and otherGG_logo_for-facebook legal, project management, and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.

All questions on any topic related to legal, management, and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously and/or posthumously.

__________________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

 

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Arts Management, Contracts, Copyrights, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Liability, Licensing, Music Rights, Presenters, Publishing, Venues | Comments Closed

The Divine Right To Cancel

Thursday, February 12th, 2015

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.   

We were in the process of booking one of our singers with an orchestra, when we encountered the following Force Majeure clause in the orchestra’s contract: “If, as a result of any event beyond the control of the Orchestra, including, but not limited to, war, national calamity, strike, labor relations, lack of funds, poor ticket sales, or other Acts of God or force majeure of any kind or nature, Orchestra determines it necessary to suspend, cancel, or terminate the giving of any of the performances specified herein, then the Orchestra, in its sole discretion, shall have the right to do so by giving notice to the Artist. Upon such notice, the Orchestra and Artist shall be relieved from any further obligations under this Agreement without any liability of either party to the other for any damages arising from such suspension, cancelation, or termination.” We asked if they would strike the reference to “lack of funds” and “poor ticket sales”, but we were told that their contracts must be approved by their board of directors and, as such, nothing can be changed. Have you encountered this before? Do you have any advice on how to respond?   

Telling someone that a contract cannot be changed because their board of directors says it can’t be changed is the equivalent of a parent telling a child “because I said so.” As I am frequently reminded when faced with the manifest irrationalities of my own parents: do not engage and back away.

I actually don’t doubt that the orchestra’s board of directors did, in fact, suggest and recommend such language. It’s just the type of thing a poorly formed board of wealthy corporate donors with no actual arts experience would come up with. (It brings to mind an occasion when I was called in to consult with a board of directors who was insisting that no season could be planned or programmed unless the artistic director was willing to guarantee exactly how many tickets would be sold to each performance!) Regardless, such language is absurd and quite frankly, insulting and unprofessional.

It is absurd because, as I have previously written, a force majeure clause is supposed to be limited to events truly beyond anyone’s control: floods, snowstorms, terrorist attacks, etc. Ticket sales and funding are not determined either by serendipity or the intervention of divine energies (though I often suspect many strategic plans are based on such notions.) I find it insulting and unprofessional because the orchestra’s board of directors is trying to obfuscate a cancellation provision under the pretext of a force majeure clause. By defining force majeure to include “lack of funds” and “poor ticket sales” the orchestra is attempting to give itself the luxury of being able to cancel at any time for any reason with no liability or consequence. Contractually, this would render the Agreement terminable at will by the orchestra and, thus, meaningless for the Artist.

As a compromise, I would propose amending the force majeure clause and adding to the agreement a proper cancellation clause whereby, if the Orchestra felt that it needed to cancel due to “lack of funds” or “poor ticket sales” then they would have the right to do so by paying a specific, pre-determined cancellation fee. If the orchestra refuses such a reasonable alternative, then I would simply thank the orchestra for its time and walk away.

I realize, of course, that, in practical terms, artists are not always in a position to walk away. Just like good art always requires risk, occasionally this applies to deals and negotiations as well. Perhaps the artist is young and needs engagements. Or perhaps the engagement presents an artistic or resume-building opportunity to the artist. Those might be reasonable reasons to take a risk. However, such risky transactions must be entered into with eyes wide open as opposed to wide shut. As the artist’s manager, it falls to you to make sure the artist understands the risks and that both of you understand that, should the orchestra avail itself of its contractually unfettered right to cancel, you will accept that and, whilst reserving the right to swoon, sway, and cry foul, resist the temptation to threaten a frivolous lawsuit.

_________________________________________________________________

For additional information and resources on this and otherGG_logo_for-facebook legal and business issues for the performing arts, visit ggartslaw.com

To ask your own question, write to lawanddisorder@musicalamerica.org.

All questions on any topic related to legal and business issues will be welcome. However, please post only general questions or hypotheticals. GG Arts Law reserves the right to alter, edit or, amend questions to focus on specific issues or to avoid names, circumstances, or any information that could be used to identify or embarrass a specific individual or organization. All questions will be posted anonymously and/or posthumously.

__________________________________________________________________

THE OFFICIAL DISCLAIMER:

THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE!

The purpose of this blog is to provide general advice and guidance, not legal advice. Please consult with an attorney familiar with your specific circumstances, facts, challenges, medications, psychiatric disorders, past-lives, karmic debt, and anything else that may impact your situation before drawing any conclusions, deciding upon a course of action, sending a nasty email, filing a lawsuit, or doing anything rash!

 

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Acts of God, Artist Management, Arts Management, Contracts, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Liability, Non-Profits, Presenters, Venues | Comments Closed

« Older Entries