Kenny Rogers' Lawsuit Shows The Many Ways That A Major Label Screws Artists (Even The Big Ones)
from the here-we-go-again dept
We've seen this many times before, where famous musicians are totally screwed over by the major labels. A bunch of folks have sent over a summary of Kenny Rogers' lawsuit against Capitol Records (EMI), which highlights the levels to which Capitol Records went to not pay Rogers. The central facet of the lawsuit is similar to that of lawsuits that a number of artists have been filing, concerning whether or not iTunes transactions are sales or licenses -- for which massively different royalty rates apply.However, there's plenty of other crazy things in the lawsuit, most of which involve an "audit" that Rogers requested from Capitol in April 2007... and which took until March 2009 to complete. Yes, it took two years. For a basic audit just to make sure he was getting the money he was owed. Oh, and the audit showed that he was not getting the money owed. From there, things got worse... with all sorts of stalling and foot dragging, finally resulting in the lawsuit. That stalling included repeated promises to resolve the problems and pay up. Rogers was told at times that the company was "still ironing out a few things," and then later found out that the people he'd been negotiating with were no longer at the company -- replaced by a lawyer who just told Rogers that he would be happy to work with Rogers to "promptly try to resolve the Rogers audit" -- nearly two years after the audit was completed and four years after it was requested.
Among the problems in the audit are a bunch of unprocessed royalties that were put into a "suspense" file for no reason. These kept $76,956 from Rogers. There were also actions in foreign territories where Capitol appears to have ignored the royalties it's supposed to pay Rogers. There were also things as simple as just not reporting royalties on money from record club sales. The company is also accused of playing some tax games to double count taxes to avoid paying royalties. There's also the fact that Capitol charged Rogers the full amount for a video production to his own expenses (i.e., money they'd "recoup" out of his portion of royalties), but they ignored their own contractual agreement that only 50% could be expensed that way.
Then there's the fact that Rogers wants his cut from the money Capitol has received in various lawsuits -- those against Napster, Kazaa, AudioGalaxy, Grokster, BearShare and others. As we've noted in the past, the labels have bent over backwards to avoid paying out such money to the actual artists -- but Rogers wants his piece:
Such lawsuits have resulted in Capitol Records receiving monies from entities such as Napster, Kazaa, Audiogalaxy, Grokster, BearShare, and others. Capitol Records has refused to provide Kenny Rogers with an accounting regarding the amounts actually received. A portion of the monies received by Capitol Records is attributable to the Masters and Kenny Rogers is entitled to that portion of Capitol Records‟ receipts. Capitol Records‟ refusal to account to and pay that money to Kenny Rogers has resulted in Kenny Rogers suffering direct financial harm in an amount that cannot be determined until Capitol Records provides a full, fair, and accurate accounting.There are a few other charges as well, but those are the big ones. None of this, of course, is to say that it's "ok" to infringe because the major labels are somehow "bad." But it does show just how ridiculous it is if anyone assumes the majors represent the best interests of artists in any way.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: copyright, kenny rogers, lawsuits, record labels
Companies: capitol records, emi
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why?
Mike, I hear that fire prevents trolls from regenerating. If you dump some lamp oil on them and then light them it will permanently kill them. At least that's how it works in D&D
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why?
Why is that?
Because Mike Masnick loves piracy. It's why he runs this pro-piracy blog.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why?
You know, one of those same labels that claims piracy is actually stealing from the artists? A label who itself seems to be doing more harm to this one artist in this instance than any pirate.
Oh, but it's funny because you of course try and spin this into "Mike loves pirates". While not saying a word in defense of the artist who is literally getting cheated here by his own goddamn label. Yeah, the hypocrisy is strong in you young shill-awan.
If they give awards to "Best Industry Shill", I think you deserve the top honor (whatever it may be). You tow that party line and dismiss anything that should normally shut you up like a true champ. Kudos to you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why?
Why is that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cheats
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cheats
Boycott the Big Content Industry !!
They are the thieves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Cheats
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Cheats
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Cheats
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Cheats
Calling it a rabbit hole is like calling Chris Dodd a little dishonest.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Cheats
http://rapfix.mtv.com/2011/03/22/eminem-victorious-in-lawsuit-against-record-label/
http: //www.billboard.com/news/public-enemy-s-chuck-d-files-100m-lawsuit-1005477392.story#/news/public-ene my-s-chuck-d-files-100m-lawsuit-1005477392.story
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/univers al-music-lawsuit-rob-zombie-rick-james-256662
Floodgates open
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Cheats
Probably a multiple of the amount of royalties owed to the artist, plus costs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cheats
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is the world we live in...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
sadly, i don't get to make the decisions on these things.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
These moronic companies cannot hope to survive if they try to sue customers, bribe politicians, and defend themselves from paying artists. With artists tieing up their lawyers and large sums of money maybe they will be forced to drop some of these stupid laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
1. Be a decent human being.
2. See 1.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
and we are supposed to expect to get everything for free? we are supposed to be the ones ruining the industries? we are the ones that are stopping artists from being able to afford to eat? yeah, right!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"If it wasn't for the filthy pirates then the record companies would have enough money to pay their artists. All of this is the fault of the filthy pirates!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"For the artists?"
"Who?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Where are the shills?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Where are the shills?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Where are the shills?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well, duh.
It's right there on the name of the file. Will he get the money, or won't he? Tune in next decade!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well, duh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You're Wrong, Mike!
Poor management of accounting is part of the labels business model. Hell! Maybe all the "losses to piracy" were actually forgotten in some file...just sitting there all along because it was under the executives blow satchel.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The only difference between this and a thousand other stories...
For every case like his, there are many (MANY!) more that never came to light, because the musicians involved couldn't afford to pay even cheap legal counsel. They just had to throw up their hands and walk away in resignation, while the fat, bloated, greedy pigs at the record companies pocketed the money. Or they died -- an outcome I'm sure these executives cheered, since it greatly diminished the probability that litigation would be brought or would succeed.
"Vile" does not even begin to describe these people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I sent a copy to my Senator
As you might remember, Grassley was one of the sponsors of PIPA.
I suspect that Kenny Rogers material will soon become as hard to find as James Garner is currently. It just doesn't pay to sue Hollywood.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I sent a copy to my Senator
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: I sent a copy to my Senator
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Troll this!!!
Well Capitol Records obviously understands the value of free stuff....
"The Audit also revealed that Capitol Records has distributed �FREE goods�
containing the Masters in foreign territories without accounting for or paying royalties for those FREE goods. The Recording Agreements specifically state that FREE goods distributed in foreign territories shall not be reduced from calculations of the total number of foreign sales used to determine the royalties due Kenny Rogers. Capitol Records has failed to provide documentation regarding the exact number of FREE goods upon which Kenny Rogers is due royalties. However, Capitol Records has provided information which indicates it has underpaid Kenny Rogers by at least $17,754.52, by not properly paying royalties for free goods distributed in foreign territories."
So it's ok to give away someone else's content when you agree to pay them for it and then its ok to not pay them for it.
Why isn't the RIAA on top of this? It sure as hell seems like piracy. Capitol took content that wasn't theirs and distributed it for FREE. Isn't that piracy???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Troll this!!!
...OKay, it was Kenny Rogers' royalties.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Troll this!!!
I like it! Ok RIAA & MPAA I'll never "pirate" anything again. You'll get paid right after it gets processed through a copy of YOUR accounting and disbursement model.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is what happens...
/sarcasm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No reason? It has kept Kenny in suspense for years!
They can't make a movie that good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What's the benefit?
Moral: don�t sign a contract with a big record label. They are in fact a huge liability. So exactly what value do they provide today?... I can�t think of anything. Nope, still can�t think of any benefit of the big labels.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What's the benefit?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You're gonna go far, you're gonna fly high,
You're never gonna die, you're gonna make it if you try;they're gonna love you.
Well I've always had a deep respect, and I mean that most sincerely.
The band is just fantastic, that is really what I think.
Oh by the way, which one's Pink?
And did we tell you the name of the game, boy
we call it Riding the Gravy Train.
We're just knocked out.
We heard about the sell out.
You gotta get an album out,
You owe it to the people. We're so happy we can hardly count.
Everybody else is just green, have you seen the chart?
It's a helluva start, it could be made into a monster
if we all pull together as a team.
And did we tell you the name of the game, boy
we call it Riding the Gravy Trail.
Good to see that nothing has changed since 1975.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If only....
*turns and looks into the camera*
Only labels can prevent horrible face lifts.
Pay the artists what you owe them, and stop these terrifying visages from attacking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
List of People who had to sue
Did Prince?
Others?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
criminal prosecution !!!!!!!!!! ??
downloading without payment AND
copying and distributing without payment?
One is a pirate and the other a theif?
Seems to me that this type of stuff should be criminalized no?
"Artists' And Children's Family Protection Act" anyone????
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: criminal prosecution !!!!!!!!!! ??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: criminal prosecution !!!!!!!!!! ??
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Y'know....
Yep, a real victory for justice was had the day Megaupload was taken down.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So it's ok to give away someone else's content when you agree to pay them for it and then its ok to not pay them for it.
Why isn't the RIAA on top of this? It sure as hell seems like piracy. Capitol took content that wasn't theirs and distributed it for FREE. Isn't that piracy???
Yes indeed, and Roger's should press charges that they are violating his copyright - I mean, if they aren't complying with the contract, then how is it binding anymore?
He should get all rights to his music back, period.
In these situations, why aren't the contracts considered null and void with all rights returning to the original creator?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110912/13500315912/hollywood-accounting-darth-vader-not-getti ng-paid-because-return-jedi-still-isnt-profitable.shtml
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on Feb 22nd, 2012 @ 9:26pm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]