By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq. Dear Law and Disorder: We are a small classical music presenter. Several months ago, I booked an artist for a performance this fall. Recently, I received a phone call from the artist’s manager asking for a deposit. Usually, we don’t pay deposits, although, sometimes we will if it’s an artist or manager with whom we have never worked before. However, we’ve worked with this manager before and she’s never asked for a deposit before. When I asked her about it, she said that she (the manager) was having a slow summer and that she needed the money to give her some cash flow to “tide her over” until the fall. She threatened to cancel if I didn’t agree. Is this legal? As a general rule, I’m a big fan of deposits. They provide artists with some “leverage” in the event of a cancellation and they provide presenters with some assurance that an artist has, in fact, been “booked.” However, once all key terms have been negotiated and agreed upon, whether or not a written booking agreement has been signed, then a manager cannot retroactively “require” a deposit. The requirement of a deposit is a key term which needs to be discussed, negotiated, and agreed upon at the outset of discussions. If the artist were to cancel because you refused to pay a deposit you never agreed to pay in the first place, then the artist would be in breach of the booking agreement. But that’s not really the problem here. The problem is that the manager volunteered that she was asking for the deposit not for the benefit of the artist, but for the benefit of the manager herself. It would be different if the manager wanted the deposit to reserve airline tickets or advance costs to cover the artist’s out-of-pocket expenses. However, according to you, that’s not what the manager said. She said she wanted it to “tide her over” for the manager’s own cash flow purposes. Based on that statement, and her subsequent threat to cancel if you refused to pay the deposit, the manager’s actions are not only unethical and unprofessional, in my opinion, but, more importantly, highly illegal. Managers and agents are legally bound to act only on behalf of and in the best interest of their client (the artist) and not on behalf of themselves or anyone else. In legal terms, these obligations are called “fiduciary duties.” Managers and agents can take no actions which are not authorized by the artist and most certainly cannot treat the artist’s money as if it were their own—including asking for and using deposits to float themselves loans to cover their own cash flow needs. This is why, among other reasons, managers and agents are supposed to keep their own, personal operating accounts separate from their client’s (artist’s) accounts. This should not be confused with legitimate situations where managers and agents sometimes ask presenters to split an engagement fee into two payments and pay a commission fee directly to the manager or agent and the balance to the artist. While I find this to be an ill-advised and awkward business practice, it’s neither illegal nor unethical. While I suppose its entirely possible that, in this case, the manager was acting with her artist’s knowledge and authority, I seriously doubt it. This means that the manager was acting out of her own self-interest and not in the best interest of her artist, is in breach of her fiduciary duties, is no longer acting in her legal capacity as a representative of the artist, and, in the event of a cancellation, would be personally liable for the return of the deposit and any damages. Given the manager’s self-admitted cash flow problems, that’s probably a risk you don’t want to take. I’d like to think that the manager is acting out of a genuine confusion over the duties agents and managers owe to their artists. Sadly, this issue continues to confuse even experienced managers and agents who believe that their artists work for them and not the other way around. Regardless, in terms of red flags, this one is ten feet tall and on fire. Run away! __________________________________________________________________ For additional information and resources on this and other 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. __________________________________________________________________ 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!
Archive for the ‘Artist Management’ Category
A Manager’s Deposit of Trouble
Wednesday, July 17th, 2013Who’s Responsible For Performance Licenses?
Wednesday, June 26th, 2013By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq. Dear Law and Disorder: In all of my artist’s booking contracts, the presenters are required to obtain ASCAP, BMI and SESAC licenses. I recently received a contract back from a venue in which they crossed out that language. They told me that their policy is not to get these licenses and that the artist is responsible for obtaining them. It was my understanding that it was always the venue’s or presenter’s responsibility to obtain the performance licenses from ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC. Am I wrong? You’re not wrong, but you’re not entirely correct either. The truth is that it is the legal responsibility of all parties to make sure that the proper licenses have been obtained for a performance. Which party actually obtains them and who bears the costs is a matter for negotiation. Whether it’s a festival, a school, a nightclub, or a large performing arts center, non-profit or for-profit, it’s the legal responsibility of the owner/operator of a performance space/venue to ensure that the necessary rights and licenses have been obtained with respect to all copyrighted music which is performed at that venue. (Actually, this legal responsibility is not limited to performance rights, but extends to dramatic rights, synchronization rights, broadcast rights, and all other required rights and licenses which pertain to music, images, trademarks, recordings, images, or other protected rights or materials which are used as part of the performance.) However, it’s equally the legal responsibility of the artist, and in some cases, the producer and promoter, to ensure that they have all of the required rights and licenses, including performance licenses from ASCAP, BMI and SESAC. Why? Because if an unlicensed song is performed at a venue, then the US Copyright Act allows all the parties involved in the performance—the artist as well as the venue/presenter, the producer, the promoter, and anyone else involved in the performance—to be sued by the publisher or copyright owner. Stealing a song is like robbing a bank: the entire gang is arrested; regardless of who broke open the safe, who drove the get away car, or who simply served as look out, they all participated in the robbery. I am familiar with many venues which do not want to be burdened with the perceived cost and difficulty of obtaining performance licenses (which, depending upon the specific circumstances, may be neither costly nor particularly difficult), refuse to do so, and insist on the artist obtaining the licenses. However, in my opinion, for reasons I have written about in earlier blogs, this is a foolish policy. In practice, it’s simple easier for venues and presenters to obtain ASCAP, BMI and SESAC licenses than the artist. The venue can purchase a blanket license from each organization that permits all of the music in their catalogs to be performed by any artist at the venue during the license period. These licenses can cover an entire year or just a specific festival or event, and are priced based on numerous factors, including number of performances, ticket prices, size of the venue, etc. With the blanket licenses in place, the artist simply needs to show up. If a venue or presenter prefers not to obtain such licenses, then the artist or performer can certainly do so themselves. However, if no one obtains the licenses, then everyone is liable. Quite simply, whether the venue/presenter requires the artist to obtain the performance licenses or the artist insists that the venue/presenter obtains the performance licenses, passing the responsibility on to another party will not relieve either party from ultimate responsibility if the other party fails to do so. In other words, there is no contract, release, or any other document which will protect you from liability should the necessary licenses not be obtained. This is why, among other reasons, if I operated a venue, I would much rather rely on myself to obtain the licenses than depend upon another party to do so. In your case, if the venue refuses to obtain the ASCAP, BMI or SESAC licenses, then you and your artist have two options: either the artist agrees to obtain the licenses or the artist refuses to perform. Electing 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 is not an option; 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. _________________________________________________________________ “Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division” will be taking a break between July 1 – July 14. Our next post will be on July 17. _________________________________________________________________ For additional information and resources on this and other 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. __________________________________________________________________ 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!
Your Move or Mine?
Wednesday, June 19th, 2013By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq. Dear Law and Disorder: If I am booking an artist, whose job is it to draft the contract? Some venues ask me to send them my contract, but other venues seem to have their own. What’s the normal practice? Since you asked for the “normal” practice, I shall tell you: the normal practice is that some venues will ask you to send them your contract and other venues will have their own. It all depends on the circumstances and the venue. You should always have a basic engagement contract that you can tailor for each artist and send to a venue who wants your contract. However, you should expect larger venues to prefer to use their own contracts just as most venues understand and expect that major artists will insist on using the artist’s contract. It really doesn’t matter as both parties will need to review the proposed contract and, if necessary, proposed changes, additions, and amendments. Its unrealistic to presume that the venue’s contract will address all the issues important to the artist and that artist’s contract will address all the issues important to the venue. Negotiation is not just about date, time, and fee. Negotiations include ALL of the terms which will be in the final contract. What you want to avoid at all costs is a situation where, in lieu of taking the time to review and negotiate a single contract, the manger or agent just attaches the artist’s contract as a rider to the venue’s contract (or visa versa) and the parties proceed. Almost always the two contracts will have conflicting terms which will operate to negate the entire contract, making neither one legally enforceable. (And, no, it doesn’t help to use a rubber stamp that says “in the event of a conflict, mine governs.” That only benefits the folks who sell rubber stamps.) Even more important, regardless of who goes first, is to never ever ever ever ever send anyone a signed contract at the outset. The contract should be signed only after all parties have had a chance to review, make comments, propose changes, attach riders, and agree upon a final version. Otherwise, the party receiving the signed contract will simply strike out or amend the language they don’t like…or, worse, attach a rider…sign it, and return it…which, legally, constitutes a counter-offer and not an enforceable contract. (Actually, it “could” be enforceable, but this gets into complex legal issues which could all be avoided if everyone just sent one another blank contracts and waited until all issues had been resolved before anyone signed anything!) I realize that it takes time to review, negotiate, and amend every contract. However, that’s what contracts are for. It gives each party a chance to make sure that all important issues have been addressed and that there will be no unstated expectations or assumptions. Contracts are not about enforcement…they are about avoiding conflicts and disappointment. Without question, life would be easier if there were standard contracts and terms that worked for every engagement. However, we work in the arts. Nothing is normal and nothing is customary. If you are looking for consistency, go work in a bank. Otherwise, learn to embrace the chaos. __________________________________________________________________ For additional information and resources on this and other 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. __________________________________________________________________ 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!
Pre-Nuptial Management Agreements
Wednesday, June 5th, 2013By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq. Dear Law and Disorder: I just received an email that an artist is leaving my roster for another manger, effective in two weeks. I’ve been working with this artist for over five years. We’ve never had a signed contract because we’ve never needed one. Isn’t it customary to give at least 3 months notice? Also, the new manager is offering to let us keep our commissions on any engagements that are “contracted.” What does that mean? Everyone knows that engagements are often confirmed without their being contracts! Help! Actually, you’ve always needed a signed contract. You just didn’t realize you needed one until now. A contract is your opportunity to memorialize all the terms of a relationship…including how to get out of one. An artist/manager relationship is like a marriage and, when it ends, it’s like a divorce—all too often a bitter and nasty divorce. If there is no pre-nuptial agreement, then any disputes will be resolved by the application of legal rules and concepts. In these situations, such rules are quite basic: what you didn’t negotiate for in advance, you don’t get! Many in our industry like to believe that there exists a magic book of customs, traditions, and rules which govern everything from artist-manager relationships to engagement cancellations, and that, in the absence of a contract, this book will determine how everyone should behave. Nothing can be further from the truth. What may be “customary” for one person or situation may not be “customary” for another. Nor would you want it to be otherwise. The arts and entertainment industry is too diverse, too broad, and too delightfully fluid for that degree of uniformity. To the extent there exists a set of rules which govern relationships in the absence of a contract, such rules consist of the laws of contracts, agency, and a myriad of other legal concepts—all of which are fairly arbitrary and none of which will provide an outcome better than the parties could have devised for themselves through advanced contractual negotiation. Whether its exclusivity, the right to be reimbursed for expenses, the authority of the manager, or the calculation of the manager’s commissions, such issues need to be agreed upon…in advance…and memorialized in a written contract. If you want an artist to be required to give you three months notice before leaving your roster, that needs to be agreed upon and written down as well. (While an agreement does not have to be written to be enforceable, its very hard to prove the terms of any agreement without something in writing—especially when you’re in the midst of a bitter divorce when everyone’s memories will suddenly and conveniently become quite spotty.) In your case, without a written contract setting forth a specific length of time an artist is obligated to remain on your roster (ie: 1 year, 2 years, etc.) and without a requirement that the artist has to give you advance notice before terminating the agreement, then the artist can leave your roster whenever they want with no notice at all. As for the new manager’s offer to let you keep your commissions on any engagements that are “contracted”, this, too, is something that should and could have been defined in an artist management agreement. Otherwise, the definition of “contracted” will be the legal definition: a “contracted” engagement is one where there is an enforceable agreement (either written or oral), which means there has been an offer and an acceptance of that offer and the parties have agreed upon all key terms. While its true that engagements are often confirmed without their being contracts, a confirmation of an engagement may not necessarily constitute a “contracted” engagement. A “hold” may or may not be an enforceable contract. If the parties have agreed upon the date and the fee, it may not be “contracted” if there are other important issues that have not yet been agreed upon—ie: insurance, licensing, technical requirements, etc. In other words, what you consider to be “contracted” may or may not be what the law of contracts considers to be “contracted.” In the absence of a written agreement with defined terms and obligations, your best and most practical course of action is to accept that this is a bit of a mess and enter into a dialogue with your “former” artist and his or her new manager to come up with a mutually agreed upon list of “contracted” engagements on which you will receive your commissions. I can almost guarantee that such a list will have fewer dates that you believe is fair and more dates than your former artist and his/her manager believe is fair. However, if everyone believes they are giving up too much, its probably a fair settlement. Then, focus your time on getting agreements in place for your remaining artists. Pre-nuptial agreements are never sexy, but neither is finding yourself sleeping with the enemy. _________________________________________________________________ For additional information and resources on this and other 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. __________________________________________________________________ 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!
New I-94 Process for Artists Touring the United States
Wednesday, May 22nd, 2013By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq. Dear Law and Disorder: I heard that US Immigration will no longer be giving foreign artists the little white card they used to get when an artist entered the US. The cards were stamped with the artist’s visa category and the date they had to leave. It was my understanding that we needed to make copies of those cards if we needed to extend an artist’s visa. Are we supposed to use something else instead? Is there a new process? Yes, you heard correctly. The little white card, called a Form I-94, was an artist’s official arrival/departure record. Up until recently, every foreign artist as well as all other foreign travelers entering the U.S. (except, occasionally, Canadians, depending on when and where they entered) was given a Form I-94 to fill out (most often while waiting in an interminably long line at an airport international arrivals hall), the bottom half of which was stamped with their status and departure date and returned to them by a US Customs and Border Patrol Officer (aka the border troll.) This form was also issued to those who adjusted their status while in the U.S. (ie: changed from F to O), or who extended their visas. The I-94 was used to confirm the artist’s individual’s status or visa category (O, P, F, B1/B2, etc.) and the departure date by which they must leave the U.S. When the artist left, they surrendered the I-94 either to the commercial airline carrier or to CBP directly. The I-94 information and the date of departure was then entered into a database to verify that the artist did not overstay the required departure date. As of April 30, 2013, this process became electronically automated. CBP will no longer require artists to fill out a paper Form I-94 upon arrival to the U.S. by air or sea and will no longer issue paper I-94 forms in return. Instead, CBP will gather the arrival/departure information automatically from the foreign artist’s electronic travel records and, upon entry of the artist into the U.S., will enter their status and departure date electronically. (Because advance information is only transmitted for air and sea travelers, CBP will continue to issue a paper form I-94 “at land border ports of entry”—which is government-speak for Canada and Mexico.) Similarly, when the artist leaves the US, the date of their departure will be electronically gathered, as well. Under the new process, the CBP officer will stamp the passport of each arriving artist. The admission stamp will show the date of admission, class of admission, and the departure date by which the traveler must leave. Artists wanting a hard copy or other evidence of their valid admission and immigration status will need to go to a special website (www.cbp.gov/I94) where, using their passport numbers and names, they can access and print as many physical copies of their I-94 as they want. Officially, there is no legal reason for an artist to have a hard copy of the I-94. Officially, the electronic record and the passport stamp will serve as evidence of their valid admission and immigration status. Nevertheless, we are strongly recommending that all artists, or their managers/agents or employers, go to the website and print out a hard copy of the I-94. Why? Simple—we don’t trust CBP not to make mistakes! Plus, while CBP may no longer require a physical I-94, other government agencies still do. Despite what is stamped in an artist’s passport, an artist’s official arrival/departure record will remain the electronic I-94. If a CBP officer makes an error and the required departure date written on the passport does not correspond with the official departure date electronically entered on the I-94, the I-94 will govern. In other words, regardless of what is written on the passport, the artist MUST leave the US by the date stamped on the I-94 despite what was approved by USCIS or written on their visa. Printing out the I-94 will be the only way to verify that the I-94 reflects the correct visa category and the correct period of admission. Furthermore, having a hard copy of the I-94 will also continue to be required by employers and schools who are required by other government agencies to verify immigration status. A hard copy of the I-94 will also facilitate the process of obtaining drivers licenses and social security numbers. An equally important reason for a paper copy of the I-94 is that it would function as a backup document in the event that CBP officers cannot access the electronic record of admission due to a systems failure at the time that an artist seeks re-admission to the US after a short visit to either Canada or Mexico. A hard copy of the I-94 will also continue to be required by USCIS when an artist is currently in the US and files a visa petition to extend their visa. In such cases, the petition must include a copy of the I-94 to show that the artist was validly admitted and is currently “in-status.” CBP has issued a fact sheet that includes frequently asked questions regarding the impact of automation, visa revalidation, passenger processing times, and more. You can access that at: http://www.cbp.gov CBP contends that this automation will streamline the entry process for travelers, facilitate security, and reduce federal costs by saving the agency an estimated $15.5 million a year. That remains to be seen. As CBP implements the I-94 automation process, processing errors and challenges relating to the automated admissions process and accessibility of electronic records are already arising. _________________________________________________________________ For additional information and resources on this and other 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. __________________________________________________________________ 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!
Student Visas: A School for Scandal?
Wednesday, May 8th, 2013By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.
Dear Law and Disorder:
May a non-resident alien (Russian) musician here for an advance graduate school degree on an F-1 visa be paid for playing some off-campus recitals? Are they considered “Curricular Practical Training” which is supposed to be allowed, if approved by the Designated School Official? (Of course, 30% of the gross fee would have to be withheld unless a CWA is obtained.) Thanks for your advice!
A lot of schools, universities, and conservatories are all too happy to accept foreign students without really explaining that their ability to “work” in the US during their studies, much less remain long enough after graduation to establish careers in the US, is very limited and restrictive. (Remember, as it applies to artists, the twisted tomes of US immigration law define “work” as any performance in front of an audience regardless of whether or not tickets are sold or the artist is paid.)
While obtaining authorization for a foreign student to perform concerts and recitals on-campus is fairly simple, performing concerts and recitals off-campus can be a bit much trickier. One of the ways foreign students can be granted authorization to perform concerts and recitals off campus is to be approved for Practical Training. Foreign students are eligible for Practical Training once they have been enrolled for at least one academic year (nine months). There are two types of Practical Training: Curricular Practical Training (CPT) and Optional Practical Training (OPT).
CPT includes programs that are an “integral part of an established curriculum.” That is, the off-campus concerts and performances must be associated with the school’s established curriculum and must be an integral part of the student’s degree program. While it is completely within the discretion of the school to determine what qualifies for CPT and what constitutes “an integral part of the student’s degree program,” CPT programs are typically listed in the school’s course catalog with the number of credits included and the name of a responsibility faculty member. CPT programs typically include work/study, internships, or any other type of required internship or practical performance experience which the school believes is necessary for the student’s degree or course of study.
OPT, by contrast, is not tied to the curriculum (though it is supposed to be “related” to the student’s field of study) and can be used for up to a year full time (two years part time) on campus or off campus. OPT can take place either before graduation or in the year following graduation. OPT that takes place before graduation can only be used for up to 20 hours per week during the school year (though full time work is permitted during holidays and vacation periods if the student applies). After graduation, the employment can be full-time. Post-graduation OPT must be completed within 14 months of the student’s graduation. A student can have OPT for a maximum of twelve months after graduation.
A note of caution: while students may take an unlimited amount of Practical Training, if they take more than a year of CPT, they are barred from seeking OPT. This can be critical because the OPT may be a student’s only opportunity to perform professional engagements in the US after graduation. As USCIS discourages students from switching easily from F-1 classification to O-1 classification, any hope of doing so usually rests with what the student is able to do during their year of post-graduation OPT. Total CPT up to 364 days or less will not result in the loss of OPT. However, part time work using CPT for more than a year has been deemed to result in the loss of eligibility for OPT. In short, avoiding the loss of OPT eligibility requires both good record keeping of the time spent performing on CPT as well as a lot of math!
In your case, assuming the Designated School Official (DSO) approves the student’s request to perform the off-campus recitals, the DSO will enter the information in SEVIS and print out an I-20 with the CPT authorization for the student. The DSO is required to sign and date the I-20 prior to returning it to the student. While no employment authorization document from USCIS is needed for curricular practical training, the student may not begin work using CPT until getting the endorsed I-20.
So long as a student is approved for either CPT or OPT, then, yes, the student can be paid. However, while your willingness to acknowledge US tax-withholding obligations is both rare and commendable, it may be premature. First, Russians belong to a small list of countries from whom no withholding is required because all money earned by Russians nationals in the US is tax exempt. However, this changes if the Russian is considered a “resident alien” for tax purposes. Second, just because a student (or anyone, for that matter) is a “non-resident” for immigration purposes, doesn’t mean they are a “non-resident” for tax purposes. It all depends on how much time they spend in the US each year. As with all foreign artist tax matters, it’s a very fact specific analysis. Assuming your student in approved for CPT, then I would strongly recommend you consult with an expert in foreign artist taxation to determine the student’s specific withholding and tax obligations.
__________________________________________________________________
For additional information and resources on this and other
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.
__________________________________________________________________
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!
When To Negotiate A Contract
Tuesday, April 30th, 2013By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.
Dear Law and Disorder:
A successful duo I represent has recorded a CD which is being released by a record company. Although the artist made attempts to obtain a contract, because of time restraints, according to the record company, it was only possible to give a contract AFTER the recording was made. The terms include exclusivity universally for several-year options, and although the company paid for the recording and manufacture of the cd, these costs will come out of the royalties. The company controls the cd universally with power of attorney from the artists. To obtain copies, the artists buy the cd at a reduced price. The company insists these are normal terms which are standard practice and always given after the recording is made. This is news to me. Can this be true?
In my ideal world, among other things on my wish list, every artist, manager, agent, presenter, producer, arts lawyer, and arts administrator would have a sign above their desks stating: “Nothing is Standard!” While it is true that there are many terms and practices which are more common than others and while it is also true that certain financial arrangements and commitments will necessarily lend themselves to certain expectations in return, everything is negotiable. This does not, of course, mean that you will get everything you want. Rather, depending on the negotiating strengths of the parties, everyone is free to ask and propose whatever they want. Think outside the box. Get creative.
However, while creative proposals may be limitless, the time to propose them is not. The time to negotiate is before services are rendered, significant time is spent, or money changes hands. Thus, the real issue at the heart of your question is your comment that “because of time restraints, according to the record company, it was only possible to give a contract after the recording was made.” In my experience, I have yet to encounter a situation that was so dire and immediate that at least some basic understandings of key terms could not be mutually agreed upon ahead of time.
Sadly, it’s not uncommon in the arts and entertainment world for the artistic aspects of a project to proceed on a completely separate track and pace from the administrative and business details. New works are created or composed before the commission agreements are in place. Recordings are made before the recording contracts are signed. Engagements are scheduled and sometimes even performed with no engagement agreements. I’ve even known artists to collaborate with one another and then try, almost always unsuccessfully, to negotiate a collaboration agreement after the work has been optioned for production.
Of course, some of this is understandable. Contractual terms can be confusing, especially when the parties are unfamiliar with business practices and terminology. Also, it can take such considerable effort just to coordinate the funding, schedules, and parties that no time is left for negotiating contractual terms. Also, its not uncommon for different individuals and departments within a large organization or institution to address artistic planning and scheduling separate and apart from contractual and business planning without communicating or coordinating with one another. But, whatever the reason, this phenomenon is unfortunate because it makes it much harder to negotiate favorable terms or, at the very least, to manage expectations, avoid potential conflicts, and make informed decisions.
The biggest—and, often, only—power an artist has in a negotiation is the power of “no”—that is, the power to say: “I’d rather pause for a moment, even it means losing the deal or opportunity, than enter blindly into a relationship where I may have no control over my creative services.” Of course, it can be equally bad for record companies, producers, and presenters who can find themselves investing both time and money without getting the rights or return they anticipated. While saying “no” or “stop” can sometimes cause a lost opportunity, the alternative is a bad or unfavorable deal that, ultimately, could prove worse.
Without a doubt, legitimate practicalities, including artist availability and opportunity costs, can often make it difficult for a formal contract to be drafted up in advance of every occasion. However, there is rarely a legitimate reason why parties cannot at least mutually agree upon basic terms, with a more formal agreement to follow. Remember, a contract is a written memorialization of an existing agreement. Until an agreement exists, there is nothing to memorialize. Without terms agreed upon ahead of time, there is no contract to draft.
In any situation, if time is of the essence, never wait for the other party to provide a contract or propose terms. You may need to make the first move. In your situation, if the record company refused to provide a contract, then your artists could have proposed their own terms or set out their own requirements for proceeding with the recording. If your artists are truly as “successful” as you indicate then chances are the record company would have agreed to an outline of reasonable terms. When you say that your artists “made attempts”, that should have included writing:
“Dear Record Company, while we are very excited about the prospect of working together, unless we can arrive at a mutual agreement of some basic terms, we will be unable to proceed with the recording as scheduled. Thus, we are proposing the following…..”
Contractual terms do not, and should not be, a confusing quagmire of legalese. Write your proposals in clear, understandable language. The key is to be detailed, not convoluted. As even the most experienced artist managers can find themselves daunted by the prospect of proposing terms for recording contracts and other multi-media deals and transactions, you would be wise to bring in some specialized help.
Ultimately, in your situation, if the record company paid for the recording without negotiating the contract, then they took the risk that no agreement would be reached and that your artists could simply refuse to permit the recordings to be released. That would leave the recording company with a worthless product. Of course, your artists wouldn’t own recordings they didn’t pay for, so they would have nothing to show for their time. Everyone loses. Hopefully, the potential of mutual self-destruction will force the parties into coming up with the reasonable compromise that should have been agreed to ahead of time.
__________________________________________________________________
For additional information and resources on this and other 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.
__________________________________________________________________
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!
A Visa Substitution Requires an Artist to Substitute
Wednesday, April 17th, 2013By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.
Dear Law and Disorder:
I have a substitution/visa question for you….We were intending to use someone from the US as the eighth singer for one of our groups coming to perform with a symphony in July 2013. It’s now looking like the group might have to replace the intended US singer with a singer from the UK. The rest of the group have visas that have already been approved and issues. Obviously, the singer from the US was not included in the original visa application, so I’m wondering how it would work if we’re now substituting a singer from the UK for the US singer. Would we have to do an entirely new visa application for the new (UK) singer, or would we still be able to add this new singer to the existing (approved) visa petition as a replacement for the US singer? Any light you could shed on this, either by answering these questions or by referring me to another resource where I might be able to get an answer to these questions would be extremely helpful and very much appreciated. Thanks so much!
I can both shed light and refer you to another resource.
First, the light: If you filed a petition listing 7 beneficiaries and 7 beneficiaries are listed on the visa approval notice, and all 7 will be coming to the US, then there is no one you can substitute. The substitution process is available only if one of the original 7 listed singers were to become ill or otherwise unable to travel to the US. Then, you could ask the consulate to “substitute” one of the 7 singers with a new singer. Its also much hard to substitute a visa that has already been issued as the original artists would need to return his/her passport and visa to the consulate in order for it to be voided before the new visa could be issued.
If you need to add an 8th singer and that 8th singer is a non-US performer, then you will have to file an amended petition where you ask for 8 beneficiaries instead of 7. You cannot file a petition just for the extra singer as you cannot list only 1 person on a P (group) visa petition. You would have to re-file the whole original petition as an “Amended Petition” where you list 8 singers rather than 7 and get a new approval notice for everyone. However, only the new, 8th singer, would need to go the consulate. The other 7 can use the visas already issued. You would also need to provide all of the same supporting materials you provided with the original petition (reviews, contracts, articles, etc.) once again as USCIS does not keep copies of these things. (Well, they do, but they are not easily retrievable as we suspect the files are sent somewhere near a top secret UFO landing site in Nevada.)
As the concert is not until July 2013, you won’t need to pay for premium processing and, if you file it as an amended petition, then you won’t need a new union letter. You’ll just need to pay the $325 filing fee.
Now for the resource: There is a lot of information on the substitution process at www.artistsfromabroad.org. You can also link to that site, as well as fine other resources on immigration, at our own website: www.ggartslaw.com
________________________________________________________________
For additional information and resources on this and other 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.
__________________________________________________________________
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!
Using Existing Recordings–Not So Fast!
Wednesday, April 10th, 2013By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.
Dear Law and Disorder:
A few weeks ago you wrote a great article about how to obtain a mechanical license when someone wants to record music. But what about using a recording that already exists? We would like to promote an upcoming concert at our venue by putting some recordings of the artist on our website. Since the artist gave us the recordings, are we ok?
Thanks…and no, you may not be ok.
Any time you want to use an existing recording of a composition, whether to put on your website, or as a soundtrack to a film or video, you will need to get permission (aka “a license)” from the composer (which often means contacting the composer’s publisher) as well as permission (aka “a license”) from the owner of the recording (which is often a record label.) That’s right, you may need to get two separate licenses! Why? Because copyright law creates a separate copyright in compositions and a separate copyright in the recording of a composition.
Just because an artist or an artist’s manager gives you a recording and gives you permission to use that recording, doesn’t mean that the artist owns the recording or has the rights to give. Even if it is a recording of the artist’s own original composition or if the composition itself is in the public domain, the artist may not own the recording. In which case, the artist cannot give you permission to use it, much less the artist’s manager.
Shortly after I posted the earlier blog you mentioned (The Mechanics of Mechanical Licenses, March 6, 2013), Peter Christ of Crystal Records Inc. (http://www.crystalrecords.com) sent me an email which exactly and accurately addressed this issue. He graciously agreed to let me post it here:
Your explanation was very clear and should help those who want to record music that is not public domain. However, it does not address the situation of a person who wants to use a recording already made, and on a record label, for their web site or their movie or other background music use. It should be made clear that the publisher needs to be contacted and ALSO the record label or other copyright owner of the recorded music.
We sometimes find out that our copyrighted recordings are being used as background music for films or on someone’s web site. This is not legal without our permission, and when it is discovered, the legal expenses can be very high for the perpetrator.
Some people want to do it right, and we frequently get requests for license to use our recordings for films, web, etc. We always appreciate that someone is honest and knowledgeable enough to request a license. However, in most cases, they do not realize they need a license both from the record company and from the publisher of the music. And in many cases, the music was recorded under an AFM contract and additional payment must be made through the union to the musicians on the recording. It should be pointed out that even if the music itself is public domain, the recording is most likely not, so permission from the record company, and possibly the union, is definitely needed. So the two minutes or so they want to use can get quite expensive.
Thank you for your excellent column in Musical America.
See, I don’t make this stuff up just to make your lives complicated! Bottom line, when it comes to music rights there are three rules: never assume—always ask—and know who to ask.
__________________________________________________________________
For additional information and resources on this and other 
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.
__________________________________________________________________
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!