Posts Tagged ‘engagements’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Opening Pandora’s Box

Thursday, September 4th, 2014

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.   

Dear Law and Disorder:

Loved your recent Musical American newsletter article on ethics.  As a manager, I was very interested when you wrote: “Indeed, the time is long overdue to start considering changes to the long standing paradigms and business models between managers and artists that, for many reasons and for all parties, are no longer viable.”  Any chance I could get you to expand on that comment a bit? 

Must I? It’s only going to get me in trouble! Oh, well, here goes….

It’s hardly a secret that everyone throughout the arts industry is working harder and harder and earning less and less—and searching for both solutions and as well as excuses. Managers and agents are increasingly becoming frustrated with artists who they perceive as making unreasonable expectations and demands in exchange for paltry commissions. Artists are increasingly becoming frustrated with managers and agents who they perceive as earning large commissions but are unable or unwilling to provide the additional skills and services that they feel are necessary in today’s arts and entertainment marketplace.

While some managers are exploring different options (ie: fixed retainers, hourly rates, reduced commissions for more successful artists, etc.) others are wedded to the strict commission model. As I sit here typing this on my computer keyboard surrounded by my collection of quills and antique ink wells, I am the first to admit that I am a staunch traditionalist, resistant to change, and have even been described as “a walking ritual.” However, change is inevitable and merely continuing to claim that what worked in the past will work in the future, ignores the present realities. Assuming that there is some sort of “industry standard” that has and will survive the test of time is both unrealistic and short sighted.

Under the traditional agent or management relationship, managers and agents literally advance their services on the expectation that they will be compensated with an engagement commission at some point in the future and that, if the artist sticks around long enough and is successful, the agent or manager will recoup the initial investment of their time and efforts. While it’s intended to be a mutually beneficial partnership, is this still the case? Are the risks still equitable? While most certainly there are issues to consider far beyond mere economic and business challenges, being an impresario doesn’t always pay the bills. Part of what makes the performing arts industry so unique is the personal passion most agents and managers share for the work of the artists they represent. Nonetheless, even where the goal is to introduce an artistically important artist to new audiences and perpetuate critical art forms, selling tickets, booking engagements, and discovering new programming opportunities are all commercial enterprises. If the end result is that managers and agents simply cannot afford to stay in business, then everyone loses.

One often overlooked factor is that agents and managers are not used to thinking of their time as a valuable commodity. However, like attorneys, doctors, and others who provide personal services, managers and agents are primarily “selling” their time, expertise, and experience and the traditional commission model doesn’t often adequately compensate for the value of the time actually spent. Similarly, because artists think in terms of results, they often don’t have a realistic understanding of how much time and effort it takes to provide them with the services and results they require and often conclude they can find better deals elsewhere or on their own. In other words, a manager’s own success can often undermine the perception of how hard they are actually working.

It’s one thing for an agent or manager to advance their time, but I’m also increasingly seeing agents and managers advancing their own money to cover artist expenses with the expectation of being reimbursed by the engagement or tour fees. When did an agent or manager’s business plan including being a bank? I’ve even seen many managers and agents advance costs for airline tickets or tour expenses, including visas and taxes, out of their own pockets only to have the tour cancelled or an artist leave the roster. At what point is a tour or artist not worth saving?

All of this leads to some important questions: is a demanding artist actually “worth” the time and effort that they require? How do you deal with a demanding client base without killing yourself?  Is the commission model still viable? What services do artists really want, need, or expect? (Remember, at least from a legal perspective, the “client” of an agent or manager is always the artist, never the venue.)  Is there a more efficient or cost effective way of providing those services? Are managers and agents spending too much time learning new skills at the expense of focusing their time on those areas where they already have expertise? While in many instances, the traditional an arrangement is the only way a new or young artist can afford management or an agent, does this arrangement continue to make sense with more established and successful artists? Does it ever make sense for an agency or management company to become overely dependent upon commissions from top artists to underwrite the less successful artists on the roster? Are there other viable options to earning revenue than simply charging higher commissions? Hourly rates? Retainers? Fixed fees? Merging smaller agencies and companies into larger and larger behemoths? Are there different arrangements that might better serve artists as well as agents and managers?

While I obviously have my own thoughts and opinions on these topics, they would hardly be dispositive or universally applicable. There is never going to be a single solution that works for everyone and, ultimately, each agency or management is going to need to develop different solutions that work for them, their business plans and goals, and their artists. Still, I’d love to see more serious consideration and exploration of these topics on multiple levels. Frustratingly, whenever I am a party to workshops and discussions about “new business models”, it almost inevitably winds up being a discussion of how to “sell” artists to presenters and, rarely, if ever, an honest assessment of the field of management and artist representation itself. In other words, the focus of exploration tends to be outwards—how to sell better, package better, market better, and, in short, reach venues and presenters in different ways. While those issues are unquestionable important, there remains a perception that it’s the marketplace that needs to fixed. If you really want to examine new paradigms in a changing environment, agents and managers, as well as artists and presenters, will also need to look inwards and examine themselves as well.

Have a great season everyone!

__________________________________________________________________

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 Agents, Artist Management, Contracts, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division | Comments Closed

The Hogwarts School of Contracting and Wizardry

Thursday, May 15th, 2014

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.   

Dear Law and Disorder

I had a signed agreement with a promoter to present my artist. The contract provided for two deposits and a final payment on the day of the performance. I worked for over a year with this promoter to put this deal together. Not only did he not pay either of the deposits, but one month before the performance, he called to say he hadn’t sold enough tickets and that it was no longer economically feasible. And he is refusing to pay the money he owes. What am I supposed to do? Sue him? Why should I have to spend the time and money to sue him when we have a signed contract? What’s the point of having a contract in the first place if its not going to protect me?

For many years now I have been climbing the stairs to my secret laboratory trying to create the self-enforcing contract. Upon anyone breaching the terms of such a contract, a magical enforcement beast will materialize, forcing the breaching party into compliance. Sadly, my efforts thus far have proven unsuccessful, resulting only in a few sparks, a bit of ectoplasm still dripping from the ceiling, and a hapless paralegal I may have inadvertently turned into a newt. Until I perfect my spells and enchantments, you’ll have to settle for the fact that contracts are only as valuable as the time, effort, and common sense that goes into them. They do not exist in a vacuum. They do not self-enforce.

The point of a contract is not to get signatures on some form or template littered with extraneous terms that everyone believes are “industry standard”, but no one really reads or understands, in the hopes that it will somehow, in and of itself, stalwartly protect you from the other party cancelling your engagement, refusing to pay, or performing any other courser of unpleasantness. Rather, the point of a contract is the opportunity it creates for you to enter into deals, negotiations, collaborations, engagements, and other relationships knowingly and intelligently. Among other things, it allows you to make sure everyone is on the same page (ie: Do you define net profits the same way I define net profits? Can I cancel if I don’t sell enough tickets?). It allows you to create benchmarks by which you can judge performance and good will (ie: Did the other party pay the deposit on time? Did the check clear?). It allows you to “test the waters” before jumping into a new relationship by first seeing if you and the other party can work together to resolve differences and challenges in the creation of the relationship in the first place.

Sometimes, having a contract can also provide you with leverage. If you can point out that the other party clearly did or didn’t do something which they clearly agreed to do or not do, that pressure alone can often be enough to force compliance. However, if the leverage doesn’t work, you are ultimately left with the sobering fact that the only way to enforce a breached contract is though a lawsuit (or arbitration, if your contract provided for that.) Even then, if you win a lawsuit, you still have to collect the money. A judgment does not automatically guarantee payment. (I’m working on a self-paying judgment, too, as soon as figure out how to change lead into gold.)

The key is not to let the situation get to the enforcement stage in the first place. While some contractual breaches are unavoidable, most are the result of one the parties ignoring warning signs or not taking advantage of the contractual process. For example, a recent client of mine negotiated the terms of an engagement which included the standard items such as dates, time, repertoire, and fees. Everyone agreed. However, when she sent the contract to the presenter, the presenter discovered that the artist expected additional costs to be paid for transportation. My client, on the other hand, discovered that the presenter wanted the artist to obtain insurance to cover all the members of his orchestra. Neither of these topics had been discovered during the initial discussions. Fortunately, both my client and the presenter took the time to read the contract. Even more fortunately, both parties scheduled a time to talk about their respective concerns, worked out compromises, re-drafted the contract, and everything worked out great. Similarly, I was recently negotiation a recording contract on behalf of an artist. When I tried to discuss certain contractual discrepancies and concerns with the other party, rather than engage in solutions, they merely insisted I should trust them and enter into the deal based on “good faith.” That made me trust them even less. My artist really wanted this deal, but I convinced them not to take the risk. In the end, we wound up finding a better deal.

In your case, if your contract provided for two deposits, and the promoter didn’t pay either one, at what point did you not realize that this train was going to jump the tracks? That’s like sending off a contract, not getting a response back from the presenter or manager, having the other party  ignore your phone calls and emails, and the pretending to be shocked to find out the deal is being cancelled…you can’t cancel what was never a deal in the first place. At the time the deadline for the first deposit came and went, that was your time to stop and evaluate whether or not to proceed. If, your professional judgment, it was worth waiting until the second deposit was due, great. However, by the time the second deposit deadline came, that should have been the time to bail. If you decided to rely solely on the contract to protect you, then you were also accepting the fact that if the presenter didn’t pay or cancelled at the last minute, you would have to enforce payment by filing a lawsuit. There are many times that rolling the dice makes legitimate business sense, but you have to accept that for what it is—gambling. Unless you want to incur legal fees and court costs, not to mention lost time, if you gamble and lose, move on.

This is inherently a risky business. Contracts allow you evaluate and, in some instances, minimalize risk, but never eliminate it. Only you can protect you. You and a little pixie dust.

_________________________________________________________________

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

The Invasion of the Visa Examiner Body Snatchers Continues! (aka “The Day The Visa Process Stood Still”)

Thursday, May 8th, 2014

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.   

Dear Law and Disorder:

I recently received an RFE for a group touring the US this summer. The group is represented by a European manager who books their dates, but our US management company has previously filed petitions for them in the past, all of which have been approved without a problem. The RFE claims that I need to prove that we are not only the agent for the artists, but for each of venues on their tour. I provided an itinerary, a letter of agreement between us and the group where we are agreeing to serve as their US representatives, as well as engagement contracts confirming all the dates, including fees. This is what I have always given them before. What do they want?

For those of you who have been lucky enough not to be following along, about four months ago, the US government agency that reviews and approves visa petitions for artists, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), was invaded by aliens…and, by that, I do not mean non-US citizens, but something non-human. It began at the USCIS Vermont Service Center where reports indicate that in early February 2014 the bodies of several unsuspecting USCIS visa examiners spontaneously exploded into a burst of tentacles, multiple glowing eyes, and gaping orifices of dripping fangs. Shortly thereafter, their seedlings were able to infiltrate deliveries of pico de gallo sent to the USCIS California Service Center where they quickly replicated themselves, consuming the bodies of helpless visa examiners there as well. Ever since, these insidious creatures have taken over the review of O and P petitions, resulting in flurry of spurious RFE’s or Requests for Evidence (ie: prove that Lincoln Center is a distinguished venue!) and re-imagined interpretations of regulatory language and requirements (ie: for a role in a production to constitute a “lead or starring role” it must also be performed by an artist whose name alone will demonstrably increase ticket sales!)

Whether these beings are the evil spawn of a far-away galaxy offended by interpretive dance or whether they come from a death star of Blue Meanies, we don’t know. What we do know is that, among other things, USCIS has been seriously scrutinizing petitions filed by agents and managers, as well as itineraries. On a recent national conference call with USCIS representatives, there was a considerable amount of talk about concerns over “speculative” employment and making sure that artists had “confirmed engagements” and were not merely asking for visas in anticipation of future work.

As a result, agents and managers are being asked with greater frequency to provide proof of the agency relationship, including proof that they are authorized to represent both the artist as well as the presenters/venues. This can be either a written (and signed) agency or management agreement with the artists or a letter or other statement signed by the artist confirming that the artist has “appointed” the agent or manager to represent them in the United States. If the agent/manager has also booked all of the engagements (ie: the agent/manager’s name appears on each of the contracts or engagement confirmations), then such a letter of appointment appears to be appeasing the visa beasts…at least for now. However, many times either the artist has booked their own engagements directly with the presenter/venue or the engagements have been booked by a non-US agency and the US agent or manager is merely serving as the petitioner for purposes of filing the visa petition. In such cases, which appears to be your situation, USCIS is asking for proof that the US petitioner has been authorized to file the petition by the artist (or the artist’s non-US agent) as well as by the artist’s non-US agent and, in some cases, by each of the presenters/venues on the artist’s itinerary.

Based on a strict regulatory analysis, I cannot say that this is inappropriate. Rather, its just a very literal reading of certain regulations which have never been strictly enforced until now. Regardless, unless you have booked each of the artist’s engagements yourself, if there are any engagements booked directly between the artist and the venue/presenter, then you also need to include an “appointment form” from those presenters/venues authorizing you to include their engagement on the petition. If the artist has a non-US agent or manager, then you will need (1) proof of the relationship between the artist and the non-US agent and (2) proof that you have been authorized by the non-US agent to file the petition for the artist and on behalf of the engagements booked by the non-US agent. If there are any engagements booked directly by the artists, you will also need proof from the presenter/venue that you are authorized to include their date on your petition. The good news, such as it is, is that such “appointment form” does not need to be anything more elaborate that: “I have engaged [Artist] to perform for me. I hereby appoint [Petitioner] to include this engagement on the visa petition.” That’s it.

We’ve actually been doing this for a while. Whenever our management division acts as petitioner, we include appointment forms from everyone—our theory being: the more paperwork we throw into a petition, the more there’s bound to be something in there a US examiner is looking far. We apply this same theory to reviews, programs, and all other evidence as well. So far, this has worked.

As I mentioned, I have participated on several recent national conference calls with USCIS officials and, on each occasion, they have declared no knowledge of any new practices, rules, requirements, or regulatory interpretations designed to frustrate or scrutinize the O and P visa process. Instead, they claim to have helpfully appointed a panel of “performing arts experts”—three, to be exact, who, near as I can tell, have little, if any, actual practical familiarity with what we do—to help come up with suggestions to solve problems they claim do not exist. In other words, to translate this into government-speak:

There is no problem, but if there is a problem, we have appointed a panel of experts unfamiliar with the problem to help come up with solutions to address the non-existent problem which doesn’t need addressing, because there is no problem, but we promise we will make it better by focusing on fixing things that were not broken in the first place…until they were broken…but not by us.  

On second thought, perhaps these invaders aren’t from another planet after all.

_________________________________________________________________

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 Agents, Artist Management, Arts Management, Contracts, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Touring, Visas | Comments Closed

Showcasing: A Rare Visa Exception

Wednesday, August 28th, 2013

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.

Dear Law and Disorder

Do non-US artists need artist visas when they come in to perform a showcase at a booking conference? They don’t get paid. Its just to get bookings. In fact, the artists lose money doing this. Can they enter on a tourist visa or do they have to spend even more money and go through the process of getting an artist visa?

Its rare that someone asks us an immigration question where they actually might like the answer…this may be one of those instances.

However, its first always worth remembering that, under current U.S. immigration law, whether or not a foreign artist is required to have an artist visa (almost always either an O or a P) is not related to payment. What triggers the need for an artist visa is performance. Whether or not an artist is paid, whether or not tickets are sold, whether or not the performance is public or private, whether or not the performance is for a non-profit educational or a cultural organization, if an artist performs, and there is someone watching the performance, he or she is required to have an appropriate artist visa.

Except for rare and limited exceptions, an artist can never perform on a visitor visa or, if applicable, under the visa waiver program. One exception is a competition. An artist is not required to have an artist visa if the artist is coming to the U.S. for the sole purpose of participating in a competition where there is no payment other than expenses and a prize, monetary or otherwise. Another exception is an audition. An artist is not required to have an artist visa if the artist is coming to the U.S. for the sole purpose of auditioning or meeting with producers or presenters in the hopes of being hired to perform in the future.

While there is no official codification of a showcase being regarded as an audition, the U.S. State Department in conjunction with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services have long taken the position that a showcase is regarded as an audition if it meets the following criteria: The showcase is not open to the public, no tickets are sold or available, attendance is open only to registered members of the booking conference, and the artists are not paid and are responsible for their own expenses. Also, the artist cannot perform any other engagements in the U.S. while on the same trip. In other words, they need to get in, perform the showcase, and get out. If these criteria are met, then an artist may enter the U.S. and perform at the showcase on a visitor visa or, if applicable, a passport issued by a “visa-waiver” country.

Be forewarned: simply calling a performance a “showcase” is not sufficient. Nice try, but that won’t work. If an artist books a venue, sells tickets or otherwise makes tickets available to the public, but allows booking conference attendees to attend free, that is NOT a showcase for purposes of the artist visa exception and the artist will be required to have an appropriate artist visa. Similarly, booking an engagement with a low fee simply because the artist or the artist’s agent/manager believes such engagement will be an opportunity to showcase or introduce the artist’s talents to the U.S. market in the hopes of getting future bookings is also NOT a showcase.

If you believe that you or an artist you represent may qualify for the showcase exception, then, if the artist is traveling on a passport from a “visa waiver” country, he or she needs to travel with a letter from the artist’s agent/manager or, even better, from the booking conference itself, confirming that all the elements of the exception are met. If the artist is traveling on a passport from a “non-visa waiver” country, then he or she will need to apply for a visitor visa at a U.S. consulate, but should bring the appropriate letter with them explaining that the showcase exception applies.

__________________________________________________________________

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!

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Artist Management, Arts Management, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Touring, Visas | Comments Closed

How Does An Unauthorized Arrangement Become Grand Theft Auto?

Wednesday, August 21st, 2013

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq. Dear Law and Disorder: Several years ago, our small ensemble hired a composer to arrange and re-orchestrate a work for us to play. The work itself, which is still under copyright, was originally written and arranged for a large orchestra. Recently, we made a video of our group performing the piece, put it on YouTube, and the composer’s publisher had it taken down. The publisher also told us that the composer had not authorized any arrangements or re-orchestrations. They also told us we couldn’t even perform it live anymore. Is this true? Even though we paid for the re-arrangement ourselves? Even though we have always obtained performance licenses through BMI? We have been performing this arrangement for years and the publisher has never objected before. It doesn’t seem fair. We have engagements in 2013/2014 to specifically perform this piece as part of our repertoire. When you obtain a performance license through ASCAP, BMI or SESAC, you obtain the right to perform a work as written. This includes the right to “interpret” the work to reflect your own style, artistry, expression, etc. However, it does not include the right to re-orchestrate or re-arrange a work in a manner that changes the fundamental nature of the work. For example, obtaining a performance license to perform a work written for a chamber ensemble does not give you the right to “re-arrange” it for four banjos and a zither—as tempting as that may be! The fact that you paid for the re-arrangement doesn’t give you any rights to perform it, if the re-arrangement itself was unauthorized. That’s like stealing a car, but arguing that it wasn’t a crime because you paid for the gas. (My partner, Robyn, says I never met an analogy I didn’t like…so let’s go with that.) However, on the plus side, such as it is, should the composer/publisher of the work ever decide they like your arrangement, they can’t use it without your permission either. The right to the re-arrangement belong to the owner of the re-arrangement—which could be your ensemble or the composer of the re-arrangement, depending on how your commission agreement was drafted. (Remember, the mere act of paying for something doesn’t inherently convey any rights.) The fact that you have been performing this arrangement to date without any trouble might buy you an argument—albeit a weak one—that your past performances were “implicitly” licensed. However, now that the publisher has officially told you that your arrangement is unauthorized, any future performances beyond this point would constitute copyright infringement. The line has been drawn. I know it doesn’t seem fair when a composer, author, publisher, or copyright owner refuses to give you the rights you need—especially in a situation such as yours where your arrangement obviously has artistic merit or else you wouldn’t be getting engagements to perform it. However, bear in mind that those same rules also protect your own rights. Imagine your position if someone had taken that video you posted on YouTube and, without your permission, altered it or used it in such a way that you found artistically objectionable. You would be just as adamant that they must stop. Also, bear in mind that its almost always easier (not to mention legally required) to get rights by asking and negotiating ahead of time, rather than taking what you want and then asking for forgiveness or permission after the fact. It’s the difference between borrowing and stealing a car. __________________________________________________________________ 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!

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

Its Not The Length Of A Contract That Matters, Its How You Use It

Wednesday, August 14th, 2013

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq. Dear Law and Disorder: I want to start getting the artists I represent to sign a written representation agreement. However, all of the models I have found are too long and complex. I definitely do NOT want a 14 page contract, more like 4 or 5 at most.  I won’t be able to get folks to sign it otherwise!  And, can the language be more simple? I like simplicity. When drafting contracts, length and simplicity should be the least important factors. Such restrictions are arbitrary. That’s like saying: “I want to drive from New York to California, but I absolutely refuse to use a car that requires tires or gas.” You’re going to have a problem satisfying your travel needs and goals. The goal of any contract is not to make it simple enough so everyone signs it. If that’s your goal, you really only need two sentences: “I agree to book engagements for you. You agree to pay me.” Let’s assume both parties sign it. What if the artist doesn’t pay you or leaves you for another agent? Contracts are not self-enforcing. If one party breaches a contract, then merely having a signed contract is not going to force them to comply. You have to file a lawsuit to enforce a contract. That’s expensive…and often pointless if the artist has no assets. Worse, if your contract is too simple and doesn’t adequately address the nature of the dispute, then the other side’s attorney is going to poke all sorts of holes in your “simple agreement” and you’re going to lose anyway. The goal of a contract is having a document that adequately addresses your concerns and issues and spells out all of the key terms so that you and your artist have a chance to review and discuss them. A meaningful contract will assist both parties in routing out any presumptions or misunderstandings before problems arise. Whether it takes 4 pages to do that or 14 pages, the length of your contract will depend on the complexity of the relationship, the length of the relationship, the needs and concerns of the parties, the amount of money at issue, and a myriad of other issues. For example, if an agent takes a commission of 20% off everything they book for the artist, do you earn your commission when the engagement is booked or actually performed? Does “everything” include 20% of reimbursements for travel and hotel expenses? Are you exclusive? Do you get a commission on engagements that the artist books on their own? And when do you get paid? And how do you get paid? Are engagement fees sent to you or do you invoice the artist? What about engagements that happen after the term? How long is the term? Can you cancel? Can the artist cancel? What if the artist decides to cancel and goes to another agent? Are you still entitled to the commission on engagements you booked? And the list goes on… Think of your contract as a checklist that you will use to facilitate a discussion with each new artist you bring on to your roster to help you decide if you want to work with them and vice versa. If there are issues that are not important to you, then you can take them off your list and remove them from your contract. However, if there are expectations or requirements that are important to you, those need to be adequately explained and detailed. Similarly, while the language you use to explain your expectations and requirements can be simple, it also needs to be appropriate. While I am the first to criticize attorneys for using overcomplicated legal babble, more often than not, a lot of language that confuses artist and agents in contracts is not necessarily “legalese”, but basic business terms and practices with which they are not familiar. Let’s face it…a lot of artists as well as agents, managers, and presenters, do not necessarily have the same business background and training as do entrepreneurs and business people in other, less fulfilling industries. That merely means there are new terms to learn, as opposed to avoid, as your business grows and matures. My point is that your focus needs to be on finding the right language to adequately explain your terms, concerns, expectations, and requirements. I’ve seen too many parties get burned because they dumbed down a contract just to make it shorter. That’s a waste of both time and money. More important, in my opinion, arbitrarily “dumbing” down a contract merely on the assumption that artists won’t understand anything more complex does a disservice to the all the inherently bright, creative, and intelligent denizens of our arts industry who merely need an opportunity to be taught. __________________________________________________________________ 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!

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

Visa Envy: Why Is Yours Longer Than Mine?

Wednesday, July 31st, 2013

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq. I am writing you about a question we have in regards to the length of stay that USCIS grants for O-1B visas.  In the past few years, it has been our experience that USCIS will not grant 3 year visas for a time period that has gaps from anywhere to 3 to 6 months between engagements.  Therefore, for our artists, we have been applying for month long visas, or three month long visas, etc, which has started to become prohibitively expensive for them, and rather inconvenient and time consuming for us. We were told by an artist that is moving off of our roster that his new manager will be applying for a 3 year visa for him, regardless of the fact that this particular artist has gaps of 6 or more months between engagements, or no engagements at all after a certain point.  So our question is, has the USCIS policy changed, or worse, do you think it’s possible that the artist’s new manager has some kind of connection or agreement with USCIS that we do not? Artist visas are not defined by length, but by type: O-1 visas for individual artists, P-1 visas for groups, and P-3 visas for culturally unique individuals or groups. The length of the visa validity period depends on how many engagements and other activities (rehearsals, production meetings, receptions, etc) the artist or group has in the United States—up to 1 year of engagements for P visas and up to 3 years of engagements for O visas. Officially, USCIS will approve a single visa validity period where all the engagements constitute “a continuous event”, such as a tour. However, in its inimitable predilection for unhelpfulness, USCIS has no specific definition of “a continuous event” and no policy on the minimum or maximum length of “gaps” between engagements and activities. Rather, USCIS examiners are given complete, unfettered discretion when it comes to determining whether a gap between engagements is too long and will require filing separate petitions. Let’s say, for example, that an artist has an engagement in October 2013 and their next US engagement is not until April 2013 and the manager files a visa petition requesting a validity period of October 2013 through April 2013. USCIS could either approve the visa for the entire length of the validity period requested, notwithstanding the six month gap between engagements, or it could only approve enough time to cover the October 2013 engagement and require the manager to file a new, separate petition for the April 2013 date. When dealing with this issue, anecdotal evidence and actual experience is your best guide. While I have known USCIS to approve visa petitions even with large gaps between engagements, more often than not it will “cut off” a visa validity period where there are more than 3 – 4 months between engagements or activities. My general advice is to keep gaps as short as possible. As for shortening gaps, or even extending the length of an entire visa validity period, consider this: you are not limited to including in your visa petition only engagements dates that have signed engagement contracts. You do not have to provide a signed contract to support each engagement. Instead, USCIS will accept any written confirmation of an engagement, including unsigned term sheets, deal memos, emails, confirming letters. Even if a date is still under negotiation, so long as you are holding that date on the artist’s calendar, it can be including on the visa petition along with an accompanying written confirmation that the date is being held. In addition, you can also provide a list of the artist’s non-US engagements and explain that when the artist is not performing in the US it is because the artist will be performing elsewhere in the world. I can assure you that USCIS has no special deals with your ex-artist’s new manager. According to your question, your ex-artist is merely claiming that his new manager “will be applying” for a 3 year visa for him. “Will be applying” is not the same that as “has obtained.” If the artist has large gaps in his itinerary or lacks 3 years of engagements, he will be receiving a Request for Evidence (RFE) or a visa denial, not an O-1 with a validity 3 years. Don’t believe everything you are told, especially by disgruntled ex-artists who want you to believe they have moved to greener pastures. __________________________________________________________________ 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!

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Agents, Artist Management, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Touring, Visas | Comments Closed

Pre-Nuptial Management Agreements

Wednesday, June 5th, 2013

By 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!

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

When To Negotiate A Contract

Tuesday, April 30th, 2013

By 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!

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Agents, Artist Management, Arts Management, Contracts, Copyrights, For Profits, Independent Contractors, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Licensing, Music Rights, Non-Profits, Presenters, Publishing, Recordings, Touring, Venues | Comments Closed

Multiple-Entry Visas: A Safe Bet

Wednesday, February 27th, 2013

By Brian Taylor Goldstein, Esq.

Dear Law and Disorder:

 

I am working on an orchestra tour for the 13-14 Season. We would like to include Canadian dates in the route, but they are neither possible at the beginning or end of the tour. Is it possible on a work visa, for a group to depart the USA for Canada for a couple of engagements and then re-enter the US as part of a single visa application? This was not possible for the Cubans, I was told. However, I know a Russian ballet company that was able to do this. My associate is confident this is not possible.

I hope you made a bet with your associate, because you’d win. Your associate is incorrect. Except for a specific list of countries, ALL visas are multiple-entry during the validity period. So, for example, if a UK citizen receives an O-1 for 1 year, he can enter, leave, and re-enter as often as he wants during that year. If a Russian orchestra receives a P-1 for 6 months, they can enter, leave, and re-enter as often as they want during that 6 months. Exceptions include such countries as China, Brazil, Cuba, and certain middle-eastern countries. You can find the complete list of countries that have restricted entries on the state department website at http://travel.state.gov/visa/fees/fees_3272.html

So long as a member of your orchestra is not from a country on the restricted entry list, then, provided you are able to obtain a P-1 visa for the orchestra for the 13-14 season, each member will be able to enter the US, leave and go to Canada, and re-enter the US whenever and as often as they wish. However, as they may need separate visas to enter Canada, you will need to check Canadian law immigration to confirm that.

___________________________________________________________________

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!

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Artist Management, Arts Management, Law and Disorder: Performing Arts Division, Touring, Visas | Comments Closed

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »