Quote:
Originally posted by RainDreamer
I think this is like in the same way that an artist[major mostly] would require permission before doing a cover (live performance or recording) from the writer of the song, performance royalties have to be paid as well as the approval by the original writer. I guess you could say singing the original to a song doesn't make you OWN it , its whether you wrote it that makes you own it.
Anyway this is the only thing I could think of and needless to say ive never seen it applied in this way, but it could be ....
|
You're absolutely right. In a recent interview with Patti Labelle she states that artists (referring to herself) don't hold any rights to any song they didn't write (co-writing, as in adding a line or 2 words isn't considered co-writing and while you do get to put your name in a booklet, you don't get any provision unless you're the first one in command). This applies to commercials, covers, etc...
So if he wrote the song he has every right to forbid her from performing his material for whatever reason. Petty as it may be.
Quote:
Originally posted by LMFAO
This is why every artist should strive to co-write their music. Not only do they get more money, but they have more control and less potential problems.
|
Indeed, they should.