Read on Twitter
Understanding the collaboration process between labels and TV Show / Youtube channel. My chat with a friend who works at a music label.
- A thread -
- A thread -
First, please note that there is a system on YouTube, where if a song is played, in any video, uploaded by anyone, the profit will go to the artist / label (monetizing).
Talking about TV performances, especially during promo, usually there will be an agreement between TV Show and the artist. In general, the first year there is a “leniency", where TV show can profit from it, they don’t have to share it with the artist, and the artist can promote.
After the agreement is over, there will be options given. TV Show is already getting profit from views, usually the artist/label will ask for the monetization be directed back to them in the following year. The options could also be shared profits, could be 50:50, or 70:30, etc.
After there is no "leniency", TV Show also has to pay for performing rights, masters, songwriter rights, etc. So when a TV Show drops a performance from their channel, it means that they don't want to pay the artist anymore and give the option to them to buy the performance.
Even if the performance stays available on the channel and both sides take the profit sharing option, the process is also very complicated and time-consuming. In fact, many channels neglect to send reports so the process of calculating for profit sharing is very difficult.
My friend has experience managing this for a female soloist in Indonesia who collaborate with a channel on YouTube, it really takes time, and in this, both parties are still in the same country, matters will be much more complicated when they are from different countries.
Based on their experience, TV Show will take down the artist's performance video from their channel when they can’t profit from it anymore and instead have to spend money to pay the artist / label.
While the artist/label also performs and doing promos to benefit from it. As for labels, when their artist is the biggest act they have, they will not give the other party the opportunity to continue to make profits for free.
I don't know the reason why BH doesn't buy BTS performances from TV shows, but this label person sees it like this,
"They are our our artist, we produce the song, the engagement these tv show get is from our artist fanbase, why are we the one that have to pay?"
"They are our our artist, we produce the song, the engagement these tv show get is from our artist fanbase, why are we the one that have to pay?"
Performance rights are paid by the one that profit from it to the artist, it's not the other way around. It is a misconception that label have to pay, while the one who gets the benefit is the TV Show.
The basic analogy is, the artist works hard, so the artist must get paid.
The basic analogy is, the artist works hard, so the artist must get paid.
When a label doesn't buy a performance, don't immediately assume and interpret it as an act of sabotage against their own artist's promotion, this could be their way of maintaining the artist's CLASS and RIGHTS, especially if the artist is their biggest act.
The period of "leniency" in which the TV show does not have to pay the artist/label, if it is maintained for too long, it will be the artist/label's loss.
IMHO, so this isn't about money, a label as big as Big Hit is able to buy 10 or 100 performances easily. But this is more about defending one's position, respecting artist rights, maintain their class, and upholding principles.
