Introduction

Artists, songwriters, producers and other stakeholders in the music and entertainment industries must comprehend the nuances of master and publishing rights. Each of these two separate but related rights governs distinct elements of a musical composition each with its own sources of income and legal ramifications.

 

Understanding Master and Publishing Rights

In the context of sound recordings master rights refer to the ownership of a master recording. These are frequently owned by the organization that provides funding for the recording, which could be the artist if it was self-funded or a record label. How the recording is used, distributed and reproduced in the media is up to the owner of the masters rights. Synchronization licensing or sync licenses for the use of recordings in movies or advertisements for instance is covered by master rights.

 

Important Legal Aspects of Masters Rights.

Under copyright legislation master rights serve as the cornerstone for the protection, commercialization and distribution of sound recordings. These rights comprise the established legal precedents pertaining to ownership duration licensing terms and the laws regulating their application and implementation.

 

  1. Ownership of Master Rights

 i) Artist Ownership

Frequently, independent musicians keep their master rights which allows them to control how the recording is used and receive full payment.

 

Control over Creativity and Finances.

Independent artists don’t require any permission from third party organizations to license their recordings for use on streaming services and sync partnerships along with other uses. By maintaining the master rights, they are better able to control the terms of use pricing and distribution methods for their songs.

 

The Difficulties Faced By Independent Artists:

While the master rights ownership is admittedly a more freeing and artistically inclined experience, it also means that the artist will have to be ready to cover the bills that come with production, marketing and distribution. Independent artists just starting out will most likely not have access to the resources and finances readily available in record labels, possibly restricting their capacity to succeed financially and gain market share.

 

  1. ii) Label Ownership

Artists often enter into contracts with record labels that include the acquisition of master rights. Some labels consider this to be an important part of the negotiation process and will not take no for an answer. The labels contribute to the cost of professional production marketing initiatives, distribution networks and recording sessions while the artists transfer ownership of their master recordings to the label either permanently or temporarily in return.

 

Revenue Sharing:

Artists are usually paid royalties on the earnings earned from the master recordings. Although the percentage varies depending on the contract many artists get between 10 and 20 percent of net profits. Labels maintain control of the majority stake which they defend as payment for their investment. Certain contracts contain clauses that let artists reclaim their master rights after a predetermined period of time or after fulfilling specific requirements.

 

  1. Duration of Master Rights.

The term of protection for master rights differs by the local jurisdiction, although it is usually for several decades.

 

International Standards (the Berne Convention):

The Berne Convention, which unifies copyright regulations among participant countries, establishes a 50-year period of protection for sound recordings starting from the date of publication. This time frame is extended by many nations such as the European Union to 70 years following the release of the recording or the death of the inventor.

 

Copyright laws in the United States:

For 85 years following publication or 120 years following invention whichever comes first, sound recordings made in the United States after February 15, 1972 are protected. Depending on state legislation and federal changes older recordings may be subject to different standards.

 

Understanding Publishing Rights

Conversely, the underlying composition—the melody arrangement and lyrics—is covered by publishing rights. Typically publishers and songwriters own these rights. They have authority over the works’ public performances, distribution and reproduction. Publishing rights are involved when a composition is licensed for covers or movie adaptations.

 

  1. Split ownership of publishing rights.

A music publisher and the songwriter or songwriters often share publishing rights which leads to a division of duties and royalties.

 

Songwriters’ Ownership:

Due to their role in the creation of the composition (melody and lyrics), songwriters are still entitled to publishing rights. This share could be anywhere between fifty percent and the majority of the rights depending on the terms of the contract. Ownership is divided equally among many songwriters who work together and this needs to be recorded in a split sheet to prevent disputes.

 

Earnings:

Songwriters are compensated with royalties for their synchronization, performance and mechanical rights. The role of the publisher may also give them administrative control over the licensing of their compositions.

 

Music Publishers’ Role in Ownership

Publishers manage the market, promotion and profit from the composition in return for a share of the rights. Among their duties are licensing the composition, obtaining synchronization and cover opportunities and collecting royalties.

 

Standard splits:

Songwriters and publishers typically share publication rights 50/50 but this is not always the case. Self-publishing independent songwriters keep all rights but they are also in charge of all marketing and administrative duties. In foreign markets the composer may be represented by sub-publishers who will keep a share of the publisher’s profits while permitting local licensing and royalties to be collected.

Examples of Legal Cases.

There have been notable court cases pertaining to publishing rights most of which have involved ownership transfers, license conditions and royalties.

 

Music Mills Inc. v. Snyder in 1985.

The Supreme Court considered a publisher’s right to retain a share of earnings from derivative works produced after the songwriter terminated the initial transfer of rights. The idea that the original creator maintains complete ownership of any rights that are terminated was upheld by the Court’s ruling in favor of the songwriter.

Williams v. Gaye (2018): A Case of Blurred Lines.

A lawsuit was filed against Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams for allegedly violating Marvin Gaye’s song Gotta Give It Up. The court found that there had been a violation of Gayes publishing rights and granted significant damages.

 

Conclusion

Intellectual property in the music industry is complicated as demonstrated by the relationship between master and publication rights. Participants need to be well-informed about these rights and their legal basis in order to optimize profits and reduce disputes. In order to guarantee fair and sustained business growth as the digital music economy develops these challenges must be addressed by robust legal frameworks and open processes.

Eniola Sultan Olatunji is a final-year law student of the University of Ibadan, and an aspiring corporate lawyer with a focus on Entertainment, Data Privacy, and Commercial Law. A talented writer, Eniola looks forward to working with top companies in the nearest future.

Sources

  1. Bolero Music: “Master vs Publishing Rights in Music IP” https://www.boleromusic.com/blog/master-vs-publishing-rights-music-ip
  2. Releese Help Center: “What is the difference between master rights and publishing rights? https://support.releese.io/hc/en-us/articles/23100485505947-What-is-the-difference-between-master-rights-and-publishing-rights
  3. Icon Collective: “How Music Royalties Work in the Music Industry” https://www.iconcollective.edu/how-music-royalties-work
  4. Case law: Mills Music, Inc. v. Snyder (1985), Grand Upright Music, Ltd. v. Warner Bros. Records Inc. (1991) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Upright_Music,_Ltd._v._Warner_Bros._Records_Inc
  5. U.S. Copyright Office – Circular 56A: Copyright in Sound Recordings https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ56a.pdf