The Company has completed the development, formulation, packaging and branding for the first spirits products arising out of its joint venture with Universal's Interscope Geffen A&M Records. It is anticipated that the first of these products, a premium cognac through the Company's venture with music icon Dr. Dre and his Aftermath Beverage Company, will be introduced to the market within the next sixty days.

With respect to the production and supply of the Aftermath Cognac, the Company has entered into a letter of intent for the production, supply and European distribution of the cognac with Abecassis Cognac, a producer of premium cognacs. Completion of this agreement will not only give the Company access to a superior and necessary inventory of fine cognac, but calls for the Aftermath Beverage Company brands to be distributed by Abecassis in the European countries in which it is now doing business.

Following the introduction of the Aftermath Cognac, the Company's joint venture with Interscope/Dre/Aftermath will introduce a unique new line of 80-proof flavored and unflavored sparkling vodkas. The Company, having completed any necessary formulations, bottle and label design, marketing plans, and regulatory approvals, expects that this new line of products will begin to be shipped to distributors within the next sixty days. These products are to be introduced in coordination with the launch of Dr. Dre's long-awaited "Detox" album, and will be supported by a fully integrated marketing program with the performer and his record company.

The Company has taken note of apparent customer anticipation for the Company's Aftermath line of alcoholic beverages as evidenced by over one million "Google" mentions in advance of any actual product availability in the marketplace.

Of course, most of those mentions were along the lines of "Why the hell is Dr. Dre concentrating on lending his name to things like sparkling vodkas when he's had this album hanging over his head for years now," which might explain the whole coordinated launch idea. Looks like it's your move, Dr Pepper!

Drinks Americas Announces Fiscal Fourth Quarter and Year-End [BusinessWire via Bloomberg]

Bill Wyman seems to think that she doesn't, and that selling music can only lead to an artist being degraded in the eyes of his or her audience. And he gets listicle-ish about it:

1) While art can be created out of commercial or propagandistic purposes, from Michaelangelo to Irving Penn, let's face it, most isn't.

I would argue here that the "commercial purpose" becomes implicit when a price tag is slapped on an album, but that might be stretching.

2) In any case, the dynamic is different. Someone like Penn, for example, created art out of his profession. A rock artist is trafficking in the implicit independence of the form; the companies buying an artist's songs are really buying a little bit of that perceived coolness.

But are rock artists who have entered a contract to create music—and I'm talking about artists signed to labels, here—solely trafficking in "implicit independence," given their work is often subject to release delays and edits that are directed by the people in charge of disseminating it? (Which makes it sound sort of like writing for money, cough cough.)

3) In most cases, that perception will correspondingly decline. The artists aren't selling their songs; they are essentially selling off their coolness.

4) Soon they aren't artists any more—they are just songwriters who write little attitudinal pieces of lifestyle soundtrack to help sell overpriced crap.

5) Their fans can no longer trust them. It's fashionable to say selling out in this fashion doesn't matter, and that no one cares anyway. But I don't think its coincidence that greedy folks like Moby, an innovator in this area, have wholly marginalized themselves.

I like Tom Frank too, but I have to wonder if, in 2008, "rock" really has the same quotient of "perceived coolness" that it did at its genesis, or even on Sept. 24, 1991. If anything, I'd say that the form's darker days—which, yes, include some "selling out" on the part of its biggest names, from the awful of-the-moment dreck that so many legacy artists put out in the '80s to the "suggestions" that certain bands work with proven songwriters (Diane Warren, anyone?) to the selling off of certain once-iconic songs to any brand that'll have them, as well as the recent fragmentation of music, where artists like Santogold create music for and disseminate to, well, an audience that would argue about these sorts of points—has resulted in its coolness quotient going down some. If there is "coolness" (itself a loaded word), it's not necessarily because of the music; it's often tied up in ideas of exclusivity or "trading up" to fame in other arenas, whether they're related to pure celebrity or acting or what-have-you. Pop music has become such a dominant idiom that people almost take it for granted.

Perhaps the idea of "selling out" rankles with some music fans because licensing is actually cheap for advertising companies and brands, even if it creates a windfall for artists thanks to a landscape that's been ravaged by oversupply and people abandoning the idea of paying for musical product. And to be fair, there are certain musicians who have overexposed themselves thanks to their willingness to say "yes" to any brand that comes a-calling (i.e. the Black Eyed Peas and Moby); Santi's reeling off of a ton of brand names in the New York piece probably raised a Fergie-emblazoned red flag to some, and, hey, I'd be scared by one of those things too.

It's a knotty issue, one that I don't think is going to be untied anytime soon; after all, flail against the selling of "cool" all you want, but would anyone begrudge Chris Knox getting some extra scratch by "selling out" a song a few years after the fact? Maybe it's the idea of "greed" that gets to people, the idea that an artist can just shop their wares around to anything and thus deplete the work of any personal meaning divested in it. While thinking about this post, I kept going back to one comment by one of The Daily Swarm's commenters:

Ultimately I think artists need to make a decision about the long term association of their songs, as coupling them with images can create a more lasting impression.

THE WHO licensed their track, "We won't get fooled again" for a car commercial in the middle of a war for oil, when the original intent was a response to the Vietnam War and anti-corporate wars, so either it was grand ironic humor, or just a really bad decision.

And Carly Simon's "Anticipation" may now be forever associated with Ketchup, rather than her original lover's vibe of waiting to go on a date with Cat Stevens.

Maybe like so many things, the key to licensing lies in being selective, both in subject matter and in promiscuity. I know that moderation is a foreign concept in 2008, but what the hell, there's no time like, uh, the almost-midpoint of a year to engage in some behavior modification.

Santogold Standard [NYM]
Sellout Watch - Santogold [Hitsville]
Santogold on selling out: "Now it's how we make our money" [The Daily Swarm]

In Britain two singles preceded "You're Beautiful." But Atlantic Records, which issues Mr. Blunt's music in America in partnership with Custard, released that song first. Though it stalled on the charts at the beginning, a flurry of commercial licensing made it inescapable on television. It was used in a Sprint ad campaign, in prime-time dramas like "Smallville" and "ER," on daytime soaps, in promo spots for "Extreme Home Makeover" and even in the 2006 Winter Olympics. That exposure helped its popularity on radio, and after seven months it hit No. 1. To date the album has sold 2.6 million copies in the United States.

As Ms. Perry sees it, all that licensing backfired: "You're Beautiful" became as hated as it was loved.

"When you have a really big song and you want to see some legs on a record," she said, "you don't start putting that song in commercials and on TV shows and keep oversaturating it. Because that's when people get sick of it."

And if anyone should know about oversaturation of a song, it's Linda Perry. But guess what, everyone? We're going to need some extra airsickness bags, because Atlantic Records' high-rolling chairman Lyor Cohen knows that Blunt's signature blend of stubble and soft-rock caterwauling will, at the very least, allow enough licensing money to roll in so he can keep helicoptering Rolling Stone-employed lapdogs between New York City and the Hamptons:

Mr. Cohen said fears of piracy kept him from sending out the songs on "All the Lost Souls" for licensing in advance of the album's release. But now that the album is out, the saturation can begin.

"We will license these records, in movies, TV and commercials," he said. "Trust me, you will hear these records."

Making a Career After a Monster Hit [NYT]

The Sept. 23 season premiere of "Cold Case" will feature eight of the band's songs: "All Apologies," "Stay Away," "If You Must," "Lithium," "Drain You," "Something in the Way" and "Heart Shaped Box."

The episode of the CBS procedural is called "Thrill Kill," and concerns an investigation into a 1994 case "about two seemingly nihilistic male teens who may have been falsely accused and convicted of murdering three 10-year-old boys," "Cold Case" executive producer Veena Sud, who wrote the episode, said in a statement issued by the network. ...

"The episode... takes place several weeks after the 'Cold Case' Season 4 finale, when Lilly (Kathryn Morris) was shot and critically wounded," according to CBS' Monday press release. "She has just returned to work and tries to convince her boss, Stillman (John Finn), and herself that she's emotionally ready to spearhead the re-opening of the disturbing 1994 case after new evidence suggests that the boys' real killer may still be at large."

The story laid out in CBS' synopsis, by the way, bears a resemblance to the real-life case of the West Memphis Three. During the mid-90s, three young Arkansas men were convicted of the 1993 murders of three 8-year-old boys. The three men convicted in the case, which was investigated in the documentaries "Paradise Lost" and "Paradise Lost 2," have many high-profile supporters in the rock and alternative-music scenes who think the men were wrongfully convicted.

Well, I guess really trying hard to appeal to the thirtysomething demographic can be considered a "youth movement" for CBS, right?

Nirvana's music comes to 'Cold Case' [The Watcher]

Drinks Americas Holdings Ltd., the company behind a Donald Trump vodka, Willie Nelson's "Old Whiskey River" bourbon and a line of Paul Newman-branded juice drinks, is set to announce today an agreement with Universal Music Group's Interscope Geffen A&M label group. Universal Music Group is owned by French media conglomerate Vivendi SA.

The idea of the deal, executives of both companies said, is to come up with brands of drinks — both alcoholic and nonalcoholic — that bear the imprimatur of artists on Interscope's roster, which includes Eminem, producer Dr. Dre and Sting.

One of the most intriguing aspects of the deal is that record labels, including Interscope, nearly never control the rights to name and likeness rights like those needed to slap a celebrity's face or name on a bottle. One exception is the Pussycat Dolls, a female pop group; in that case, from the group's inception Interscope has been a participant in all kinds of licensing and merchandising deals.

The companies specified that it is Interscope's obligation to negotiate drinks deals with artists. Drinks Americas, of Wilton, Conn., will then create the beverages, while Interscope will kick in marketing support for both the newly minted products and its partner's existing line of drinks.

We're not sure if she's covered in the deal, but the one Universal artist who seems like a natural fit for this bit of cross-promotion is Amy Winehouse, who has single-handedly brought the Rickstasy out of oblivion. We can see a pre-mixed "Not Going To Rehab" bottle of the stuff slotting in right next to the Friday's-branded mudslides at our local liquor outlet, even if the drink itself does sound like the type of beverage that you'd have to be drunk to quaff. (Honestly—Bailey's and banana liqueur? Talk about a recipe for inducing vomit.)

Interscope Cuts Deal For Celebrity Drinks [WSJ]

dear idolator,

do you want the whole story on the tullycraft/darla wienerschnitzel license dust up?

the fact of the matter is that darla owns and controls tullycraft masters: the first album + all the early singles. i purchased the master rights from sean back in 1998 and we reissued the first record and a compilation of all the singles shortly after. the agreement, signed by sean/tullycraft so i assumed he read it, includes a controlled compositions paragraph, which clearly states darla has the right to issue sync licenses without publisher or artist consent.

sean/tullycraft's claim that the band hasn't seen any money is just sean further attempting to paint me as bad guy and himself as abused artist. it ain't so. as per our agreement all profits are split 50/50. sean asked me earlier this week when he would receive his money from the ad. i told him i hope we receive payment from the ad agency in time to include it in his next statement. sean knows his share is forthcoming.

darla records is a two person husband & wife operation. we're in our 14th year in business. we pride ourselves on working hard for our artists & labels and looking out for their interests. every other band on the label is eager for me to find such license opportunities.

sean wants to make a big stink. i guess he doesn't like hot dogs, ice cream and cookies. it's ok i guess if he wants to disagree with me about issuing a license based on... whatever. i dunno. hot dogs & ice cream are delicious. i love 'em. i don't see a federal case here. there's real controversial stuff commonly included in a list of things a label won't issue licenses for: cigarettes, booze and porn. messages that contain hate and/or violence are now also becoming commonly included in that list. hot dogs, ice cream and cookies ain't on that list.

thanks,
james agren

You're welcome, James—although accusing the band of disliking ice cream and cookies is a bit below the belt, no? Anyway, we hope this clarification (along with our more tut-tutty commenters' teeth-gnashing) has reminded all the musicians who read Idolator to read their contracts, too, and to get a well-trained lawyer to go over them as well.

Earlier: The Song That Makes The Nutter Butters And Hot Dogs Dance Has A Sad, Sad Beat Behind It

It was brought to my attention a little over a week ago that the Tullycraft song "Sweet" was being used in a television commercial for Wienerschnitzel. I found this very shocking because I knew nothing about these ads.

We hadn't been contacted by Wienerschnitzel or any agency representing them. After a little research, it was discovered that the record label that had re-issued our first album "Old Traditions, New Standards" had licensed the song without asking our permission or even contacting us about it. Ultimately, I guess this is my fault. When HARRIET RECORDS went under and we were approached about re-issuing "Old Traditions, New Standards," I thought... "sure!" I didn't anticipate being told: "Read your contract. We don't have to ask your permission to license your songs." I guess I thought that the indie world was different somehow. I assumed that we didn't practice business like the ugly major labels. More than anything, I hate being disappointed by people who I thought were my friends.

Old Traditions was a 1996 album that was reissued by the California label Darla a few years ago; this is the first instance we've heard of a band having its licensing abilities completely pulled out from under them by having their material reissued, although we're pretty sure it isn't the last. Of course, back when the contract was signed, the epidemic of indie bands serving as jinglesmiths wasn't as widespread as it isn't now, which is why we're guessing that's why this little wrinkle wasn't covered in the negotiations (disclaimer: we are not, and probably never will be, lawyers). But that doesn't excuse the label's behavior at all in our eyes—in fact it makes it seem worse, dancing peanut-butter cookies or no. Would a phone call have been too much to ask for?

Tullycraft in a television commercial? [tullycraft news]