Idolator

the agreement w/darla controls both masters and publishing? really? i'd want another look at this.

50% is pretty solid.

Open letter to James,

I haven't seen Sean say anything about this outside this initial piece in Idolator (which features that attractive sad hot dog. How could I resist?), granted, but wow, James, defensive much?

You're essentially stating what was already stated in the previous Idolator piece. I don't recall Sean dragging Darla's name through the mud at all. He even acknowledged that he should have read the contract more closely and basically said "crap. oh well", but induced at the end that he wished the people he worked with in the indie music industry would act more like friends than business people.

By not letting Tullycraft know about the use of the song, even informally, that was a very un-friend-like thing to do. Sure, you had a right and legality to do it, but don't try to martyr yourself in the process. "Looking out for the best interests of your bands" by not letting them know about using a song of theirs without their permission, even within your rights, is a contradiction.

mackro

PS James, do you know what they put in hot dogs? Especially Wienerschnitzel ones? You'd never eat one again. Seriously. Ugh!

did darla pitch and place this song? regardless, had the label not made the grab for the publishing, sean would have been entitled to 75% of the total license fee (50% of the master side, and 100% of the publisher side).

So will someone post a YouTube video of the ad in question already? I can't find it...and I spent all of 2 minutes looking!!

For the record, I like hot dogs, cookies and ice cream...whatever they put in them (and I'm reminded here of what Dan Akroyd said to John Candy in movie "The Great Outdoors"...).

Based on my (albeit limited) experience, a label owning the masters is completely standard, and handling the publishing/licensing is fairly common. Same thing with the 50% deal. That's pretty much the bedrock of every indie record contract I've ever seen.

But it is unquestionably weird for the label to not ask the artist at all before licensing. What I've seen happen is that the label asks, and if the artist expresses hesitation or starts waffling (which turns out not to happen much, especially for indie acts), the label invokes the clause in the contract. Feelings get hurt, but at least the band is aware of what's going on.

What I would ask to James is: I understand you had the right to license without getting permission, but why didn't you ask the band beforehand? Even if you had gotten into a fight with them over the issue and had ultimately had to invoke the contract clause you would be in the same place that you are now but the band wouldn't have a leg to stand on in their complaints.

i don't like hot dogs.

I guess people in bands should learn how to read.

This Darla guy sounds like a jerk! He should understand that it isn't that he had the "right" to do use the song without consulting the band, it's that they shouldn't have to hear about their song being used through an outside source. That should have come directly from him to them. What a slimeball! He spoke to people, signed papers, emailed and faxed people to make the deal happen. Shouldn't they have been a part of that? Seriously, an email would have taken less than a minute to write and would have avoided the mistrust and aggression that Tullycraft is feeling right now. He brought this on himself. That's what you get if you're a complete fucker I guess?

All I know is:

1) I haven't seen the ad either, as edmur sez, anyone got the youtube link?

2) I love Wienerschnitzel, don't even care what that stuff is made of

3) There aren't enough Wienerschnitzels here in Phoenix

@mackro: dude, "unfriendly"? There's nothing unfriendly about respecting the terms of a signed contract. Why make excuses for the poor business acumen of a songwriter?

@Gnarls Oakley: If it makes you feel any better, there's a new location going up in Chandler.

I seriously doubt Mr. Darla is giving us the "whole story". If he wasn't forthcoming with the band what makes you think he'd be honest with us now. I haven't seen Sean/Tullycraft painting James as a bad guy or himself the as an abused artist. In fact it's been the opposite. Sean blamed himself for this mishap. And now James is attacking Sean after he was the one who committed the offense in the first place. What a creep! Artists always get screwed by wannabe artists.

I actually saw that the other day, it's right by where I used to live. WTF.

@RepentTokyo: "There's nothing unfriendly about respecting the terms of a signed contract."

Like James himself said, Darla is not a megacomglomeration. It's just a small business. It's common for people to do business with small business owners because of previous trust and friendship. At least, this is what Sean was hinting was the case before all this happened.

Yes, the band should have read the contract more closely, but to say that poor communication skills on Darla's part in a case like this is not unfriendly is playing devil's advocate just the for sake of playing devil's advocate.

Dear James / Darla
As a strong supporter of independent music and a fan of Tullycraft I'm going to encourage my friends stop supporting your label and mail order services. I have been following this for the last couple days and your response on this blog is simply inexcusable. James I'm convinced that you are what's wrong with the music industry today. The fact that you were lucky enough to have Tullycraft on your label and then were able to turn around and treat them like that is beyond me or any of my friends. I feel sorry for you James.

- Heather

I think I just heard Bizarre Love Triangle in a Reeses commercial... Hooky's gonna be stoked on all the free peanut butter cups.

@mackro: I'm sorry, but no. When I was touring, if every promoter had respected the terms of our contract, I would have about 9 million fewer grey hairs. So no devil's advocate here. I don't have any tears to shed for a band who attempts to disguise their naked capitalism with faux-indignance.

I don't think this band was involved with a small business owner for the "trust and friendship", I think they were involved with them because no larger business was interested.

@Heatherafter: And to other posters, a kneejerk reaction to stop buying music from a label that exercises it's legal right to not only profit from music that IT OWNS, but also to share that profit with the music's creator - I think you need to grow up a little bit. Save your righteousness for sunday school.

RepentTokyo: Darla is (or was), in fact, a major player in the indiepop world; they cultivated relationships with many bands playing that circuit. Especially in 1998, it wouldn't have been unthinkable for Darla to be interested in Tullycraft and vice versa. It's not just a case of "well, Sub Pop said no and Interscope won't return our phone calls, so I guess we'll have to go with this guy."

It looks like Darla had the right to do what they did, so I'm not really faulting their business sense. But would it have hurt to call the band and let them know what was happening? If Tullycraft really was in it for the "naked capitalism," no doubt the band would they have been more excited (and less conflicted) about seeing their song in a fast food ad.

I do agree that boycotting record labels is like keeping a New Year's resolution. If I bought only records by virtuous labels, I'd have almost no records.

If you ask me, this Darla guy sounds like an asshole.

@mike a: "If Tullycraft really was in it for the "naked capitalism," no doubt the band would they have been more excited (and less conflicted) about seeing their song in a fast food ad."

One of the finest guitarists I personally know translates Japanese for the CIA. People don't enter the music business without wanting to do some business. No harm in that. The problem is when ridiculous assumptions about authenticity or whatever cause bands to pay too little attention to their business.

@meneses:

"What a slimeball!"? Darla OWNS the master. The moral of the story is that artists should read things (with a lawyer) before they sign them. I work for a major label and we own lots of masters---we can do whatever we'd like with them. Once an artist gives up control for a nice chunk of money, they cannot turn back around and be "pissed" that their music is not being used as they'd like. I firmly believe that all artists should choose to own their own masters and publishing, but those who don't have made that decision.

I agree that New Year's resolutions are tough to keep, but a simple boycott of Darla by all of the indie pop fans that dislike their business dealings wouldn't be that difficult. There are plenty of other places to buy records.

i understand that darla has the contract on their side but this is waaaay shady! they really couldn't be bothered to let the band know about the deal? how fucked up is it that tullycraft had to see the commercial on tv to find out about it? something is not right here.

How would the formal boycott of Darla's mail-order start? Should we contact music blogs?

well, your first major obstacle is going to be extreme apathy. better to just quit while you're ahead.

I'm not sure you're aware of how many die hard Tullycraft fans there are out there. They are a super important band if you follow twee. I can't say the entire indie community would stand behind such a thing, but I'm sure there is a portion that would stay clear of Darla in support of Tullycraft.

@meneses: I applaud your allegiance to Tullycraft, but the idea that the "twee" crowd could be menacing in any manner, even as consumers, is hilarious.

@meneses: Also, I think the Tullycraft folk will care about this much less when the check arrives.

i don't know, even the "twee crowd" has to buy their cds somewhere right? and why give their money to darla? it's small i'll admit, but darla could feel a small impact.

beware the power of cuddles!

I've been doing my own unofficial "boycotting" of Darla since the last Holiday Flyer album or so. It's called "not much on the label I've been interested in hearing."

"i dunno. hot dogs & ice cream are delicious. i love 'em. i don't see a federal case here"

i'm sorry james but you're a complete tool.

Thanks for publishing this letter. Darla is an excellent boutique label, James and Chandra are hard-working music-lovers with great taste (for music, as well as cookies and ice cream) and don't deserve to be slammed over making a decision that'll net a nice bit of coin to one of their artists.

Prissy so-called artists: read your fucking contract before you sign it, or shut the fuck up. Seriously. If you wanted to be asked before your tunes were licensed, the time to work that out was before you put your "X" on the line. If you're a musician and have a strong objection to hot dogs, wouldn't you want to make that fact really well known to everyone that YOU authorize to represent YOU on YOUR behalf?

actually, i think james is still a tool. if he were a true "music lover" he wouldn't have allowed this to happen to one of his bands.

@Aaron_R: Seriously, running an indie label is a lot of work, not to mention huge financial risk at every turn for often very little financial reward. There are plenty of labels out there that cater to the whims of the marketplace, labels founded on daddy's trust fund money, labels that specialize in washed-up has-beens making half-hearted comebacks, and Darla isn't one of those. It's a nice little label that represents the aesthetic tastes of the people who run it. In a world where we have more entertainment at our fingertips than we can possibly enjoy, it's important to have labels around that represent a curatorial approach to art, and I feel that this is what Mr. Agren does. That makes him a tool? Well, opinions are like assholes. I've got one too. :)