So this might be a stupid question… I was wondering if there is any difference between a "record label" and a "music publishing company"
The specific situation I am wondering about is this:
I was on the Warner/Chappell Music website, they claim to be a "music publishing company", a division of Warner Bros. Music. Makes sense.
And the company lists Kevin Rudolf as one of their artists… They posted a recently published album of his on their website.. but under "label" it says Cash Money Records…. which is the part I am confused by.. shouldn’t their label be Warner??…
I noticed a bunch of their artists have random labels listed, like Capitol, Reprise, Interscope, Fueled By Ramen… etc.. now, i know some of these are owned by Warner.. but others (like Cash Money Records and Capitol) are completely unrelated to Warner..
if anyone took the time to read and understand that.. haha can you help me out?
Recording contracts and Publishing contracts are two completely separate contracts.
I’m sorry to say that your first answerer is incorrect.
You sign a contract with a record company concerning the recorded sound and the distribution of it.
You sign a PUBLISHING contract for the WRITTEN FORM of the music such as sheet music and books.
The two deals are completely separate.
So a songwriter can sign a contract with a PUBLISHER and never actually work in a band, go into a studio or ever go away on tour (Yep, I am one and thats what I do)
Publishers will take their clients work and present it to record companies for their solo acts to perform (You know the ones that dont have bands? Like Celine Dion etc…)
Record companies will also contact Publishers to see if they might have some material that is suitable for one of their acts to record, OR they might ask the publisher to have one of their clients WRITE a song for one of the rec comp clients.
Another thing that was wrong in the other answer was the collection of royalties, that isnt done by EITHER the rec or the pub company. I live in Aust. Here that is undertaken by APRA the Aust performers rights association. Each country has its own, but its NOT done by either rec or pub!!!
Artists quite frequently have deals with separate companies, you sign with whoever offers you the best contract, the best deal and the best rate.
Some rec companies have branched into publishing as well but that doesnot mean its the best option for you and you really SHOULDNT do it.
Some MAJOR record companies are now INSISTING that their acts sign BOTH contracts with them, If they dont agree to sign up to both then the record company wont sign them at all.
It is BEST to NOT have both contracts with exactly the same company. EVER!
All the best
Cat (Please click my avatar and check my profile!)
I’ll try to make this as clear as possible since it’s a bit hard to describe exactly. A music publisher or publishing company is one who looks after your copy rights. You cede the company the rights to your music through a contract, and they will in return, collect your royalties and look after your monetary rights. Much like and administrator.
A record label involves all of the parts comprehended from recording to merchandising to distributing (including publishing rights). Sometimes artists will sign a publishing contract before getting in touch with a record label (publishers don’t risk anything by signing with an artist so it’s much easier to sign with one) and in order to avoid the breach of contract with them, they sign with a recording company but let the publishing to the prior one.
Do i make sense?
References :
Recording contracts and Publishing contracts are two completely separate contracts.
I’m sorry to say that your first answerer is incorrect.
You sign a contract with a record company concerning the recorded sound and the distribution of it.
You sign a PUBLISHING contract for the WRITTEN FORM of the music such as sheet music and books.
The two deals are completely separate.
So a songwriter can sign a contract with a PUBLISHER and never actually work in a band, go into a studio or ever go away on tour (Yep, I am one and thats what I do)
Publishers will take their clients work and present it to record companies for their solo acts to perform (You know the ones that dont have bands? Like Celine Dion etc…)
Record companies will also contact Publishers to see if they might have some material that is suitable for one of their acts to record, OR they might ask the publisher to have one of their clients WRITE a song for one of the rec comp clients.
Another thing that was wrong in the other answer was the collection of royalties, that isnt done by EITHER the rec or the pub company. I live in Aust. Here that is undertaken by APRA the Aust performers rights association. Each country has its own, but its NOT done by either rec or pub!!!
Artists quite frequently have deals with separate companies, you sign with whoever offers you the best contract, the best deal and the best rate.
Some rec companies have branched into publishing as well but that doesnot mean its the best option for you and you really SHOULDNT do it.
Some MAJOR record companies are now INSISTING that their acts sign BOTH contracts with them, If they dont agree to sign up to both then the record company wont sign them at all.
It is BEST to NOT have both contracts with exactly the same company. EVER!
All the best
Cat (Please click my avatar and check my profile!)
References :
Professional muso/songwriter