4 ms·

> has accused O'Donnell of failing to pay him royalties after acquiring Akai, repeatedly calling him unscrupulous and a "bastard" in interviews. This seems ext

> has accused O'Donnell of failing to pay him royalties after acquiring Akai, repeatedly calling him unscrupulous and a "bastard" in interviews. This seems extremely straight forward to sue against? Basically the claim is either never paid for specific sales (very easy to win) or stated number of sales is lower than expected (requires lots of disclosure). OR, maybe he did win in court and they simply ignored the court order?

arethuza 3y ago
Perhaps they use the "Hollywood Accounting" trick of promising payments based on profits then arranging things so that no profits are actually made?
- dylan604 3y ago
  I know this is the saying, but why is Hollywood given the dubious honors? Wouldn't it be just as accurate to say Business Accounting?
  - arethuza 3y ago
    Probably because they seem to have the most egregious examples based on works that seem to everyone else to be pretty successful? "the Tolkien estate sued New Line, claiming that their contract entitled them to 7.5% of the gross receipts of the $6 billion hit.[23] According to New Line's accounts, the trilogy made "horrendous losses" and no profit at all." I think most people would find it surprising that both Return of the Jedi and the Lord of the Rings movies failed to make a profit? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
    - TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
      Points on the gross receipts are not points on the profits. The fact that the trilogy was supposedly unprofitable shouldn't be relevant.
      - arethuza 3y ago
        Yes, I should really have read that more carefully!
      - darig 3y ago
        [dead]
  - underlipton 3y ago
    https://twitter.com/ed_solomon/status/1669178741342326784 https://twitter.com/ed_solomon/status/1669178741342326784
sowbug 3y ago
The situation might seem "extremely straightforward" to you, but it is an expensive and time-consuming kind of legal dispute, because it requires discovery of years of business records, expert witnesses in forensic accounting, and likely a trial to establish whose interpretation of key contract terms is the controlling one. That means years and at least hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal work, at the end of which a trial is hardly a sure outcome. Unless the plaintiff is willing to commit to funding that out of pocket, then he'd have to find a lawyer willing to take it on contingency, meaning he'd pay as much as half of any award at trial, after legal costs were deducted. Unlikely the best-case outcome is much, and the worst-case outcome could bankrupt an individual. "maybe he did win in court and they simply ignored the court order" No, that doesn't happen in countries with solid legal systems, if it's a corporate defendant with easily identifiable assets.
- maxwell 3y ago
  Any ideas on potential ways to avoid this kind of outcome when going into a royalty deal in the first place?
  - pclmulqdq 3y ago
    Have a really good lawyer who anticipates this sort of dispute. I would bet that the contract was written in a kind of "tricky" way that didn't make it clear exactly when the royalties applied.
  - reddit_refugee3 3y ago
    I think the artist (unless they're like Radiohead or Taylor Swift or something) is always going to be at a massive disadvantage in any negotiation with a label (massive corporation). This is just the nature of capitalism. The more capital you have, the more leverage you have. The people who actually create the product are always at a disadvantage compared to those who own the means of that production. You can try pooling resources together to negotiate collectively (unions), but without government intervention to put a thumb on the scale to try to even the playing field for unions vs corporations, even that would usually end poorly for the people who produce the actual product (see: union busting, the Pinkertons, etc.). Historically, they may actually even straight up just kill you for trying. Capital also equals political power (even moreso since Citizens United), and corporations use that power to do everything they can to prevent that balance from tipping any direction but theirs.
Blackthorn 3y ago
If Roger Linn, one of the most genuine and generous guys around in the business, calls somebody a bastard, they're absolutely a bastard.

arethuza 3y ago

Perhaps they use the "Hollywood Accounting" trick of promising payments based on profits then arranging things so that no profits are actually made?

dylan604 3y ago
I know this is the saying, but why is Hollywood given the dubious honors? Wouldn't it be just as accurate to say Business Accounting?
- arethuza 3y ago
  Probably because they seem to have the most egregious examples based on works that seem to everyone else to be pretty successful? "the Tolkien estate sued New Line, claiming that their contract entitled them to 7.5% of the gross receipts of the $6 billion hit.[23] According to New Line's accounts, the trilogy made "horrendous losses" and no profit at all." I think most people would find it surprising that both Return of the Jedi and the Lord of the Rings movies failed to make a profit? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
  - TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
    Points on the gross receipts are not points on the profits. The fact that the trilogy was supposedly unprofitable shouldn't be relevant.
    - arethuza 3y ago
      Yes, I should really have read that more carefully!
    - darig 3y ago
      [dead]
- underlipton 3y ago
  https://twitter.com/ed_solomon/status/1669178741342326784 https://twitter.com/ed_solomon/status/1669178741342326784

sowbug 3y ago

The situation might seem "extremely straightforward" to you, but it is an expensive and time-consuming kind of legal dispute, because it requires discovery of years of business records, expert witnesses in forensic accounting, and likely a trial to establish whose interpretation of key contract terms is the controlling one. That means years and at least hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal work, at the end of which a trial is hardly a sure outcome. Unless the plaintiff is willing to commit to funding that out of pocket, then he'd have to find a lawyer willing to take it on contingency, meaning he'd pay as much as half of any award at trial, after legal costs were deducted. Unlikely the best-case outcome is much, and the worst-case outcome could bankrupt an individual. "maybe he did win in court and they simply ignored the court order" No, that doesn't happen in countries with solid legal systems, if it's a corporate defendant with easily identifiable assets.

maxwell 3y ago
Any ideas on potential ways to avoid this kind of outcome when going into a royalty deal in the first place?
- pclmulqdq 3y ago
  Have a really good lawyer who anticipates this sort of dispute. I would bet that the contract was written in a kind of "tricky" way that didn't make it clear exactly when the royalties applied.
- reddit_refugee3 3y ago
  I think the artist (unless they're like Radiohead or Taylor Swift or something) is always going to be at a massive disadvantage in any negotiation with a label (massive corporation). This is just the nature of capitalism. The more capital you have, the more leverage you have. The people who actually create the product are always at a disadvantage compared to those who own the means of that production. You can try pooling resources together to negotiate collectively (unions), but without government intervention to put a thumb on the scale to try to even the playing field for unions vs corporations, even that would usually end poorly for the people who produce the actual product (see: union busting, the Pinkertons, etc.). Historically, they may actually even straight up just kill you for trying. Capital also equals political power (even moreso since Citizens United), and corporations use that power to do everything they can to prevent that balance from tipping any direction but theirs.

Blackthorn 3y ago

If Roger Linn, one of the most genuine and generous guys around in the business, calls somebody a bastard, they're absolutely a bastard.