Meg Stallion to sue 1501 ent. Edit#9: Meg wins, New music is released. Them numbers not looking good

[CashmereThoughts]

The money from her shows and touring go directly to the label? That sound right to you?

All of the money? You saw her agreement?

 

[NinoBrown]

The money from her shows and touring go directly to the label? That sound right to you?

Very deceptive, but as we see here, she pretty much signed over her collection rights, BUT in exchange for the rights, she was promoted at a global scale, ain't nothing free with a label deal.

 

[CashmereThoughts]

Very deceptive, but as we see here, she pretty much signed over her collection rights, BUT in exchange for the rights, she was promoted at a global scale, ain't nothing free with a label deal.

They in here running with any narrative. None of us know what’s really up with her business.

 

[LiveFromLondon]

Thread a lil too celebratory

 

[bourgeoisie tall freak]

That's not grounds to void the contract. That's grounds to sue and enforce the contract. And I would imagine there is an arbitration clause in the contract that outlines how disputes such as potential money owed will be handled so she has no argument. This is just a PR stunt. Disagreements over money is normal in music contracts... and the dispute process is almost always outlined in the contract. Especially the bad ones. Ask birdman.

it's a bit of semantics going on so I'll clarify. The company failure to perform those base duties could amount to a material breach that allows her to terminate the contract, which in effect is the same as voiding it = she gets out of it.

The charge that the label committed a material breach of contract can also be a successful mechanism for an artist to utilize in a bid to leave a record company. A material breach can be alleged in many different forms, but the most common is the lack of proper payment of royalties by the label.39.

Just such a breach was highlighted in the recent court decision involving the band the Kingsmen who had a big hit with the song "Louie Louie" in the 1960s. The Kingsmen won a five year court battle in November 1998 when the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Ninth Circuit Court ruling that cancelled the record company's contract with the group because the company neglected to pay royalties.40. The suit was based in part on the law of rescission which states that a party may unilaterally rescind a contract if there have been "breaches of the contract so material and substantial in nature that they affect the very essence of the contract and serve to defeat the object of the parties."41.

In a similar 1996 dispute, the multimillion selling group the Offspring attempted to exit its contract with Epitaph Records, an independent label. The group fired the first salvo by initially declaring in no particular detail that Epitaph breached its contract. 43. Although the matter was settled, the pressure move worked because the band later signed a lucrative deal with the major label Columbia Records.

A breach argument might also exist if there is a provision in the record contract whereby the label guarantees that a minimum amount of recorded product will be commercially released by the record company. If the company does not fulfill its commitment to release, the company may not be able to pick up the next option. However, unless there is a specific definition of "release" included in the contract, this would not be a definitive escape route.​

Mclane & Wong - Articles: Breaking a Contract


As far as this hope for an arbitration clause, the court has already ruled in her favor on part of the matter and is scheduled to hear more so i doubt that is even an issue lol.
yes disagreements over money is normal, and sometimes the artists win too as i've posted above and as meg has already had an order in her favor. as far as birdman, the most high profile case of lil wayne lawsuit, wayne reportedly got what he wanted out of suing cash money (millions of dollars, masters, etc) so i'm not sure what point you are making

 

[CashmereThoughts]

Coli entertainment Attorneys eating today

 

[Saysumthinfunnymike]

So all you gotta do is find a thick attractive female throw her ten thousand, have her shake her ass a bit and make seven million

 

[Chip Skylark]

Is it 15k from one song? If so that sounds about right.

streams don’t amount to much

1 million streams is about 10k plus she has to pay the label, producers, songwriters.

 

[Saysumthinfunnymike]

What kills me is the imagery. You always see them in full Gucci or Fendi or Louis Vuitton outfits but how can they afford it when they only getting 15k? The label pays them in clothes?

Yes and no. Sometimes the label provides the clothes and cars. Sometimes the companies supply the products. Like there was one dude who got a BMW and the record company came and repossessed the shyt. Tinashe got a Ferrari from her label and 2 years later she was driving around the same whip.

 

[Bolzmark]

All of the money? You saw her agreement?

That’s what it say in the 3rd paragraph of OP’s post. ALL show and live performance money.

But should ANY show money be going to the label? That’s traditionally separate from the label.

 

[Alvin]

now I wonder what a lot of these new artists are getting I don’t think these guys are making money what they seems to be making

some def are and some ain't, it's always been like that though, just now it's more visible bc of social media.

 

[ThaEruditious]

That’s what it say in the 3rd paragraph of OP’s post. ALL show and live performance money.

But should ANY show money be going to the label? That’s traditionally separate from the label.

Not in 360s

 

[Hiphoplives4eva]

What kills me is the imagery. You always see them in full Gucci or Fendi or Louis Vuitton outfits but how can they afford it when they only getting 15k? The label pays them in clothes?

Yes. Most of the time it's rented.

Alot of times they get it free, especially if it's not a rich European label

 

[bourgeoisie tall freak]

I mean coerce someone to do the right thing is different from voided a contract. I ain’t mad at it but it sets a precedent.

meh. either way it goes, there's no precedent being set here. these things have been ruled on a million times by now. some get free, some don't.

 

[Rembrandt]

Thread a lil too celebratory

It's weird and corny.