Congrats American Idol Winners: You Are Now Rupert's Bitch (Their Contract's Exposed)

Cafe Society
1

I don’t think you have to be a lawyer to realize this is one crap contract. Those poor schmucks who appeared on American Idol have basically signed over their rights to Rupert Murdock and FOX.

Read it over and see if YOU would have signed this puppy.

(All of the following verbage, including commentary, is taken from Salon.com.):
So Clarkson is on top of the world with a record deal, management contract, public performances and nothing but blue skies ahead, right? Perhaps. But let’s have a look at some of the more exciting fine print in the “American Idol” contestant contract, which was posted on the “Pho” e-mail group by Los Angeles music attorney Gary Fine.

Fine came into possession of the contract when the mother of a young man who was interested in being on the show brought it in for his perusal. The contract had been presented on a “take it or leave it” basis and the man had been given a couple of hours to make a decision. Fine told him not to sign.

"1. I hereby consent to Producer’s filming, taping and/or recording of me for use in and in connection with the Series … I acknowledge and agree that Producer will be the sole and exclusive owner of all rights and material filmed, taped, and/or recorded pursuant to this Agreement.

"… I hereby grant to Producer the unconditional right throughout the universe in perpetuity to use, simulate or portray (and to authorize others to do so) or to refrain from using, simulating or portraying, my name, likeness (whether photographic or otherwise), voice, singing voice, personality, personal identification or personal experiences, my life story, biographical data, incidents, situations and events which heretofore occurred or hereafter occur, including without limitation the right to use, or to authorize others to use any of the foregoing in or in connection with the Series …

“… I understand that, in and in connection with the Series, I may reveal and/or relate, and other parties … may reveal and/or relate information about me of a personal, private, intimate, surprising, defamatory, disparaging, embarrassing or unfavorable nature, that may be factual and/or fictional.”

In other words, the producers can record any and all behavior of the contestant “in and in connection with the series” and use the contestant’s likeness, voice and any or all biographical material, whether true or false, any way they want to. The producers own all this material forever and “throughout the universe.”

"2. Confidentiality/Disclosures: Any and all information disclosed to or obtained by me concerning or relating to the Series, the contestants, the events contained in the Series, the outcome of the Series and/or contest, Producer, the Network and the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be strictly confidential.

" … I acknowledge that any disclosure of such information will constitute a material breach of this Agreement and will cause Producer and the Network substantial and irreparable Injury and will cause substantial damages in excess of Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000), entitling Producer (and/or the Network, as a third party beneficiary of this provision) to, among other things: (a) injunctive or other equitable relief, without posting any bond, to prevent and/or cure any breach or threatened breach of this paragraph by me; (b) recovery or disgorgement of the monies and other consideration, if any, I received in connection with such disclosure; © forfeiture of any and all cash and prizes that I may have been entitled to for participating in the Series; and (d) recovery of the Producer’s and/or the Network’s damages, including but not limited to, lost profits and other consequential damages, to the extent permitted by law, and attorneys’ fees and court costs incurred to enforce this paragraph."

Absolutely all information regarding the show and this contract is confidential. If the contestant breaches this confidentiality it will cause damages assumed to be in excess of $5 million. The producers can recover such damages, anything gained by the contestant from such a disclosure, the contestant’s winnings from the show and any actual additional damages caused by the disclosure.

2

It ain’t just the winners… everyone had to sign it. Which is why you see Keith singing “Like a Virgin” when they have the chance, because that footage is owned by the company.

Oh, and IIRC, it isn’t FOX that has this right, but 19 Group, who makes this show.

3

It’s a fair price to pay for what they’re compensated with. They don’t have to sign the contract.

4

Isn’t Salon the same magazine that ran an article claiming it was impossible for a black person to win a reality series like “American Idol”? Maybe my vision is going, but isn’t Ruben Studdard black?

I think I’d like to reserve judgment on this contract until I know it’s the real deal. And I see it all.

5

" the unconditional right throughout the universe in perpetuity" ?

Jeesh, that’s creepy. The universe? Maybe Rupert’s building a colony on the moon or something.

6

One crap contract? Did you wake up on the wrong side of the couch or what? What fledgling singer wouldn’t give their grandmothers wheelchair for that contract?

Where do you think Clay Aiken would be in five years without American Idol? and With?

7

Here’s the article DMark is talking about.

RickJay is talking about this one, which is a well-written examination on minorities in reality TV that’s been repeatedly reduced to “They said Ruben couldn’t win but he did! Nah nah!” here today.

They are definitely Rupert’s bitch, too. Of course, whether it’s worth it to them or not to get in the door is up to them. Bill H is likely quite right, we probably never would have heard of any of these people without American Idol. Still, I think it’s fair to question what kind of artist would submit to this kind of control. I agree with what John Mayer said about the show:

  • Slacker
8

Says a man (John Mayer) who is no where near as popular (or good) as the two that made the final ;).

9

lol well that’s certainly subjective. I wouldn’t listen to any of the three of 'em if my life depended on it. I wouldn’t think it’s that uncommon of a sentiment among the community though. I know Morrissey made similar comments on the Craig Kilborn show if that helps sway your opinion. :smiley:

10

Wouldn’t a standard suffering singer/songwriter say that kind of thing about any pop star? It’s their signature to be disdainful of fluffy pop.

11

Is this VERY different from the contract ANY new act has to sign to get into the record industry?

Don’t they pretty much OWN you for the first few albums at “slave labor” prices?

12

To me, the problem with “American Idol” is that it rewards a singer for being pretty good at singing several different styles of music, but not for being great at any one thing. To be a champion on “American Idol” is a lot like being the world’s greatest karaoke singer. The fact that a guy can do a perfectly serviceable rendition of a lot of different popular songs does NOT mean he’s likely to make good or memorable music of his own in the future.

In all likelihood, your favorite singer (no matter who he/she is) would do very poorly in the “American Idol” format. For the sake of argument, how would Bruce Springsteen have done on that show? Probably horribly! He might do very well on any given week, depending on the song/genre selected for him, but there’d be other weeks when he’d have to sing songs/genres he just isn’t suited for. On one of those weeks, he’d stink out the joint (it couldn’t be helped!), and he’d be voted off.

13

[slight hijack]Personally, I think Bruce Springsteen stinks out the joint every time he sings, so he’s not exactly a good example in my book. Try someone who can SING for a decent comparison. I utterly fail to understand the appeal of a guy who nasally whines incomprehensibly – the lyrics may be deep, but for all I can tell he’s doing the ol’ Louie Louie scam again, make it incomprehensible so people will waste their time trying to understand it.[/hijack]

Actually, John Mayer can’t sing that well, either. He definitely can play the guitar, and he writes good stuff, but some people are just meant to write for OTHER people to sing their stuff. To me, he’s one of them. I can understand his being snide about American Idol types; they’re judged first and foremost on his weakest skill, so he wouldn’t have a chance even with all his talent in other areas.

14

Which may be one of the reasons the record industry is so strongly opposed to online MP3 distribution houses:

“Oh no! If anyone can distribute home-made recordings of themselves nationwide, all the indie bands will put us out of business!”

15

Hilarious! I can’t stop laughing at this.

Whether you like it or not, the cold hard fact is that there are extremely few indie bands that stand to become major stars. One of the reasons they are indie is that the don’t have mass appeal and they know it.

And the record industry is perfectly happy with onlin MP3 distributions sites like MP3.com, which plays the indie music. Their gripe is people who share music they have no right to share.

16

Yes, where would any of the contestants be without the show? They don’t have control, but without it, they most likely wouldn’t have careers. Why not take it?

Anyway, I’m told there’s a saying among musicians that the 2 happiest days of their careers are the day they sign their first contract, and the day it expires. Any idea how long the exclusivity clause lasts on these ones?

17

I assumed that all “New Acts” signed these type of contracts as a poster said above. Which is one of the reasons you see so many acts/bands do a record or two and then vanish. It’s simply good business to keep producing new acts that can’t make huge demands.

18

You could just as soon say “there are extremely few bands that stand to become major stars”. Being signed to a major label does not a star make, despite what Extra! might declare - If any of these Idol winners have real star power in 2 years that’s not propped up by the “American Idol” name itself, I will eat my shoe. Seriously - remind me of it and I’ll do a webcast.

Saying that Indy bands don’t have the mass appeal is a little misleading, too. The ones that do cease to be Indy and are poached by major labels who have much more distribution power, in some cases unfairly so.

The point about MP3s is that it presents an equalizing force. Sometime in the future, a good band might not need to get signed by a major label in order to move up the path that their talent paves - a thought that should make consumers happy as well.

That said, I’m denying that there are more indy bands than major, nor do I deny that there are tons of indy bands that suck and will /never/ get a major contract. The reason why you never hear about a band before they get signed to a major label is not due to their talent, but due to the very nature of Major vs. Indy distribution.

19

grr… that should be

  • That said, I’m **not *denying that there are more indy bands than major, nor do I deny that there are tons of indy bands that suck and will /never/ get a major contract
20

No, because there is no such thing as a slave labor price. Slaves don’t get paid at all!