Interesting Tim O'Reilly article.

From: Feldman, Robert <Robert_Feldman_at_jdedwards.com>
Date: Mon Dec 16 08:48:00 2002

There was just a piece on National Public Radio's "Morning Edition" this
morning (12/16/02) about how the record industry's current audit procedure
makes it almost impossible for an artist to know even such basic information
as how many copies of his/her CD have been sold. The section's summary is:

<quote> NPR's Rick Karr reports on the latest developments in the ongoing
dispute between record companies and artists over royalty payments. Two of
the five major labels say they will change the way they compute royalties,
to make them more transparent and less confusing. The record companies hope
the changes will convince more artists to join the fight against free
downloads of music on the Internet. </quote>

-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne M. Smith [mailto:wmsmith_at_earthlink.net]
Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 11:49 PM
To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Re: Interesting Tim O'Reilly article.


> At 09:12 PM 12/13/02 -0800, you wrote:
> >Every recording contract with a participation clause has an audit
provision
in
> >it that allows the artist to come in with their own auditor/accountant
and
> >have
> >full access to the books. Same is true in the movie biz. So I don't
really
> >know what you're referring to.
>
> -BZZZTTTT- Wrong answer... the recording industry contracts state that
> Yes, you can ahve your contract audited, but only with a list of
'approved'
> auditors, as a matter of fact if you show your contract to ANYONE you are
> in violation of the contract.

I don't think that's right. There are restrictions that prevent hiring an
auditor on a contingency fee basis, and using an auditor who is performing
an
audit of the same company on behalf of another artist at the same time. I
have
never heard of the "approved list" you mention.
Received on Mon Dec 16 2002 - 08:48:00 GMT