Megan Thee Stallion sued the label for defining the album

Megan You’re my stallion sued her record label1501 Certified Entertainment, in the debate over what constitutes and what is not an “album”.

This applies to last year’s release Something for you April which she and her legal team want to classify as a mixtape rather than as an album for contract purposes. Her record label holds the opposite view.

Megan’s team insists on this Something for you April “Clearly meets the definition of” album “and claims that 1501 Certified Entertainment wants to introduce the definition of” mixtape “to” link [Megan] down ”for their own“ financial gain ”.

All of this will apply to the recording contract she signed with the record company, which will outline what the results are (i.e., how many albums she has signed). Claiming that Something for you April is not an album, the label will require that its release not be a tick of one of the albums required for her contract.

Her legal team adds that it was only two months after its release that it was informed that the label did not consider it an album. They believe that, according to her contract, the album is any work lasting more than 45 minutes. Something for you April almost crosses this threshold – for two seconds.

“The rapper is seeking a non-monetary declarative verdict that the record corresponds to the definition of the album and any attorney’s fees as a result of the case, “- writes Digital music news. “It would satisfy her current contract under 1501 Entertainment.

There is a short but bitter story between the rapper and her label, as she has filed a lawsuit against 1501 for the second time. In early 2020, she moved to re-sign the contract with a label adding in video post that she “didn’t really know what was in my contract” when she signed it. “When I joined Roc Nation, I got control – real control,” she said. “I have real lawyers. They said, “You know it’s in your contract?” and I said, “Damn, this is crazy – no, I didn’t know.”

The debate between “album” and “mixtape” is not new, but is traditionally conducted on a creative line, not on a contract basis.

Feature in Vice in 2013 suggested that because the role of mixtapes has changed significantly since the early days of hip-hop, the process has been accelerated due to the fact that artists could easily distribute them online. «[W]what distinguishes a modern rap mixtape from a rap album is its purpose“- argued Vice.

“Albums have to move units and create singles,” she continued. “They fit into the well-oiled, decades-old equipment of the recording industry. While mixtapes can (and often do) release singles and sell some copies, their goals are more flexible. Mixtapes are a way to attract new fans, something that old fans can talk about on social media, an occasion for touring and a way to demonstrate collaboration with great artists. Mixtapes are moving the rapper’s career forward, and they can do it without selling a single copy. “

Other than the features of her contract with her label is a lie broader industrial debate on the role and appeal of albums in the digital age. Napster launched the album in 1999 and allowed users to focus on individual tracks, although it was completely unlicensed. This process of separation was legitimized by the record business in 2003 with the advent of the iTunes Music Store, which sells individual tracks at a fixed rate of $ 0.99 each. Since then, streaming has overtaken streaming, and the focus has shifted to how tracks work in a playback environment.

Kanye West, with exit Pablo’s life in 2016 questioned what an album is on a creative level, turning it into a moving holiday, repeatedly adding new tracks and removing others, something that was possible and cost-effective only in the digital age. What he did was the exception rather than the rule, but he got involved in a wide-ranging debate about what an album was. there is and what an album is for.

As for contract issues and album disputes, this is a story that dates back to 1960, when a jazz pianist Erol Garner has successfully sued Columbia Records for breach of contract. This is due to the fact that the label releases tracks from his studio archives without his approval or consent while they are reviewing his record contract. After a three-year battle, Garner won a landmark deal and received not only a cash settlement but also the return of his masters.

Since then, other acts have been empowered to go against their labels – with mixed results.

Notable cases include: Geffen Records sued Neil Young in 1983 allegedly for creating “unrepresentative” and “uncharacteristic” albums; George Michael’s unsuccessful lawsuit against Sony in 1992; The Prince’s long battles with Warner in the 1990s; Courtney Love terminated her contract with Universal Music Group in 2002; and Michael Jackson’s public animosity with Sony Music in the early 2000swhere he said that they “really, really conspire against artists – they steal, they cheat, they do everything they can”, believing that this is especially often “against black artists”.

Most recently we saw Taylor Swift returns and begins re-recording her albums, originally released on Big Machine Records after it was acquired by private investment companies as part of a deal led by Scooter Brown, a leader with whom she had a difficult relationship. Last year Ray unveils dispute with Polydor (part of Universal Music Group) where she claimed the label was killing her career by not allowing her to release music the way she wanted. (Palidor quickly released her from the contract when the story exploded.)

How things are going with Megan You’re a Stallion remains to be seen. As he joins all the above examples (and more) in the long litany of legal battles between artists and labels, the only thing that can be said in this dispute is that it will not be the last.

Megan Thee Stallion sued the label for defining the album

Source link Megan Thee Stallion sued the label for defining the album

Related Articles

Back to top button