the unsavory truth about songwriting credit
 

With reference back to a discussion on an earlier thread about songwriting and credits and royalties, I thought some of you might find this article of interest:

http://www.theguardian.com/music/mus...ts-songwriters

Here's a quote that talks about the type of situation that was being discussed here about Stevie getting credit for changing a word or two in Seven Wonders written by Sandy Stewart-

"It's common for artists to demand songwriting credits on a track – jokingly called "change a word, get a third" by songwriters – sometimes without having anything to do with the writing. An artist once demanded 70% of a song I had worked on, if she decided to record it. As the song was a three-way co-write, that would've left the three of us who actually had written it with 10% each."

Here's another quote from an article about the song Blurred Lines. Robin Thicke demanded credit as writer even though Pharrell Williams wrote it:

"As to why Williams let Thicke take the credit, it's just business as usual according to his testimony:

"This is what happens every day in our industry," said Williams during his own deposition. "You know, people are made to look like they have much more authorship in the situation than they actually do. So that's where the embellishment comes in."

I always wonder, too, just how much of a song was actually written by the superstar who's credited as its writer. Now we know."
http://gawker.com/robin-thicke-was-h...-bl-1634886014

I need to double check the legality at some point, but I believe you can sell your authorship as well. If you wrote a song, someone else can buy your songwriting credit, if you choose to sell it to them, and then they are the legal songwriter and you are not.

A lot of the Gawker report is based on this Hollywood Reporter one:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr...g-abuse-732783

Despite having limited input into the creation of "Blurred Lines," Thicke was given a co-writer credit, which he says entitles him to about 18-22 percent of publishing royalties. Why would Williams be so generous?
"This is what happens every day in our industry," said Williams during his own deposition (read in full here). "You know, people are made to look like they have much more authorship in the situation than they actually do. So that's where the embellishment comes in."

It would appear when she collaborates, Stevie is what is called a "topline writer" -- in cases when someone (like Mike Campbell) sends her a track (like say, FWIW) and she puts the melody and lyrics on it.

"sending out a track to…. topline writers, asking them to come up with melody and lyrics (the topline) for the track."

I can't speak to whether or not Stevie deserved her writing credit on "Seven Wonders," but I do know there's at least one instance where a songwriter wanted to credit Stevie for changes she made and Stevie declined. Bret Michaels told a Canadian radio station sometime around 2001, that Stevie made quite a few lyrical changes to "Love's A Hard Game To Play." So much so, that Bret wanted to add Stevie as a co-writer -- but she told Bret it was his song and she wanted him (and Pat Schunk) to retain full credit.

So if Stevie did happen to play the "change a word, get a third" card with "Seven Wonders," it doesn't seem to be something she made a habit of. Thankfully.

This pay for songwriting credit baloney became much more pervasive in the 90s until now. Madonna was/is notorious for it. And so are the likes of Beyonce etc., to get more artistic acclaim, glory & credit, along with additional royalties, than just a performer royalty. They buy the prestige of being regarded as a songwriter, or co-writer. But people in the industry know the dirty truth. This is nothing new.

But, Stevie is not even in the same category with these so-called songwriting interlopers.
Stevie was exceedingly prolific from the early 70s throughout the 80s, painstakingly so! And then again in the mid 90s til SYW. And she is anything but passive about giving co-writing credit where deserved, or when writing over a track.

Agreed. She also offered Prince co-writing credit for Stand Back and he declined. Although I know in some places, he is indeed listed as co-writer. But the point is, Stevie seems to be quite generous or at least possesses integrity when it comes to taking/giving credit.

Agreed, Stevie is nothing at ALL like the so-called 'artists' out there now. She's very creative, she is prolific, and she can sing. She doesn't hide behind a lot of technology wizardry in the studio or pre recorded tracks live. And the vault songs attest to her output. Nothing here was meant to imply otherwise; there was a lot of talk about credits and royalties in a previous discussion and because of that these articles might be of interest to some.

Did Sandy Stewart complain about this? I don't understand why this became such an issue with fans. I mean Stevie made Sandy a millionaire.

Yes she did and her people told her that she could put "Seven Wonders" on her next record or keep quiet and make a LOT of money...

Elvis wanted to record I Will Always Love You ,colonel tom parker told Dolly she had to forfeit the right/and publishing 100% to Elvis .... we all know how that ended

she also recorded Stairway to Heaven , she changed the lyrics with Plant and Pages permission/insistence to make it hers but has no credit

Well, in all fairness, we were only told that Sandy complained and was advised to keep quiet. Sandy has never once, to the absolute best of my knowledge, complained publicly about it.

So until such time as she does, then the allegation is nothing more than hearsay.

So she had a choice and chose to make a lot of money? :shrug: Well, it doesn't seem to be bothering her much today. The song is still paying off, with the AHS Coven exposure and the forthcoming DVD set.

Is the person who reported this credible? We get a lot of fan fiction (uncorroborated statements) on the boards, so I'm more curious where it came from.

She was duped. That was Stevie's only good song on that album. She needed her.

Many times we find out stories that we've rehashed a million times were wrong all along and I wonder if the Seven Wonders songwriting is one of them i.e. maybe it's as simple as: Sandy heard the recorded song, pointed out Stevie's incorrect lyrics and said "you've made it your own so now you should get songwriting credit". And maybe she insisted as a response to some generous act Stevie had done for her in regards to publishing or songwriting. And so maybe Stevie said: At the most I'll give myself credit for "additional lyrics" so everyone knows the song is YOURS, but I won't take any financial return for songwriting this song.
It's all hypothetical, I know, but my point is: gouging someone for songwriting credit does not fit the personality profile of our girl. She does have an ego; she is unrealistic and tells "untruths" or "inaccuracies" about herself and time frames, but never at someone else's expense, especially in regards to what she knows is the core of most of the luxury she's had in this life: songwriting.
I really believe all this speculation on our part is overblown, and overblown in the wrong direction. Not sure why it took me 13 years as a member of The Ledge to pipe up but there you have it! Lol ;) Ricoh

Well why did she accept credit for that? She could of said no. The credit is ridiculous.

What she should have done is trade the Seven Wonders credit for the songwriting credits for Welcome to the Room Sara and When I see you Again...now that would have been sharp bargaining .:lol:

Why? We have heard that Stevie changed one word, but we have also heard she changed quite a few. Until we have the original we will never know how ridiculous the credit is.

The obvious answer is because Stewart wanted the "additional lyrics by Stevie Nicks" because Nicks in several spots didn't sing the lyrics that Stewart actually wrote.

So it's not Nicks trying to grab credit, its Stewart wanting it known that the lyrics aren't what she actually wrote.

Songwriters typically don't give away their bread and butter ($$) for a word or two. It's when someone makes a substantial contribution to the song/meaning/melody whatever.

Frankly I *do* believe our girl could have grabbed the credit-- or people acting or her behalf. The music business is pretty nasty. (Stevie's famous words "We're rock stars, and rock stars aren't nice"). And reading the articles, it talks about record labels, managers, whomever demanding writing credit for their artist so that person appears to be responsible for creating their own material and success … and if Stevie didn't bring enough good stuff to the table for FM, I can totally see her management fearing it would look bad for her to be covering someone else's material on a Mac record. On a solo record is one thing-- there are 10-12 songs on an album and that's a tough order to fill for any writer on every.single.album. So having a couple of songs by other writers there isn't anything "bad". But to only have to cough up 3 songs for FM and not even be able to do that would make her look really bad. Not to say she didn't have all her vault material but obviously she liked Seven Wonders, took it to FM, *they* really liked it and thought it had single potential, and it would just look bad for Stevie to just be the 'singer' on an outside writer's song on a Mac album.

It's a business all about 'image' and not necessarily about truth or honesty or integrity (ask Lindsey, he can talk about that forever). So yeah I can see Stevie's managers saying to Sandy, "think of the money you'll make in royalties even as a cowrite on a FM album". Having that hit with the Mac means she can charge more for her songs if other bands/singers want to do them. It's all tradeoffs.

Haha Bombay Sapphire for the best answer yet! Case closed.
Ricoh

So Stewart just decided to give away credit and money for one of her best songs... Don't think so

Well, they were friends, remember? Isn't it possible Stevie could have credit WITHOUT taking money? I think it's possible AND probable.
Ricoh

There was also a rumour that Stevie and Sandy had a falling out in the mid 80's----something to do with Stevie's overwhelming vocals being all over Sandy solo album "Cat Dancer". Sandy went in and tried to tone down the vocals so it didn't sound like a Stevie Nicks album. This is said to be the reason that Sandy does not appear on "Rock A Little" (while she was all over "The Wild Heart"). Sometime after, Stevie and Sandy made up and "Seven Wonders" ended up on "Tango In The Night".

ALSO, speaking of songwriting royalties, Lindsey stated last year that Christine SOLD her music catalog. That doesn't seem like a smart move, she must have received a WHOLE LOTTA MONEY !! So, does that mean Chris no longer gets paid when her songs are played? Do the Mac have to pay money to include her songs in the new 2014 set list?

Tango In The Night would have been the first album for that lineup without a hit single for Stevie with royalties for songwriting credit, had she not been allocated some credit for writing Seven Wonders.

Stevie is very kind and sweet and lovely and all, but I wouldn't doubt for a moment that she had the foresight to look out for herself since she obviously had no other avenue with Fleetwood Mac for the income a hit single would have generated at that period of time in the music business. I don't see anything wrong with that, though. When I See You Again and Welcome To the Room...Sara certainly were not going to drive up album sales, and didn't stand a chance at being released for a single with a video that got heavy rotation. Just speculation, obviously, as until Sandy or Stevie talks about it, we won't really know.

But, I wouldn't be surprised if the decision was purely one made to financially benefit Stevie, who until then, was an unstoppable source for a hit singles under the Fleetwood Mac name.

Unlikely. Bands and solo acts cover songs all the time on live shows.

Me either... And she was full of herself, an entitled rock star... A lot them are like that. Elvis wanted total songwriting credit from Dolly Parton to record I Will Always Love You and she said no. Thank god because Whitney made that song a phenomenon and she made a fortune. Beyoncé got songwriting credit for Bootylicous and someone else wrote it.

They don't have to pay anything different than if Christine hadn't sold her catalog.

Same thing with Silver Springs. Whether it's owned by Welsh Witch music or Barbara Nicks, FM doesn't have to pay a different amount to play it in concert.

Michele

I might be getting a bit off topic here, but am I the only one who thinks Blurred Lines is one of the most disgusting songs ever?

Hmm. I can see your point here. And I can definitely see Stewart weighing a reduced percentage in favor of bigger on-a-Mac album sales. I wonder why the just "additional words" credit, if Nicks was trying to grab credit, and why Nicks has been so vocal about saying she only got the credit because she couldn't actually remember all the lyrics and just "winged it"? That seems very proactively blunt and honest for someone trying to grab credit.

Dunno. Maybe it was her team that did it and she felt bad? Maybe she got sober and realized it wasn't nice? My bet is the team, but who knows. Celebrities hire people to be hardass on their behalf. Maybe Sandy indicated she would blab (though seems less likely) and Stevie got out ahead of it? My guess is management team, and a zonked Stevie. I don't recall exactly but I don't think it said 'additional words' on the album when it came out, just her name. Anyone have an orig copy? My vinyl is in storage…..

Blurred Lines is absolutely foul. The objectifying of women's bodies that goes on in the video, the lyrics that LITERALLY talk about the ~blurred lines~ of consent... And the fact that a song with such awful content could be kept at number one on the charts for long periods of time in multiple countries by people streaming and buying it? Ugh, just thinking about it makes me mad.

I'm not arguing your point, 'cause I totally get it, but I hear the lyrics differently. To me, the 'blurred lines' were those of relationship boundaries and monogamy. He's singing to a girl who is in a relationship with someone else, yet who is being very flirty with him despite that fact. He thinks her other guy is a schmuck and says 'I'm here to liberate you' He says to her, you're a good girl, but I know you want it (me), even though you have a boyfriend. The lines of fidelity and monogamy are what I interpret as being blurred. Maybe I hear it differently because I am male? :shrug:

Have you seen the parody with a female group singing about a boy? Hilarious. Even has boys in booty shorts and heels, dancing.

I see it as being about consent 'cause of lyrics such as the extraordinarily charming 'I'll give you something big enough to tear your ass in two', the many times repeated 'I know you want it', and of course, 'what rhymes with hug me?'. The whole sexual violence and Rohypnol thing sounded really rapey to me; and as a seventeen-year-old girl (so yes, some of our differing views probably are to do with ~age and stage~), I have plenty of young peers who have been coerced into things they aren't at all comfortable with, usually by older guys who give them the whole 'but you're a good girl, and I know you want it' thing. And then there's this post I found a while back, contrasting the song's lyrics to things rape victims were told by their rapists: http://thesocietypages.org/socimages...eal-life-rape/

And I don't think I've seen that particular video, but I've seen a few of guys dancing in heels to Beyoncé and Lady Gaga- oh to have such talent! Compared to them, I'm a toddler in a pair of my mother's shoes! :blob1: :blob2:

Bekka Bramlett did that on "Nothing Without You" on the "Time" album. It originally appeared on Delaney Bramlett's "Giving Birth To A Song" album twenty years earlier. She changed the line "'Cause I'm such a lucky man" to "'Cause I hold the winning hand" and got a songwriting credit.

BTW, where a song has two co-writers, the writer of the lyrics/melody usually gets 75%, while the writer who comes up with the chord progression gets 25%. On those songs, the writer of the lyrics/melody usually gets first credit. Of course, there are exceptions, most notably "Yesterday," where John Lennon really had nothing to do with the song.

It was probably a lump sum payment, kind of like winning the lottery. Christine is the wealthiest British female musician of all time. She probably has enough money to last 10 lifetimes. Once you have that much money, it's self-sustained through investments and you basically live off the interest.

Also with "Give Peace A Chance" where Paul McCartney is listed as co-writer but had nothing to do with the song at all. (other than playing it once in concert in 1988 as part of a John Lennon tribute medley with "Help!" & "Strawberry Fields Forever"), John just happened to write it while the songwriting partnership was still under contract (back when anything either of them wrote was credited to Lennon/McCartney regardless of whether the other one had any input or not).

From what I recall the original credit was "additional lyrics by Stevie Nicks".

From what I can remember reading years ago, I believe she sold her catalogue for somewhere in the range of $80 million.