SoulAlive said:

When Toni Braxton went bankrupt the first time, my first thought was 'she really should have contributed to the songwriting on her album' so that she would be collecting royalties.Why allow others to do all the writing and make all the money? Be a part of it, too.

I agree, and TOni can play piano too, collaborative writing and solo writing + playing piano should be her direction

MickyDolenz said:

Writing songs is no guarantee of getting paid. The Wilson brothers wrote songs in The Gap Band, but Charlie said Lonnie Simmons (who ran their label Total Experience) took all the royalties and most of their touring money too. For non performing songwriters, some are "work for hire", which is they get a fee for each song they write, but the songs belong to someone else like a record label and they get no royalties. HDH sued Motown because they said they were not getting paid what they should and then left. James Brown has said that King Records would tell him his singles sold less than they did, so they wouldn't have to pay as much royalties. Many acts found out that they signed away their publishing to the label or their manager as they didn't understand or fully read their contracts. That's how The Beatles lost their songs to Lew Grade and Little Richard also lost his songs in this way. J. Prince who ran Rap-A-Lot would not pay or underpay his acts and has been known to have them beat up if asked. Sylvia Robinson (Sugarhill Records) would also avoid paying her acts and the house band too.

Thats interesting. I wonder if this type of thing is as prevalent today as it used to be? I would think regulation of intellectual and creative property right would be better these days, and artists would know not to sign contracts wthout lawyers carefully reading and renegotating them.

lezama said:

SoulAlive said:

When Toni Braxton went bankrupt the first time, my first thought was 'she really should have contributed to the songwriting on her album' so that she would be collecting royalties.Why allow others to do all the writing and make all the money? Be a part of it, too.

Yep.. this is why you should always be in on your own songwriting, at least in part if you can't do it all: http://www.businessinside...sa-2014-12

and also....I would think that,as an artist,you would want your songs to have input from you.If I were a singer,I would walk into the studio with an entire notebook filled with lyrics,lol.I wouldn't want a bunch of already written songs just handed to me.

I get the impression that songs are usually given to artists, and performers have to REALLY FIGHT to record their own material - even Britney Spears. The assumption is that those "singers" don't write. No. They want to but everyone is caught up in the hit parade.

Lady Gaga calling out singers in this situation is like calling out a Clear Channel radio disc jockey for not shaking up the playlist. They don't have the power to!

I can't really argue with her point, since she expressly says if you don't write you better be a great singer, which includes people like Tina Turner, etc. I mean let's face it, the crap that's on the Top 40 now is all product. She's right to call it karaoke.

TheResistor said:

To be honest, if I was a songwriter working for major label artists I'd feel just pissed off if the performer would get 50% of the royalties for just writing some silly "party, party" and "baby we go together like a hand and a glove" type of lyrics to my songs. It doesn't take that much effort to come up with the type of lyrics that most pop albums are full of, but very few people can actually write catchy enough melodies.

I'd imagine many professional songwriters have had in their contracts the right to write the lyrics to their songs and get justly paid for their work.

[Edited 1/1/15 10:31am]

the thing is....most songs you hear on the radio these days are crap.So why allow someone else to write a crap song for you and make all that money? You can just do it yourself

Ok,maybe not everything is crap,but you get my point.

I was prepared to be pissed off at Gaga, but.... I agree. An artist -- a musical one -- has to has something musical going for them. If you can't compose, that's perfectly fine. Sing or play really well. If you can't compose or sing or play, at least produce. (And by produce, I mean earnestly have a hand in the construction of a soundscape; don't just bankroll a project.) If you can't do any of the above, you're basically just a fan.

[Edited 1/2/15 7:50am]

lowkey said:

one of the most ridiculous things i've ever heard. so according to her logic motown wouldnt have existed, those great artists didnt write any of their classic timeless songs.

But didn't Gaga say that artists that didn't write their own material better know how to blow?

Blow = sing VERY well.....

The Temps could sing very well. The Supremes could sing very well in their own sweet, understated way. Four Tops, very well. I can go on and on...Gaga's point was if you are a good "singer" or have an indelible voice then it's quite OK that songwriting it not your thing. it's why Tony Bennett can still sing well into his 80s. He has the VOICE...

Someone like a Britney Spears is who Gaga was pointing to....Not talented singers...

So yeah. Gaga is right....