Mixing session done - band refuses to pay
- Thread starter tgs
- Start date
JayB
Member
Line666
Fendurr
- Sep 2, 2006
- 3,342
- 1
- 36
slashvanyoung
Dopefish lives!
An unfortunate situation, for sure.
The legal situation is a bit sketchy though. Law is quite similar throughout Europe, especially concerning sales and service contracts, due to the European Union.
First off, is there a contract? Well... yes, but maybe no. Sounds weird? Let me elaborate on this:
At the very moment when the band agreed on letting Tore start the mix, they engaged into a service contract. If you doubt that, then you have no understanding about civil law - or European civil law therefore - to begin with. End of discussion.
You don't need a piece of paper saying "contract" on it, neither do you need to draw out every detail in a spoken agreement. When you go to a vending machine, put your money into it and get a soda out of it, then there is a contract, even though no words at all were interchanged. There's got to be an offer and the acceptance of the offer by the client. Both is the case here, so there is a contract. Tore is bound to deliver the mix (and master? depending on the contract) and the band is bound to pay for it.
So there is a contract and Tore even has the e-mail communication and the received files to prove it.
Now it's getting tricky.
The band could contest the validity of the contract.
They could argue that they would have never agreed to this contract if they knew the (potential) height of the bill beforehand. So now Tore could argue: "That's bullshit, my rates are estimated on my website". Now the band could argue that they didn't understand the possible consequences of the price estimates given on the website.
Now if a judge believes the band, that they never intended to engage in a contract with these circumstances, that would mean that the contract is (ex tunc) invalid. Ex tunc invalidity means there was no contract to begin with, retrospectively.
But even if a court would decide in favour of the band (which is quite unlikely) then they would probably still have to pay Tore compensation for his damages (because of their reckless behaviour).
Anyway. Chances are quite slim any court in the world would rule in favour of the band, but the low value in dispute makes legal steps nonsensical if you don't have legal expenses insurance.
If you work as an AE and you often have to argue about values which don't justify legal steps (if you have to pay for them) but which will make a significance to you: Get legal expense insurance. Even one case every so often you win will make that insurance profitable.
The legal situation is a bit sketchy though. Law is quite similar throughout Europe, especially concerning sales and service contracts, due to the European Union.
First off, is there a contract? Well... yes, but maybe no. Sounds weird? Let me elaborate on this:
At the very moment when the band agreed on letting Tore start the mix, they engaged into a service contract. If you doubt that, then you have no understanding about civil law - or European civil law therefore - to begin with. End of discussion.
You don't need a piece of paper saying "contract" on it, neither do you need to draw out every detail in a spoken agreement. When you go to a vending machine, put your money into it and get a soda out of it, then there is a contract, even though no words at all were interchanged. There's got to be an offer and the acceptance of the offer by the client. Both is the case here, so there is a contract. Tore is bound to deliver the mix (and master? depending on the contract) and the band is bound to pay for it.
So there is a contract and Tore even has the e-mail communication and the received files to prove it.
Now it's getting tricky.
The band could contest the validity of the contract.
They could argue that they would have never agreed to this contract if they knew the (potential) height of the bill beforehand. So now Tore could argue: "That's bullshit, my rates are estimated on my website". Now the band could argue that they didn't understand the possible consequences of the price estimates given on the website.
Now if a judge believes the band, that they never intended to engage in a contract with these circumstances, that would mean that the contract is (ex tunc) invalid. Ex tunc invalidity means there was no contract to begin with, retrospectively.
But even if a court would decide in favour of the band (which is quite unlikely) then they would probably still have to pay Tore compensation for his damages (because of their reckless behaviour).
Anyway. Chances are quite slim any court in the world would rule in favour of the band, but the low value in dispute makes legal steps nonsensical if you don't have legal expenses insurance.
If you work as an AE and you often have to argue about values which don't justify legal steps (if you have to pay for them) but which will make a significance to you: Get legal expense insurance. Even one case every so often you win will make that insurance profitable.
PhilR
Studio Scapegoat
Dude, again, there are tons of bands with way less MySpace hype going on that could afford that... I don't even have a MySpace for one of my bands and I can afford Tore mixing a song or two out of my own pocket... Seriously you need to just stop using the MySpace argument, lol. It literally has no relevance whatsoever man. I deal with blackmetal bands a lot, they aren't as broke as you think
A band I know recently laid down £7000 for a "production package" from a known producer for about 4/5 songs which they had already recorded with us. Thats over $11,200 worth. They aren't signed, they play VERY few gigs. But they believe they can buy and blag their way into fame by endless namedropping and spending money with "name" producers.
Force666
Member
- Sep 12, 2007
- 1,096
- 0
- 36
The Unavoidable
jättebög
They must have a lot of myspace friends.
Tell me about it. I knew this one band, who really wanted to record their debut in One on One studios with Bob Rock so they stayed up ALL NIGHT adding friends to their myspace until they could afford it.
kev
Im guybrush threepwood
El_Gato
I love this gain
Absolutely, and I have to add this: In case you win (quite sure) you wouldn't have to pay any trial charges, the band would.
And yes, having a cheap legal insurance for about 100/year or so. They would have sent them a letter about money or trial and they would have shitted in their pants.
But honestly, I wouldn't do it. Think of this: How long did you need to mix it and how long would the legal actions take, maybe a year? BTW no price reduction also, just rant and relax. You can charge 50% forward too.
Dude, again, there are tons of bands with way less MySpace hype going on that could afford that... I don't even have a MySpace for one of my bands and I can afford Tore mixing a song or two out of my own pocket... Seriously you need to just stop using the MySpace argument, lol. It literally has no relevance whatsoever man. I deal with blackmetal bands a lot, they aren't as broke as you think
I gotta agree, thefyn...The Myspace "popularity" vs. what kind of money dudes in a band have is REALLY REALLY REALLY grasping at straws.
Now, if you were to get on Myspace and see their band/show pics and see they use Crate amps and Bronze Warlocks, then MAYBE you'd have an argument! :Smug::zombie:
006 and nwright quoted for trvth.
yes thefyn, you are totally over-doing it with that line of argument... since it is actually totally IRRELEVANT, and i have already utterly refuted it in at least two of my previous posts in this thread, as have others.... most of which, like me, have more than enough experience to make that judgement, even it weren't solidly within the realm of common sense, accessible by anyone.
1. being unknown and having few "friends on myspace", says nothing whatsoever about the financial solvency of any band at all... there could be rich members, members with wealthy parents, members with great jobs, etc., etc. case and point: two of my highest paying jobs EVER, were from unsigned bands with next to no friends at all on their myspace accounts.
2. even if they are poor, there are many bands that save for a long time to do a quality recording or get a quality mix, even if they are dirt poor and have shit day jobs.... it's called determination, and some bands have it. determination to have a quality recording out there representing their band... the band they love and want the world to see in it's best light. there is no way to account for the "determination factor" by any tally of "myspace fans".
3. your claim that the fact they didn't pay is somehow proof that they can't pay is yet another gross leap of logic from you:
a. in their own words they didn't seem to be clear that they couldn't afford to pay the price so much as they were insistent that they would not pay it.
b. they could be wealthy and popular and still not pay. non-payment is not proof of poverty. and their poverty, even if they are poor, is not relevant anyway. you don't walk into a grocery store and look for any food item that's not clearly marked with a price and then eat it, then take the remains to the check-out counter and say, "hey, that was good.. how much?" , only to state indignantly that you can't afford that amount once the clerk tells it to you.
at least a dozen people on here have already either shot down, discredited, diproven, and/or utterly ridiculed this line of logic.... stop trying to use it before your quotes regarding it become something akin to the type of "legend" that the infamous Tad enjoys with his "BOOM" hilarity.
seriously though, repeating a weak, dead-in-the-water, non-argument ad infinitum does not lend it any more weight. just stop.
PhilR
Studio Scapegoat
They must have a lot of myspace friends.
Oh yeah, thousands. Yet for some reason despite them being a band from Nottingham England that has never toured anywhere ever, 99% of their myspace friends appear to be girls in bikinis from Florida, LA, and San Francisco. What an odd state of affairs.
Line666
Fendurr
- Sep 2, 2006
- 3,342
- 1
- 36
Can I just say we're not talking $1000 for a song, we're talking €600, there's a difference, European currency doesnt translate directly to American currency like that in real terms.
For me in the Uk at least, I know that $10 in America is probably in real terms worth about £10 here. Even though I could directly exchange £10 and get $16 for it.
And what we're talking about here is not "one song" it is one song with the duration of at least two. I see entry level studios here take around a quarter of that for a days work here, so seeing someone with a large portfolio of work in that genre take around four times that for mixing and mastering the equivalent of two songs seems entirely fair.
I also get the feeling that quite a lot of the home studio people on this board that oppose the price are waiting for tgs to post a mix so they can jump out and say they would have done a better/equal job for something equivalent to a half or quarter of that amount of money.
For me in the Uk at least, I know that $10 in America is probably in real terms worth about £10 here. Even though I could directly exchange £10 and get $16 for it.
And what we're talking about here is not "one song" it is one song with the duration of at least two. I see entry level studios here take around a quarter of that for a days work here, so seeing someone with a large portfolio of work in that genre take around four times that for mixing and mastering the equivalent of two songs seems entirely fair.
I also get the feeling that quite a lot of the home studio people on this board that oppose the price are waiting for tgs to post a mix so they can jump out and say they would have done a better/equal job for something equivalent to a half or quarter of that amount of money.
yes, what Owen said. 10 euros may convert to $16 at a bank, but if you come from the US to europe with that $16, convert it to 10 euros... well, you just go ahead and try to spend it like $16. i can tell you now it will feel like you spent only $8, at best.
Things progress. That was way before any problems. I was in the middle of a big production, which I by the way am still waiting for the final 50% of. Alright?
Pure comedy gold, hehe.
Oh, by the way, I actually DO have legal expense insurance! But first I wouldn't want to waste time over 600 euros, would be different if it was 6000. And second, as already mentioned, I did opt to get paid without invoice, so that wouldn't look very good.
006 and nwright quoted for trvth.
yes thefyn, you are totally over-doing it with that line of argument... since it is actually totally IRRELEVANT, and i have already utterly refuted it in at least two of my previous posts in this thread, as have others.... most of which, like me, have more than enough experience to make that judgement, even it weren't solidly within the realm of common sense, accessible by anyone.
1. being unknown and having few "friends on myspace", says nothing whatsoever about the financial solvency of any band at all... there could be rich members, members with wealthy parents, members with great jobs, etc., etc. case and point: two of my highest paying jobs EVER, were from unsigned bands with next to no friends at all on their myspace accounts.
2. even if they are poor, there are many bands that save for a long time to do a quality recording or get a quality mix, even if they are dirt poor and have shit day jobs.... it's called determination, and some bands have it. determination to have a quality recording out there representing their band... the band they love and want the world to see in it's best light. there is no way to account for the "determination factor" by any tally of "myspace fans".
3. your claim that the fact they didn't pay is somehow proof that they can't pay is yet another gross leap of logic from you:
a. in their own words they didn't seem to be clear that they couldn't afford to pay the price so much as they were insistent that they would not pay it.
b. they could be wealthy and popular and still not pay. non-payment is not proof of poverty. and their poverty, even if they are poor, is not relevant anyway. you don't walk into a grocery store and look for any food item that's not clearly marked with a price and then eat it, then take the remains to the check-out counter and say, "hey, that was good.. how much?" , only to state indignantly that you can't afford that amount once the clerk tells it to you.
at least a dozen people on here have already either shot down, discredited, diproven, and/or utterly ridiculed this line of logic.... stop trying to use it before your quotes regarding it become something akin to the type of "legend" that the infamous Tad enjoys with his "BOOM" hilarity.
seriously though, repeating a weak, dead-in-the-water, non-argument ad infinitum does not lend it any more weight. just stop.
Yeah they could all be wealthy, rich parents etc etc. It is possible.
In this case, they asked about the price so money WAS an object.
I'm not bitching because I am right or wrong. I am bitching that me equating a bands lack of popularity, is usually linked to how much they can spend in the studio being THE STUPIDEST ASSUMPTION EVER MADE that someone has EVER READ.
I said it is a flag is all.
YES!! this, exactly this.
you see fyn? it's already starting to happen,
I am really glad I said that.Similar threads
