What kind of record contract did they sign in 1984?

THE place for your Sisters-related comments, questions and snippets of Sisters information. For those who do not know, The Sisters of Mercy are a rock'n'roll band. And a pop band. And an industrial groove machine. Or so they say. They make records. Lots of records, apparently. But not in your galaxy. They play concerts. Lots of concerts, actually. But you still cannot see them. So what's it all about, Alfie? This is one of the few tightly-moderated forums on Heartland, so please keep on-topic. All off-topic posts will either be moved or deleted. Chairman Bux is the editor and the editor's decision is final. Danke.
Post Reply
User avatar
Prescott
Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 617
Joined: 22 Feb 2008, 04:28
Location: Somewhere Over The Rainbow

This is an excellent article on recording contracts in the UK.

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr07/a ... tracts.htm

Ever wonder what kind of contract the Sisters signed to?
"... because we're that kind of people."
Top
User avatar
Ozpat
From the Lowlands
Posts: 6758
Joined: 16 Aug 2005, 13:14
Location: In the place through which we wander.

A crappy one. :von:
"as we walk on the floodland"
Top
User avatar
mh
Above the Chemist
Posts: 8124
Joined: 23 Jun 2003, 14:41
Location: A city built on rock 'n' roll

So far as I understand 1984's contract was not much beyond a distribution deal. The big trouble started when Warners got reshuffled and the Sisters ended up on East West.
If I told them once, I told them a hundred times to put 'Spinal Tap' first and 'Puppet Show' last.
Top
User avatar
Randall Flagg
Gonzoid Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 363
Joined: 24 Apr 2006, 21:09
Location: London Village

Prescott wrote:This is an excellent article on recording contracts in the UK.

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr07/a ... tracts.htm

Ever wonder what kind of contract the Sisters signed to?
A long time ago now, but an aquainitance who had recorded and was selling/ trading a video of the RAH gig (this was London late 85/early 86) was "pursued" by WEA ref copywright infringement. As part of the cease and desist type operation he was shown a copy of the original contract. I always recall him saying he wished he'd kept it/obtained a copy.....

Flagg
Top
User avatar
stufarq
Popweazle Piddlepoop
Posts: 3209
Joined: 19 Jan 2008, 17:09
Location: my own imagination

Randall Flagg wrote: A long time ago now, but an aquainitance who had recorded and was selling/ trading a video of the RAH gig (this was London late 85/early 86) was "pursued" by WEA ref copywright infringement. As part of the cease and desist type operation he was shown a copy of the original contract. I always recall him saying he wished he'd kept it/obtained a copy.....

Flagg
Odd considering:
The official site FAQ wrote: The band was on WEA Records at the time. Why was 'Wake' released by Polygram?

WEA didn't want to fund the project.
I could understand Polygram pursuing your friend but what interest did WEA have when they didn't hold any rights to the video? Unless, I suppose, they funded the tour but I'd still have thought they'd leave it to Polygram.
Top
User avatar
Randall Flagg
Gonzoid Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 363
Joined: 24 Apr 2006, 21:09
Location: London Village

stufarq wrote:
Randall Flagg wrote: A long time ago now, but an aquainitance who had recorded and was selling/ trading a video of the RAH gig (this was London late 85/early 86) was "pursued" by WEA ref copywright infringement. As part of the cease and desist type operation he was shown a copy of the original contract. I always recall him saying he wished he'd kept it/obtained a copy.....

Flagg
Odd considering:
The official site FAQ wrote: The band was on WEA Records at the time. Why was 'Wake' released by Polygram?

WEA didn't want to fund the project.
I could understand Polygram pursuing your friend but what interest did WEA have when they didn't hold any rights to the video? Unless, I suppose, they funded the tour but I'd still have thought they'd leave it to Polygram.
It's a long time ago now so I can't be sure, but the copyright on the tracks on Wake resided with WEA. As far as I can recall it was not a Polygram driven thing which would leave, WEA, Candlemasse or Von.

One things for sure, the illicit video hit the streets of Camden etc weeks/months before Polygram released Wake.

Flagg
Top
paint it black
Black, black, black & even blacker
Posts: 4966
Joined: 11 Jul 2002, 01:00

WEA picked up on his advert in the NME. It was def WEA lawyers involved
Top
User avatar
million voices
Slight Overbomber
Posts: 1005
Joined: 10 May 2006, 22:31
Location: The Ballrooms Of Mars

Regarding the contract and the split with the band
If Eldritch had walked away and left the other boys with the name "The Sisters of Mercy"
(sort of like Gabriel did with Genesis)

a) - Could he have done that? I mean walked away and recorded and toured as Eldritch or whatever - started again.

and

b) - Would that have absolved him of all contractual obligations - Was the contract with the band rather than the individual?

Anybody have any idea?
Well you must know something
'Cos we're dying of admiration here
Mastering obscure alternatives
Top
User avatar
stufarq
Popweazle Piddlepoop
Posts: 3209
Joined: 19 Jan 2008, 17:09
Location: my own imagination

Randall Flagg wrote:It's a long time ago now so I can't be sure, but the copyright on the tracks on Wake resided with WEA. As far as I can recall it was not a Polygram driven thing which would leave, WEA, Candlemasse or Von.
WEA wouldn't own the recording copyright unless they funded it. They'd own all studio audio recordings because they paid for them but filmed footage comes under a different clause and, back then when the home video market was still very new, wouldn't have been a standard part of the contract. There could have been an additional clause giving WEA video rights but then the video wouldn't have been funded and released by Polygram.
million voices wrote:Regarding the contract and the split with the band
If Eldritch had walked away and left the other boys with the name "The Sisters of Mercy"
(sort of like Gabriel did with Genesis)

a) - Could he have done that? I mean walked away and recorded and toured as Eldritch or whatever - started again.

and

b) - Would that have absolved him of all contractual obligations - Was the contract with the band rather than the individual?

Anybody have any idea?
a) Yes. Happens all the time.
b) No. He would almost certainly still have been under to contract to WEA as a solo artist. In The Mish's biography Names Are For Tombstones, Baby, there's a story about how Wayne and Craig should have been tied to WEA too but their demos were conveniently left lying around for them to steal and no-one tried to stop them from finding another label. (I may be misremembering the exact details but the point is that everyone was still technically under contract to WEA.)
Top
User avatar
robertzombie
Overbomber
Posts: 4382
Joined: 05 Sep 2005, 12:49
Location: London

WIKIPEDIA wrote:After the “Sisterhood fiasco� [12] Eldritch decided to continue under the name The Sisters of Mercy: “I think that reflected rather badly on the name The Sisters of Mercy and it's probably due for re-instatement for that reason if no other.� [7] “I couldn't have gotten rid of the name even if I'd tried. So changing it wouldn't have made any sense. I'm still writing and recording the songs in very much the same way.� [2]
Top
User avatar
million voices
Slight Overbomber
Posts: 1005
Joined: 10 May 2006, 22:31
Location: The Ballrooms Of Mars

Thanks for the knowledge share.
It is just something that has irked me that he went to all that trouble to protect the name TSOM and then Sisterhood and it just seems to have caused him all kinds of contractual issues (if one can believe the stories). But I thought if he had given the name away like Bowie did with the Spiders and gone out as "Eldo and the Non-Goths" he could have prevented a lot of this and re-written his contract - but obviously not.
Well you must know something
'Cos we're dying of admiration here
Mastering obscure alternatives
Top
Spiggy's hat
Utterly Bastard Groovy Amphetamine Filth
Posts: 662
Joined: 31 Jan 2002, 00:00
Location: East Yorkshire

stufarq wrote:
Randall Flagg wrote:
million voices wrote:
b) No. He would almost certainly still have been under to contract to WEA as a solo artist. In The Mish's biography Names Are For Tombstones, Baby, there's a story about how Wayne and Craig should have been tied to WEA too but their demos were conveniently left lying around for them to steal and no-one tried to stop them from finding another label. (I may be misremembering the exact details but the point is that everyone was still technically under contract to WEA.)
Think that WEA were hoping to get the Mish but wanted them to bring in a vocalist, as they didn't rate Waynes efforts on the microphone. Didn't Wayne mention WEAs suggestions of Andi Sex Gang/Gavin Virgin Prune ......and Sal Solo! :lol:

When Wayne/The Mish refused the above suggestions it all went quite with WEA & so as you say, they rush released the single on CHapter 22 & were never pursued by WEA.
Give me one good reason
Top
User avatar
Purple Light
Slight Overbomber
Posts: 1526
Joined: 02 Feb 2004, 16:25
Location: Kirkstall
Contact:
Contact Purple Light

Unless it involves Crash And Burn I can't be arsed reading it. So I won't be reading it then.
“I got lost in the mirror, wondering what could have been, I couldn’t help but kill her, but I couldn’t kill the dream.”
Top
User avatar
stufarq
Popweazle Piddlepoop
Posts: 3209
Joined: 19 Jan 2008, 17:09
Location: my own imagination

Spiggy's hat wrote:Think that WEA were hoping to get the Mish but wanted them to bring in a vocalist, as they didn't rate Waynes efforts on the microphone. Didn't Wayne mention WEAs suggestions of Andi Sex Gang/Gavin Virgin Prune ......and Sal Solo! :lol:

When Wayne/The Mish refused the above suggestions it all went quite with WEA & so as you say, they rush released the single on CHapter 22 & were never pursued by WEA.
Now that you mention it, Sal Solo rings a bell.
Top
Post Reply

Return to “Sisters Chat”