Originally posted by Scroatey
Ignoring the earlier argument this thread developed, the biggest scandal about the use of bands' songs isn't whether a song is re-recorded and the writer benefitting over the performer, but the fact that the record companies take a huge slice of publishing deals for very little work - Ad'man hears a song he wants to use, approaches the label and gets the OK for a price (eg. ú10,000) - the record company keeps +50% of this, and for how much work?
They pay for the publishing and for the recording - the record company doesn't get a slice of any publishing money; the two parts are negotiated separately.
The record company typýcally will be the party who has paid for the recording and done all the promotion at radio, press and TV of the record, and in my experience is more often than not the agent who presents the recording to the advertiser - why don't you think the record company should see any money? In fact, the breakdown is usually 25% record company, 25% recording artist, 15% composer, 35% publisher; as far as I can see, the party who's done least work is usually the publisher.