Green Linnet lawsuit?

Jim McGuire · Post by **Jim McGuire** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:23 am

I hadn't heard that they had decided to take it to court.

scooter587 · Post by **scooter587** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 1:52 am

The suit was originally filed in NY State Supreme Court, June 2003. At the time, GL's owner Wendy Newton admitted that some royalties had gone unpaid. She said bookkeeping problems led to delays. Those "delays" lasted years and some are still ongoing. Even GL does not dispute these facts, which are a matter of public record, not some pr myth created by the musicians.

All I'm saying is that if you want to support the artists, buy their music direct, at concerts or through their web sites. For example, you'll find Cherish the Ladies cds at http://www.cherishtheladies.com/records.html.

meemtp · Post by **meemtp** » Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:08 pm

A friend of mine used to be GL's distribution manager. He said the truth lies somewhere in between. According to him, there were unpaid royalties, but not always what some of the artists were claiming. Usually in these cases there's a 50/50 share of the blame. It is important to note that many GL artists are not involved in the suit. Also, Keven Crawford said once that Lunasa was looking forward to completing their contract requirements. They never claimed unpaid royalties as far as I know, but I did get the impression that they weren't altogether satisfied with the financial aspects. It was also specifically mentioned that they weren't completely happy with the way GL chose to package and design some of their albums.

Wizzer · Post by **Wizzer** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 2:15 pm

[quote="scooter587"]The suit was originally filed in NY State Supreme Court, June 2003. At the time, GL's owner Wendy Newton admitted that some royalties had gone unpaid. She said bookkeeping problems led to delays. Those "delays" lasted years and some are still ongoing. Even GL does not dispute these facts, which are a matter of public record, not some pr myth created by the musicians."

My take:
I find it hard to believe that GL would somehow believe that we would continue to do business with a company that is not ethical.
If they have cheated the artist how could we in good faith trust them with our money and credit information.
If their accounting system is so bad that they cannot keep up with what they owe the artist how could we trust them with credit card and personal info?
For a business to use a defense that they are incompetent to the judge leaves me befuddled.

BrassBlower · Post by **BrassBlower** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 3:43 pm

Wizzer wrote:If their accounting system is so bad that they cannot keep up with what they owe the artist how could we trust them with credit card and personal info?
For a business to use a defense that they are incompetent to the judge leaves me befuddled.

Darned straight, buddy!

I normally try to see all sides of an issue before choosing sides, but when you have "friends" involved, it becomes difficult. There's no way in all honesty I could sit on that jury!

It's things like this that make me want to... (see signature)

Jim McGuire · Post by **Jim McGuire** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:00 pm

But no facts here - just third hand info. I get the feeling that people just don't like Green Linnet and will do and say anything to paint them black.

Unseen122 · Post by **Unseen122** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:25 pm

That seems pretty likely to me Jim. I do believe Corin though as she seems to have talked to the most inside person. I think after that arguement between them and their artists, people wanted to bash GL. I for one do not look at what record company the band has a contract with and am right now listening to one of my favorite bands Teada who happen to be on GL in fact I was going to see them last week but there was freezing rain which was supposed to last well into the morning so I did not go. I probably will not stop buying albums on GL as too many of my favorites are/were on it. From what I hear about Lunasa from reading their website is that the artwork and track listing on the album Redwood is wrong on the Japanese version and the artwork is wrong on the American/Canadian version and that they never had a really good relationship with them to begin with so they did not renew the contract and have switched to Compass.

Wanderer · Post by **Wanderer** » Fri Dec 23, 2005 9:04 pm

For me, it's not a matter of whether I like GL or not...I used to buy from them pretty regularly. I choose not to buy from Green Linnet, because Joanie sent me an email that they still haven't been paid, so I don't like they way they are treated. It's a simple choice for me. Personally, I'd love to buy from them if they were treating their artists right...they do have a large selection, and often run great sales.

Since Green Linnet said themselves that they haven't paid royalties, it doesn't seem like there's many facts in dispute...maybe a matter of how many dollars, rather than if any are owed at all.

It's a matter of principle. I don't eat goose liver pate, because I don't like the way they treat the goose. Some people don't eat meat at all. For me, I have a greater care for artists than animals..I eat meat, but I won't be partaking of the Green Linnet...

Unseen122 · Post by **Unseen122** » Sat Dec 24, 2005 11:27 am

I care about the artist too, I just don't pay attention to the label when buying. I do own quite a few GL CDs though. I never use free downloads (yes they are still around) plus I prefer CD more.

scooter587 · Post by **scooter587** » Sat Dec 24, 2005 4:29 pm

I'm not bashing GL, just airing out the facts as they've been documented in NY's courts. Go look it up yourself if you don't like second-hand news. I just wish GL'd do the right thing and pay their artists what they're due.

I come at this as a published writer--book royalties are part of my bread and butter. Publishers and recording labels do sometimes struggle to keep accurate books on their holdings. It's not unusual for a business to upgrade its booking systems over time, which creates greater opportunities for coding errors, misplaced decimals, lost addresses, etc. A musician or writer's business relationship with a label or publisher can last many years, so glitches may periodically arise. It's happened to me. When I brought errors to the publisher's attention, they checked their books, found the problem, and promptly corrected it. I've also had roylaty checks delayed, but never more than a year. In the GL case, the artists have been more than patient, giving Wendy every benefit of the doubt for years. As a GL customer, I too gave them the benefit of the doubt. But this has dragged on too long, and it's very hard for me to continue to believe that GL is acting in good faith.

So I don't buy my music from them, and I encourage others to inform themselves before supporting such business practices. I hope Wendy can set things right, and if she does, maybe I'll buy through GL again some day. But for my dollar, she's got a long uphill climb to win back her credibility.

Jim McGuire · Post by **Jim McGuire** » Sat Dec 24, 2005 9:49 pm

If royalties are actually due, I hope they get reconciled. Artists do need to step up their involvement and vigilance through contracts and arrangements. I've been involved in many third-party software distribution agreements where determining reporting and reconcilement is the key to success for both parties. If those activities are not detailed, it's virtually impossible to get the other side to do anything.

Issues such as how much royalties are due for tracks on compilations probably was not anticipated in original contract discussions, or movie rights. Management fees and expenses get pulled out of fees paid before royalties so it's not clear that a lot is owed. We do know that the artists want a lot.

Busting Wendy Newton and Green Linnet, before the issues are decided and settled, serves no one. The artists likely have a fall back plan to regain control of the LP/CDs.

Caj · Post by **Caj** » Sun Dec 25, 2005 10:15 pm

meemtp wrote:A friend of mine used to be GL's distribution manager. He said the truth lies somewhere in between. According to him, there were unpaid royalties, but not always what some of the artists were claiming. Usually in these cases there's a 50/50 share of the blame.

I wonder if someone can explain to me how it is possible to have a "50/50 share of the blame" over unpaid royalties.

I mean, if I am supposed to pay you royalties, and one way or another you don't get them, how can that be 50% your fault? How does the artist share in the blame?

Caj

susnfx · Post by **susnfx** » Mon Dec 26, 2005 9:28 am

One thing I don't believe has been mentioned is that part of the issue is that GL has used, without permission, their artists' music on compilation CDs. While GL may have the legal right to do this, by apparently not having it in their contracts and the musicians not realizing (at least for quite some time) that they had no say in compilation CDs and would receive no money for them, it seems to me personally to be an unethical practice on GL's part. That's the major reason I won't ever buy from them again.

Susan

Jim McGuire · Post by **Jim McGuire** » Mon Dec 26, 2005 10:14 am

Have you seen the artist/GL contract(s)? Were permissions or notifications required? What money (if any) is due for their usage? Is GL entitled to management fees and expense for keeping artists CDs in the catalog or for cutting new deals with third parties?

I'm guessing that both sides have learned quite a bit and will structure deals differently in the future. We seem to be nearing the end of the CD era anyway.

Penalizing Green Linnet before things are resolved is unfair.

carrie · Post by **carrie** » Mon Dec 26, 2005 1:05 pm

scooter587 wrote:I come at this as a published writer...

Just curious, if you don't mind telling: What do you write?

Carol