Analysis Of The Article Prince Warns Young Artists: Record Contracts Are Slavery

487 Words2 Pages

The article that I read, entitled “Prince Warns Young Artists: Record Contracts Are 'Slavery”, deals with Prince and his experience with music contracts. The article explains how Prince is unhappy with the recording contract that he is bound to. He claims that Warner Brothers has used his contract to pay him less than he deserves. In the article, Prince is quoted as saying that “music contracts are just like slavery.” Prince has publically adorned the word slave on his face in order to “emancipate” himself “from the chains that bind me to Warner Bros.” He also says that young people thinking about signing recording contracts should think again. Prince has taken all his music off all streaming services with exception to Tidal, which is a relatively new service. Prince says that Tidal, a streaming service started by Jay-Z, is working to give rights back to artists. Prince’s new album, “HitNRun”, will be available exclusively on Tidal. Prince’s exclusive agreement with Tidal is his attempt to legally escape the binds of his contract, and have his music heard through a medium that doesn’t involve large music corporations. Along with taking his material off of streaming services, Prince has ordered all videos, images, and torrents of him or his music to be taken off of the Internet. …show more content…

It makes sense that he would be 18 because 18 is the youngest age someone can be legally bound to a contract. The music contract that Prince singed was an expressed bilateral contract. It wasn’t a gratuitous promise. As much as Prince would argue otherwise, both Prince and Warner Brothers got something out of their deal. Prince earned money and recording opportunities, while Warner Brothers also earned money from record, merchandise, and ticket sales. Because the contract was signed with both parties being fully competent Prince has no way of legally leaving his

Open Document