That "fair use" clause in my music contract wasn't fair at all

I used to think fair use clauses were standard and harmless, just boilerplate everyone signs. Last year I signed a 12-month licensing deal with a small label based in Austin, and their fair use clause let them use my tracks in promotional videos without extra pay. After 6 months I noticed they were selling compilations with my music on streaming platforms and arguing it fell under that clause. I hired a lawyer to look it over and she said the wording was vague enough to cover commercial sales too. Has anyone else had a vague fair use clause backfire on them like this?

3 comments

3 Comments

the_felix17d ago

@taylor_wells guess my lawyer fees outweigh what i even made from those streams haha

fionanguyen17d ago

@taylor_wells guess @the_felix learned the hard way that free streams ain't always free.

taylor_wells17d ago

This happened to a buddy of mine in Nashville last year. He had a similar clause in his contract and they ended up using his song in ads for a regional car dealership chain without paying him anything extra. What worked for him was getting a lawyer to send a cease and desist letter specifically pointing out how the wording didn't clearly cover commercial sales. The label backed down when he showed proof of their streaming revenue versus the original agreement. It took a few months of back and forth but he ended up getting a small settlement and rewriting the clause for future contracts.