celeb news Miley on Bey collab: "I wrote that song two and a half years ago"

[Kool_Aid_King]

1 hour ago, FolkLover1989 said:

But you don't get 15% share of songwriter just like that

It's pretty obvious she wants everything in her name not just for name sake but later on publishing deal too

 

That's why Rihanna is better , she doesn't take share from other artists for changing 1 line

Rihanna literally does and has numerous times. She has writing credits on Consideration, Rude Boy & Work, all of those have had demos that leaked.

 

1 hour ago, supertiffany said:

??

 

who are those singers?

Rihanna, Katy Perry, Britney Spears, Selena Gomez, Demi Lovato, Lady Gaga, Janet Jackson, J.Lo etc.

 

Even Taylor & Mariah have been hit with plagiarism lawsuits.

 

All of these ladies probably have contributed enough to earn a credit on the songs they're credited for. Stop thinking women giving up credit & publishing is "gracious" & "generous". If they write, produce or change the melody, they should be credited, PERIOD.

[lonnie]

1 hour ago, period sis said:

Rihanna has done the same, and even much worse, especially with ANTi. 

How did Rihanna do worse on Anti? 

13 minutes ago, Kool_Aid_King said:

Rihanna literally does and has numerous times. She has writing credits on Consideration, Rude Boy & Work, all of those have had demos that leaked.

She usually has her name on the very end/near the end of the listed writers in this case which is what I think the user meant. Bey literally has had writing credits on covers before, let's not walk down this road. Not a single artist in the industry has accused Rihanna of taking undue credit, so again, let's not go there.

Edited June 4 by lonnie

[Princess Aurora]

I'm impressed by Miley's writing skills

[supertiffany]

43 minutes ago, Kool_Aid_King said:

Rihanna literally does and has numerous times. She has writing credits on Consideration, Rude Boy & Work, all of those have had demos that leaked.

 

Rihanna, Katy Perry, Britney Spears, Selena Gomez, Demi Lovato, Lady Gaga, Janet Jackson, J.Lo etc.

 

Even Taylor & Mariah have been hit with plagiarism lawsuits.

 

All of these ladies probably have contributed enough to earn a credit on the songs they're credited for. Stop thinking women giving up credit & publishing is "gracious" & "generous". If they write, produce or change the melody, they should be credited, PERIOD.

were those singers had LEAD in the writers list for doing songs that are no different from demos?

[supertiffany]

4 hours ago, Lion said:

No matter if you wrote the whole song or changed a line, you still get writing credits 🤷🏻‍♂️

yeah

 

but that's not what the others at obviously

 

they're saying why is she on the lead or even get 15%

 

are those words enough for 15%

[Thuggin]

32 minutes ago, lonnie said:

How did Rihanna do worse on Anti? 

She usually has her name on the very end/near the end of the listed writers in this case which is what I think the user meant. Bey literally has had writing credits on covers before, let's not walk down this road. Not a single artist in the industry has accused Rihanna of taking undue credit, so again, let's not go there.

This doesn't matter at all and says nothing about what the actual publishing split was. Rihanna has plenty of 5-20% publishing cuts off Anti songs, same as Beyoncé on CC.

 

And you can't blame the performers for wanting to get a publishing cut. The only way you're really making money off music these days is if you have publishing credit. If an artist is taking and performing a song that's going on their own album, of course they're going to want to get a cut. Whether they contribute vocal melodies / ad libs / change some words or not (and sometimes they do just to justify the cut and also put their own flavor on the song). But this benefits the original songwriters too because it means their songs are getting released (and reaching a wider audience than they otherwise would have) so they can start earning royalties.

[lonnie]

10 minutes ago, Thuggin said:

Rihanna has plenty of 5-20% publishing cuts off Anti songs

How do you know this? The only place that lists Rihanna's publishing cuts is some reddit post with no source. It's generally known that publishing cuts are gauged by the way songwriting credits are listed I.E.: The main writers (usually at the very top) getting the highest cut (as they should) and the lowest getting the smallest.

 

12 minutes ago, Thuggin said:

And you can't blame the performers for wanting to get a publishing cut. The only way you're really making money off music these days is if you have publishing credit. If an artist is taking and performing a song that's going on their own album, of course they're going to want to get a cut. Whether they contribute vocal melodies / ad libs / change some words or not (and sometimes they do just to justify the cut and also put their own flavor on the song). But this benefits the original songwriters too because it means their songs are getting released (and reaching a wider audience than they otherwise would have) so they can start earning royalties.

And I don't agree. Neither Bey nor Rih are pressed for money, and I personally think Rih shouldn't get credit where she didn't change a thing. Rihanna used to have whole albums (GGGB and Loud being prime examples) without a single writing credit which is the fair and right thing to do if you didn't participate in the songwriting process. Moreover both of them own their masters so they will be getting cuts from the songs successes either way and don't need publishing rights if they didn't work for them since it's not like they're starving. The actual writers who participated in creating the song should get all the due credit, anything else, even in the name of the song getting a wider audience and thus more money for the writer and so the performer should get an automatic credit is exploitation plain and simple, even if it's Rihanna doing it. But if we're going to compare them, then certainly Bey does worse by FAR. And she's been doing it for decades so it's not a matter of things changing with time.

 

[Thuggin]

1 minute ago, lonnie said:

How do you know this? The only place that lists Rihanna's publishing cuts is some reddit post with no source. It's generally known that publishing cuts are gauged by the way songwriting credits are listed I.E.: The main writers (usually at the very top) getting the highest cut (as they should) and the lowest getting the smallest.

 

And I don't agree. Neither Bey nor Rih are pressed for money, and I personally think Rih shouldn't get credit where she didn't change a thing. Rihanna used to have whole albums (GGGB and Loud being prime examples) without a single writing credit which is the fair and right thing to do if you didn't participate in the songwriting process. Moreover both of them own their masters so they will be getting cuts from the songs successes either way and don't need publishing rights if they didn't work for them since it's not like they're starving. The actual writers who participated in creating the song should get all the due credit, anything else, even in the name of the song getting a wider audience and thus more money for the writer and so the performer should get an automatic credit is exploitation plain and simple, even if it's Rihanna doing it. But if we're going to compare them, then certainly Bey does worse by FAR. And she's been doing it for decades so it's not a matter of things changing with time.

 

Source: I work in IT in music publishing.

Again, order of the writers doesn't matter at all in terms of publishing cut, but yeah, prominent artists will want to be listed first if the songs are going on their albums.

 

You can have your opinion on what "should" happen, but the reason Rihanna wasn't getting cuts on GGGB or Loud wasn't out of personal benevolence toward the writers. She probably just didn't have as good of a publishing deal back then. Artists as big as Rihanna or Beyoncé are going to get a cut period, unless it's a cover. And of course, this is super common and not limited to Rihanna or Beyoncé - in fact, it's pretty much the standard in country music - and that's different from "stealing" credits. Songwriters know what they're getting into when they come to the table with big artists who want to perform their songs.

[period sis]

 

44 minutes ago, supertiffany said:

yeah

 

but that's not what the others at obviously

 

they're saying why is she on the lead or even get 15%

 

are those words enough for 15%

Bey never had lead credits and never did

 

15% is much lower than Miley's cut which is lower than Tedder's cut. So I'm not sure where people are getting the notion that she stole credits and gave herself a lead credit. 

 

[lonnie]

3 minutes ago, Thuggin said:

Source: I work in IT in music publishing.

 

While this might be true that doesn't necessarily mean you have access to Rihanna's publishing cuts, and I mean no offense saying this.

 

11 minutes ago, Thuggin said:

Again, order of the writers doesn't matter at all in terms of publishing cut, but yeah, prominent artists will want to be listed first if the songs are going on their albums.

I know that it doesn't necessarily mean that, but it is very rare to find the person who originally wrote most of the lyrics get last placement on a song. It's for that reason that when a sample/interpolation is used, the writer(s) of the sampled songs are usually at the end of the song and not the beginning. Usually band mates will spilt equally regardless of contribution, but where demos existed before the artist gets a hold of the song is different. The list on credits usually indicates the level of contribution, and while there are exceptions, that is usually the standard.

 

15 minutes ago, Thuggin said:

You can have your opinion on what "should" happen, but the reason Rihanna wasn't getting cuts on GGGB or Loud wasn't out of personal benevolence toward the writers. She probably just didn't have as good of a publishing deal back then. Artists as big as Rihanna or Beyoncé are going to get a cut period, unless it's a cover. And of course, this is super common and not limited to Rihanna or Beyoncé - in fact, it's pretty much the standard in country music - and that's different from "stealing" credits. Songwriters know what they're getting into when they come to the table with big artists who want to perform their songs.

And not necessarily. Rihanna had writing credits on her debut album, several other albums before Anti (excluding GGGB and Loud). It has nothing to do with her publishing deal then and more to do with being fair. Why should anyone take credit for work they didn't do regardless of how big a star they are? That's unethical. And Bey has gotten cuts for covers before. And I know that it's become standard practice now, more or less, and it's wrong. While it's fine to take credit for changing certain lyrics or adding onto songs lyrically, it's not right to take credit that's undue. Just because it's become standard practice doesn't make it right.

[Bloo]

I mean, this is Beyoncé doing her standard schtick with credits. In my view, ad libs and minor melodic additions don’t justify songwriting credits. Plenty of other artists will change lines to make a song more personal to them and not take songwriting credits because the song was complete when they got it. Cover artists will often change lyrics slightly to better fit them, but that doesn’t seem like the work of a “writer” in my head. 
 

That’s my opinion. Feel free to disagree.

[Verandi]

On 6/3/2024 at 11:12 AM, Johnny Jacobs said:

But Bey is listed as lead writer 

 

 

[Thuggin]

4 minutes ago, lonnie said:

While this might be true that doesn't necessarily mean you have access to Rihanna's publishing cuts, and I mean no offense saying this.

 

I know that it doesn't necessarily mean that, but it is very rare to find the person who originally wrote most of the lyrics get last placement on a song. It's for that reason that when a sample/interpolation is used, the writer(s) of the sampled songs are usually at the end of the song and not the beginning. Usually band mates will spilt equally regardless of contribution, but where demos existed before the artist gets a hold of the song is different. The list on credits usually indicates the level of contribution, and while there are exceptions, that is usually the standard.

 

And not necessarily. Rihanna had writing credits on her debut album, several other albums before Anti (excluding GGGB and Loud). It has nothing to do with her publishing deal then and more to do with being fair. Why should anyone take credit for work they didn't do regardless of how big a star they are? That's unethical. And Bey has gotten cuts for covers before. And I know that it's become standard practice now, more or less, and it's wrong. While it's fine to take credit for changing certain lyrics or adding onto songs lyrically, it's not right to take credit that's undue. Just because it's become standard practice doesn't make it right.

That's fair, and I understand. I don't have access to her entire catalog. But I do have access to certain songs depending on which other writers under a certain publishing company are on them, which is quite a lot. Rihanna got a 20 percent cut for Consideration, for instance.

 

"it is very rare to find the person who originally wrote most of the lyrics get last placement on a song" well, that depends how many writers are on the song. But it is indeed very common for the performers of the song to be listed higher than their actual publishing cut or contribution to the song. Obvious samples would be a clear exception though. And bands are also a different situation because they have a clear standard for themselves they've probably agreed to; that's different than combinations of different writers/artists coming together for the first time from different labels/publishing companies where the split still needs to be determined.

 

If Rihanna had writing credit on earlier songs then she probably did have more of a hand in the creative process or she was working with less prominent writers who demanded less of a cut.

[Cleanromantic]

People bending backwards to justify this thievery or saying "it is what it is, that's how the business will always be" are why songwriters will continue to be exploited by artists like Beyoncé. Each time someone speaks up, they're hounded by her fans to shut up and the important conversation about artist's rights is stifled and set back to square one... Shame on the Beehive . 

[lonnie]

41 minutes ago, Thuggin said:

That's fair, and I understand. I don't have access to her entire catalog. But I do have access to certain songs depending on which other writers under a certain publishing company are on them, which is quite a lot. Rihanna got a 20 percent cut for Consideration, for instance.

 

"it is very rare to find the person who originally wrote most of the lyrics get last placement on a song" well, that depends how many writers are on the song. But it is indeed very common for the performers of the song to be listed higher than their actual publishing cut or contribution to the song. Obvious samples would be a clear exception though. And bands are also a different situation because they have a clear standard for themselves they've probably agreed to; that's different than combinations of different writers/artists coming together for the first time from different labels/publishing companies where the split still needs to be determined.

 

If Rihanna had writing credit on earlier songs then she probably did have more of a hand in the creative process or she was working with less prominent writers who demanded less of a cut.

I mean Consideration has a total of 3 writers including Rih so 20% is the smallest margin from the rest of the contributors, but at the same time, if true, I think it's still unfair. Even if she did change some of the lyrics of the original demo. I bet she gets less on songs like Work and Needed Me or Woo, where there are more writers if that's the case.

 

And I think Rih wrote more during her earlier years Music of The Sun and Rated R had her biggest contributions in terms of writing credit which makes a lot of sense, as she was working on the demos for months during her debut and Rated R is probably her most personal project to date. And Rihanna has worked with lesser known writers during her peak from Muni Long (when she wasn't the big name she is now) to Mikky Ekko and didn't take credit then, even now Rih never claimed credit for some of the big hits she's been featured on TIWYCF, and artists like Sia have praised Rih for not taking undue credit. A lot of Rih's biggest hits don't have her name on the writing credits and if she's began taking them undeserved then that's a recent and unfortunate development.

Edited June 4 by lonnie

[Thuggin]

1 hour ago, lonnie said:

I mean Consideration has a total of 3 writers including Rih so 20% is the smallest margin from the rest of the contributors, but at the same time, if true, I think it's still unfair. Even if she did change some of the lyrics of the original demo. I bet she gets less on songs like Work and Needed Me or Woo, where there are more writers if that's the case.

 

And I think Rih wrote more during her earlier years Music of The Sun and Rated R had her biggest contributions in terms of writing credit which makes a lot of sense, as she was working on the demos for months during her debut and Rated R is probably her most personal project to date. And Rihanna has worked with lesser known writers during her peak from Muni Long (when she wasn't the big name she is now) to Mikky Ekko and didn't take credit then, even now Rih never claimed credit for some of the big hits she's been featured on TIWYCF, and artists like Sia have praised Rih for not taking undue credit. A lot of Rih's biggest hits don't have her name on the writing credits and if she's began taking them undeserved then that's a recent and unfortunate development.

Well, the one other thing I would say is just because there are fewer writers on a song doesn't automatically mean the performer had more creative input and more publishing share. For instance, the splits for Rated R are more like 45/45/10 with Rihanna receiving the lowest share. She has a higher share on a song like Nothing Is Promised in which there are more writers credited. Basically, looking at the list of writers and the order they're in doesn't tell you the full story. And even looking at the shares themselves doesn't tell you the full story given you have to consider the level of demand of the songwriters too. If SZA had written Consideration for Rihanna today, she probably would've demanded more than 40 percent cut.

 

Generally speaking though you're probably right she demands less publishing and that explains why she prefers to delve into other more immediately profitable business ventures these days. My main point is that most big artists demand some share of publishing on the songs they take, whatever that share may be.

[DiabeticGrandpa]

17 hours ago, Kool_Aid_King said:

The way y'all care so much about publishing, songwriting and using it as a gotcha moment when 100% of our faves are guilty of what you're accusing Beyoncé of.

 

we have no idea what the original sounded like & I guarantee (as everything) Beyoncé's version was TOTALLY different and warranted a credit.

 

as @Thugginpointed out, Bey has the lowest share anyway so… what's really the problem?

This take is not it  

[Slap]

"Two Most Wanted" to "II Most Wanted" = Writing Credit 

 

A bit like Smash Into You vs Crash Into You and that classic Ave Maria writing credit 

Edited June 5 by Slap

[Mirtilo]

1 hour ago, Slap said:

"Two Most Wanted" to "II Most Wanted" = Writing Credit 

 

A bit like Smash Into You vs Crash Into You and that classic Ave Maria writing credit 

You do realize that Beyoncé's version has totally different lyrics from the poem associated with Schubert's version right?

[tachiwaka]

On 6/3/2024 at 3:23 PM, Thuggin said:

 

Being listed first doesn't mean you contributed the most to the song or get the largest publishing split.

 

The split for II Most Wanted is as follows:

Miley Cyrus - 28.4

Beyoncé - 15

Michael Pollack - 28.3

Ryan Tedder - 28.3

 

11 hours ago, Bookmark99 said:

I don't think Miley wrote it entirely herself either. Ryan Tedder and Michael Pollack are also credited. 

I mean…come with it  Miley says she wrote the song, which starts this discourse, and yet there are also two other writers on the song. We're just to assume that Miley wrote it alone with super minimal input from the other two, and that Beyoncé's contribution is completely without merit? What if this Michael guy wrote the song and Miley and Ryan stole his credit?

[FrederickGa]

8 hours ago, Cleanromantic said:

People bending backwards to justify this thievery or saying "it is what it is, that's how the business will always be" are why songwriters will continue to be exploited by artists like Beyoncé. Each time someone speaks up, they're hounded by her fans to shut up and the important conversation about artist's rights is stifled and set back to square one... Shame on the Beehive . 

In other words, sugarcoating thievery because their fave is involved 

[Johnny Cash]

The way she has been repeatedly exposed for her minimal/non-existent writing contributions throughout her entire solo career and yet people still have the nerve to defend her

[babycomeround]

People want to gotcha! Beyonce at any given opportunity. Ask why that is.

[lonnie]

10 hours ago, Thuggin said:

Well, the one other thing I would say is just because there are fewer writers on a song doesn't automatically mean the performer had more creative input and more publishing share. For instance, the splits for Rated R are more like 45/45/10 with Rihanna receiving the lowest share.

Yeah, just as she receives the lowest share on Consideration too. Which is my point, Rihanna's credits are usually set up so that she's never seen as the major songwriter on the songs. Be it on the order of credits or with percentage cuts, it seems that she doesn't take way more credit than she deserves, which has been my point from the beginning.

 

10 hours ago, Thuggin said:

She has a higher share on a song like Nothing Is Promised in which there are more writers credited. Basically, looking at the list of writers and the order they're in doesn't tell you the full story. And even looking at the shares themselves doesn't tell you the full story given you have to consider the level of demand of the songwriters too. If SZA had written Consideration for Rihanna today, she probably would've demanded more than 40 percent cut.

Interesting, because Nothing Is Promised has 4 writers, Rihanna included, listed. But that's an interesting point you bring across because Rihanna is listed at end on the credits, and I doubt she's receiving the highest share on that song seeing that MikeWill both wrote and produced that song, but if she's getting a bigger cut there then that should mean that she was more involved with the song, and since we don't have a demo of the song before Rih got it we can't say what the level of her involvement is.

 

10 hours ago, Thuggin said:

Generally speaking though you're probably right she demands less publishing and that explains why she prefers to delve into other more immediately profitable business ventures these days. My main point is that most big artists demand some share of publishing on the songs they take, whatever that share may be.

And I get this I just disagree with the statement that Rih is more aggressive with publishing demands than Bey when we have three decades of songwriters basically saying how Bey strong wills her way into greater credit going back to her Destiny Childs days. Beyonce, unlike Rih, doesn't have a single album without a songwriting credit when both are probably on the same level when it comes to lyric writing involvement. Rih might also be taking more credit than she deserves, which I think is wrong, but she's in no way or shape worse. And Rih was still recording music extensively even when she didn't have lots of money coming from publishing, her present insatiable greed for money has little correlation with publishing rights, she just realized she could get a lot more money outside of music whatever level of publishing demands even if musicians are taking 100% in their publishing they wouldn't be earning the kind of money she is right now solely off of releasing music. 

[Virgos Groove]

Bey texting Miley is so cute.