Image: Facebook/Clem Castro
Clem Castro, frontman of the OPM band Orange and Lemons, suggested that the best way to resolve the issue involving two fellow OPM bands, Agsunta and December Avenue, is not through social media.
“I do believe the best way to resolve this is not social media. Artist to artist, publisher to label. A legal notice perhaps,” said Castro in a twitter post on Thursday, Jan. 31.
Worse if it is monetised. I do believe the best way to resolve this is not social media. Artist to artist, publisher to label. A legal notice perhaps. If it is indeed monetised, a simple take down or settle with a licensing agreement w/o involving fans who are clueless of such.
— Clem Castro (@clemcastro) January 31, 2019
This was after Agsunta announced that it is signing off and deleted all their previous YouTube videos, as a result of what their fans speculated as backlash received from December Avenue frontman Zel Bautista. He allegedly threw shade on the band last December.
https://twitter.com/zelbautista/status/1075000539107053569
https://twitter.com/zelbautista/status/1076323153360478208
The issue stirred outrage from fans of both bands. Each trying to take sides and shared their opinion on who is right or wrong.
In a time like this, an opinion from a fellow artist who has been on the industry for quite a long time might enlighten fans on how to understand both sides instead of throwing hate.
“I believe they are both victims of the ever changing landscape of the music industry,” started Castro, who also pointed out that he’s not taking sides on the matter.
The @Agsunta and @decemberave issue sets a precedent for future intellectual property concerns. I don’t take sides on this matter and I have very little knowledge of the full story. But I believe they are both victims of the ever changing landscape of the music industry.
— Clem Castro (@clemcastro) January 31, 2019
Castro shared experience on how he started a Beatles cover band in high school, saying that doing covers is a “normal part of the process” for any band to develop their sound and style. He even praised Agsunta on their cover of one of their band’s songs.
I started out as a Beatles cover band in high school and progressed to a New Wave cover band before injecting original songs little by little during sets. It’s essential for any band to develop their sound and style through their influences. It is a normal part of the process.
— Clem Castro (@clemcastro) January 31, 2019
But back then there was no YouTube or online streaming sites. Everything was done live and marketing is through word of mouth. You can’t just record a cover song and have it played on the radio or TV cause you’ll need a license for that.
— Clem Castro (@clemcastro) January 31, 2019
But then, he said that Agsunta’s “initial goal of being an OPM cover band crossed a fine line when they decided to use their brand for commercial purposes,” as they signed up with a major music label in 2017.
When Agsunta started, they have a novel goal of promoting OPM. They even covered one of my songs from O&L. They sure did a great job. The problem is, the initial goal of being an OPM cover band crossed a fine line when they decided to use their brand for commercial purposes.
— Clem Castro (@clemcastro) January 31, 2019
The advent of YouTube is phenomenal for showcasing talents and was used to augment music promotion alongside live performances. But nowadays, it surpassed live performances in terms of geographical reach and fan building, which is a good thing.
— Clem Castro (@clemcastro) January 31, 2019
When YouTube decided to monetise “original” content, herein lies the problem. If you are a commercial brand (artists included) using another brand to monetise content, that is indeed questionable. Agsunta became a “major brand” the moment they signed with ABS-CBN.
— Clem Castro (@clemcastro) January 31, 2019
He then explained that though covering songs of other bands might help promote the song, it might also cause “unhealthy competition,” especially if the band “is still in the middle of promoting the song and worse if it is [monetized].”
In the case of a newly released song by Brand X being covered by Brand Y, it may seem harmless and perhaps considered added leverage for the song to others, it will unknowingly incite unhealthy competition since Brand X is still in the middle of promoting the song.
— Clem Castro (@clemcastro) January 31, 2019
Worse if it is monetised. I do believe the best way to resolve this is not social media. Artist to artist, publisher to label. A legal notice perhaps. If it is indeed monetised, a simple take down or settle with a licensing agreement w/o involving fans who are clueless of such.
— Clem Castro (@clemcastro) January 31, 2019
An issue like this is a double edged sword that will have negative repercussions on both parties and music fans. I cite this from experience, believe you me.
— Clem Castro (@clemcastro) January 31, 2019
To end, Castro suggests legal solutions to resolve the issue and remind both bands that they can do so “without involving fans who are clueless of such.”
“I cite this from experience, believe me,” ended Castro. JB
RELATED STORIES:
Young Bowie too ‘amateur’ for BBC, new documentary reveals
Gladys Knight on why she’ll sing the anthem at Super Bowl