‘Mediating Music Disputes’

I am aiming to complete the writing of my article about this subject by next Wednesday. The working draft is available to view on the ‘Mediation of Art & Music Disputes’ page at www.carlislam.co.uk.

·       Introduction.
·       Mediation.
·       Benefits.
·       Deal Making Zone (‘DMZ’).
·       Enforcement under the Singapore Convention.
·       Mandatory Mediation.
·       Contractual Matrix.
·       Fiduciary Duties owed by Managers & their Companies to Artists.
·       Copyright.
·       Fair dealing & exceptions.
·       Moral Rights.
·       Undue Influence & Unconscionable Dealing.
·       Restraint of trade.
·       Mediator Questions.
·       Bibliography.
·       Cases.
‘Deal Making Zone (‘DMZ’)’

Parking emotions, greed, ambition, and politics, and irrespective of the fact specific legal merits of a dispute, as the Table below illustrates, the settlement of a Music Dispute invariably involves a trade-off  between twelve inter-connected variables along a spectrum of needs, resources, priorities, and ‘Red-line’ dealmaker/breaker imperatives, i.e. each P’s BATNA. The DMZ exists in the space between two interacting parallel dynamics which may converge in the consciousness of each P:
– Relative Gains v. Relative Losses.
– Common Ground.
Relative Gains v. Relative Losses:
(i)         Legal rights.
(ii)        Creative control and Artistic Integrity.
(iii)       Money.
(iv)       Recognition, Reputation/ & Credibility.
Common ground in eliminating litigation risk by doing a deal instead of proceeding to trial includes:
(v)        Saving costs.
(vi)       Saving Time.
(vii)      Saving energy.
(viii)     Avoiding further stress.
(ix)       Avoiding publicity.
(x)        Avoiding the creation of a legal precedent.
(xi)       Preserving a commercial relationship and goodwill if worth saving.
(xii)      Maximising gain by transforming a conflict into a mutually beneficial commercial arrangement (a ‘Creative Commercial Opportunity’).
In contrast to Litigation, in Mediation the possibilities are only limited by the imagination of the participants and their legal representatives. Whilst not infinite, ‘doable’ deals that ‘are enough’ are invariably possible.