Susan Cotchin
Produced by Chelsea Wilson.
TRANSCRIPT:
This is Control, the podcast where we speak to game changers and change makers in the music industry. I’m Chelsea Wilson, your host and in this episode, I’m excited to be chatting with Neighboring Rights Expert and entrepreneur, Susan Cotchin.
Neighboring rights is one of the least known rights in Australia - likely because, unlike in other territories around the world, Australian artists aren’t receiving neighboring rights for recordings. Susan Cotchin is working to change that.
So what are neighboring rights? When we think about a recorded song, we already know that there are two copyrights there right? The copyright of the actual song, the composition which is a right that APRA collect royalties for. So whenever the song is used at a show or is played on radio for eg, the songwriter collects a royalty. Then a separate copyright is the copyright of the sound recording. When the sound recording is used for eg, when a song is played on radio, the owner of the recording receives a royalty. This payment is collected by PPCA. Neighboring rights, is ANOTHER copyright - this is for the musicians and performers that played on the recording. They don’t own the song or the recording, but they ‘neighbor’ the other copyrights. So, whenever the song is used, the performers of the song are paid a royalty.
Susan Cotchin, is the Managing Director of Good Neighbour working to collect neighboring rights on behalf of artists. Originally working for PAMRA in the UK, she set up International royalties rescue in London, collecting unpaid royalties from around the world for artists such as Rhianna, Beyonce, Crowded House and many more. In this conversation, we hear about Susan’s journey from a child entertainer, to an educator, to the foremost Australian expert in Neighboring rights, to establishing a new venture with the late Michael Gudinkci at Mushroom Group. This is Susan Cotchin, in control.
CW: Susan Cotchin, welcome to the control podcast.
SC: Thank you so much, Chelsea. I feel honored to be here.
CW: I'd really love to chat to you about neighboring rights and about establishing your own company. But before that, if we can, I'd love to go back very early in your career. I read that you were a child entertainer and started singing really young. Is that right?
SC: That is correct. Yes. Where did you dig that up from? What, what do you mean child entertainer, you know, like vaudeville, like we like tap dance ballet classes, you know? Well, it was, uh, the Johnny Young Talent School, which is what a lot of kids, um, started out, I think in the seventies. And, um, certainly I would also be taken to lots of pubs. My mum loved doing this. We would go to Pub Talent Quest. And my sister is also a singer, um, and older than me. So mum would enter us into pub talent quests and we would be, um, against, you know, these, you know, old blokes, usually singing Elvis songs or something. And then I'd walk in some kind of, yeah, a little cutesy, um, cutesy number or something at the pub.
And it would mean that, um, we'd either get, you know, a free voucher for a free lunch or dinner somewhere. And, um, yeah. Or, um, vinyl, um, mum didn't like it so much when we got vinyl because of course that wasn't as helpful. I was from a single parent family, so any free meals or, um, The meat tray. The meat tray was, was, was very welcomed.
But, um, yeah, winning that vinyl, it kind of changed my life, so.
CW: What were some of those records?
SC: Oh gosh, my first record was Parliament. And, yes, I know, right? Bring it on. Oh, yeah. Funk. Funk, yeah. And Grandma's to Flash in the Furious 5?
CW: Okay, whoever curated this is, that's quite cool. I didn't expect that.
SC: Yeah, I know. Well, you see, we got to choose. They would say, you can choose from any of these records. And so, of course, being like six, I chose the most colourful one and it was Parliament. It was this photo of this dude, you know, all dressed up and it was, I think there was a track called, P wants to get funked up.
And I'm like, yeah, that sounds like me. It looks really colorful and fun and he's wearing all of his disco gear. So, um, yeah. And there was a, there was a great track on that record that I still remember. And it was about Stevie Wonder and it was Stevie. You make me wonder. And, uh, it was just so many kind of, yeah, uh, cool, you know, little cliches and soulful music, you know, on those records. So big fan.
CW: And so what made you start to go to the talent school and go down that path? Was it because your sister was doing it or were you the one who was like, I have to sing?
SC: My sister, um, was singing at about age 10 and I'm about five years younger than her. And, um. Just a neighbor said, Oh gosh, you know, is she, she's your daughter sounds like she's got a talent.
So my mom put her in a theater show, the regal theater, and she used to perform in front of, um, um, you know, seniors and they loved it, um, every Sunday. And then, so I would just wanted to do what my big sister did. And I, suddenly I realized that I could sing as well. And, um, I joined the, um, Johnny Young Talent School.
We both joined Johnny Young Talent School, and this was in Perth. And it was at a time where young talent time was massive. So everyone wanted to be Tina Arena. So, so we went to the school and mum couldn't afford to pay the fees. So she would clean the toilets. Um, but then from that, there was, um, a TV show in Perth called stars of the future.
So we were on TV every week. It was like young talent time in Perth. And I was the leader of the tiny tops. So I would go and I'd be singing up front and I'd have like, like six backing singers watching me. So we did everything from TV shows to shopping centers, um, you know, and of course there was always the hope that Johnny Young might come along one day and want you to be in the team.
And so there were a few people from our team, including Bobby Dreeson, who sadly passed away a while ago. And of course, Michael Campbell, they were all in the young talent team. Um, they all came from that same background as I, and then I was also asked to be in the team. So we ended up moving to Melbourne.
CW: Wow. What a time.
SC: Quite a colorful, um, background as, as a, as a performer, as a young performer.
CW: But you also wrote your own songs, right? So you're also a songwriter. So when did the songwriting kind of come into the picture?
SC: Um, I guess I, I've in, in many ways, um, that in, you know, introversion. So I, I was always, uh, out there kind of as an entertainer. But, um, you know, I loved writing fully immersed in, in, in music and really immersed in the records and what the records, what they were saying on the records, rather than I wasn't just interested in dressing up in my sequence. I guess it was just, uh, you know, my personality type that, you know, explored ideas and stuff.
And so that married with already the musicality that I had from a young age. And I also had a friend say to me, my friend's mom said to me, I was, I think all of. Nine or ten. And I was, I remember sitting at the front yard on a swing. I was coming up with songwriting ideas and I went inside and wanted to sing it to her and to my mum.
And she sat, sat me down and she said, Don't forget that you could always pursue and venture towards becoming a songwriter. Have you ever thought about that? Like, don't discount that for your life. So I just, I always recall her saying that, really empowering me to. To, you know, pursue and, um, a dream like that. It's obviously, I was always really passionate about it, so.
CW: I love this neighborhood words of wisdom. How good is that?
SC: Yeah, it's amazing the things that you remember, you know, years down the track. Sometimes you can say someone to a young person and not realize that you're having such an impression on them. You wouldn't know to this day. Yeah. That's something that I've, you know, always kept in my mind. She was a very strong, uh, single mother with three kids and, um, you know, she was. herself trying to develop a career with flipping houses, even back in, in the eighties. So yeah, I certainly respected her and, and to have her say something like that, um, meant a lot to me, so.
CW: I read that you auditioned for the VCA unsuccessfully. That doesn't seem to add up with that experience that you had as a performer. So what happened there? Because it was classical or jazz? or do you remember the audition?
SC: Yeah, I sure do. Um, it was, it was jazz. The first thing I did is I moved to LA as a 19 year old and that was way too much. I couldn't cope. And so, um, I went from Perth to LA. It was like, no. You know, from all the shoe. And so I then moved to Melbourne and I auditioned for the, I was working with some great jazz artists, Steve Settergreen and so forth in Melbourne. And I used to do a jazz gig at the Bryson with a wonderful Gilaski, wonderful trumpet player.So I learned a lot about jazz. I loved jazz again. I probably parliament influence, you know, the funk kind whole thing, but I was always. You know, I really always kind of put myself out there. So I think when I, when I auditioned for the VCA, um, I wasn't conservative. I wasn't, you know, I was, I had too much of that, that soul, that determination.
I didn't, I didn't like to sit in the boxes so much. And it's weird because you would think that jazz was all about trying to move outside the box. Yeah. I just, I just didn't sit inside that conservative kind of jazz police. Box . It's true. So I come from this. Oh, I know. Yes, I'm aware. Yeah. I'm, yeah. So I, I come from this like pop rock background and suddenly was moving into jazz and singing it in a way that was, um, Um, you know, again, just, um, too raunchy and, you know, too soulful.
And so it just didn't fit. Um, and it's, it's just as well, even though, you know, I'd had all this wonderful experience and worked with and knew a lot of the people that were doing the audition again, um, as a songwriter, I think I had moved beyond that line of kind of, in, in, in terms of, I was listening to your other listener, which is talking about kind of classical music.
That sometimes, you know, you don't kind of fit in the box enough for people. Yeah, so I didn't get a spot. Yeah, I had no idea what I was going to do after that.
CW: So you then ended up temping at the workers compensation office and were doing bits and pieces and then you applied for the sound production program. And went, I'm going to get into sound production. And you were the only female student that was accepted. What was that time for you like?
SC: Well, I was... Supremely depressed because you know, I'm early twenties and you think that something's going to happen for you as a singer songwriter and you've been working already for many years as a young artist.
So, um, my temp job, as I said, was, yeah, workers compensation. I was sticking numbers on files. And then I would, I would ring up my answering machine, um, whenever I could, when the boss wasn't looking and seeing some ideas. So when I got home, I'd run home, you know, it's before the iPhone with the, uh, memo recorder on reception desk and quickly bringing up home and singing onto the answering machine.
So yeah, not getting into the VCA and it was like, well, what am I going to do? I'm so depressed. I need to get. I need to get out of doing this, these temp jobs. And, um, the only course I could find that was music related was a sound production course, which was at RMIT. So I was like, well, that's better than nothing.
At least it'll get me out of being a temp. I might get some study and maybe also learning about sound production. I'll be able to record myself instead of, um, just
So, um, so that's what I did, um, applied for it, got in, it was a very small course. It was only about 25 students at the time. It was like an advanced certificate and, um, yeah, lo and behold, I was the only female doing the course. And also all the teachers were male. Um, and they came from like AV backgrounds, not really music industry.
Um, so AV background and everything. So it wasn't what I thought it would be. And I was really quite disheartened and angry. And all of the guys in there that were like, again, you know, more AV type want to do live sound and want to do the sound and.
CW: Okay. They weren't like wanting to make records.
SC: Not really.
Um, so it was like coming in as a singer songwriter and it, you know, it was just such a male dominated area and it still is sound production. So anyway, when we finally got to the copyright unit and I can tell you that, you know, leaps and bounds, even though I'd had no background in AV and when we did things like, uh, electronics, I was falling behind, but then just not having a dad around or growing up in that environment, electronics wasn't kind of front of mind, but then there was a unit on copyright.
And again, the AV teacher was up there trying to teach that. And I was like, okay, I've had enough now. I know about copyright. I know about publishing. I'm a songwriter. And so I went and complained to the head of department and he said to me, do you think you can do better? And I said, absolutely. And he said, we'll go do it then.
So suddenly in the second half of the year, I was teaching the students, my fellow students, um, about copyright. And, um, I really didn't know that much, but I knew more than he did. So because of that, yeah, I, I, I guess I had a belief or I had an anger and, um, from there, the head of department was someone that really empowered, um, people and certainly empowered me.
And I ended up becoming a program coordinator and it's, um, we increased it from 25 students. I think it's something got like 150 odd students now, uh, employed studio engineers and really turned the course around. So it's now called, I think it's music technology at RMIT.
CW: So after this, you ended up moving to London and you were working as royalty accounts manager with non for profit performing arts media rights association known as PAMRA, which is now part of PPL, the equivalent of Australia's PPCA. Can you tell us about that move to London? How you went from teaching copyright to actually working within that space?
SC: Well, I would say that, um, doing this, you know, teaching copyright, being a mentor, even though I was in my still, like, probably 24, 25, I really burnt out very quickly.
And I still wasn't doing what I wanted to do, which was be a singer songwriter. So, um, that's why I moved to London to pursue a career as a singer songwriter to get a record deal. It seemed like that wasn't possible in Australia and I was fast learning. It wasn't also, it wasn't about who you know. So I moved to London and, um, formed a band and they were just incredible.
Put an ad in the paper. I didn't know anyone. Put an ad in the paper. You know, bit by bit got, got a drummer who said he had some mates and so on and so forth. And we formed this incredible band. Uh, it was just under my name and we did what's called the toilet tour in London. So, which is where you play gigs.
There's nobody ever turns up, but you're an original artist. No one turns up, um, but you're still playing in London and you could have some great managers and of course this is before Tik Tok or social media. So, you know, it was really about sending that demo in and hoping that you can make enough contact with the right people to get them to come to your gig. Um, so that's why I was in London, but, uh, the other thing I did was, uh, I needed to get some work. Of course, I just looked for some company that was involved in copyright and that was Pamera and I didn't know what they did.
And so I just went there as a PA working part time just to be able to, of course, pay my musicians and pay the rent. And part of my job when I first started at PAMRA was making tea for Joan Armatrading and Phil Collins, so that was pretty funny. Uh, and I still really had no idea what the company did because I was too focused on my writing.
Until there was a big shake up and they were saying that they were going to, um, close the company down unless we, uh, brought in some bigger named artists. And what they were planning to do was PPL, again, as you say, quite correctly is the equivalent to PPCA in Australia. PPL, which is for, for anybody who's not familiar with it, they are Phonographic Performance Limited and they're owned by record companies, privately owned by record companies and set up to collect money from all the radio stations on behalf of record companies.
And then at that time, there was this whole new legislation that had come through. In 1999 and that's the year that I was in the UK and it meant that performers could start receiving money in the same way record labels did from the performance of their contributions to the, to the sound recordings. So every time their recording got played on radio, um, they would receive royalty for it.
And so that's what PAMRA did. We looked after, we represented artists, but I found out that PPL wanted to take over PAMRA and we were here. set up by the musicians union just to look after performers and the record company society, PPL wanted to come in and absorb us. And I just kind of thought that just doesn't seem right.
So I was then promoted to royalty accounts manager. And my job was to be able to go and recruit as many performers as I could. So we could then stand on our own two feet and combat any advances from PPL to take us over because we would be able to stand. Um, independently and, uh, one of the first artists I recruited happened to be a Melbourne duo who were number one in the UK at the time.
So it was quite interesting and that was Madison Avenue, ‘don't call me baby’. So, um, so I, I recruited them, worked with them and help them to understand what it was, what this new income stream was. Again, this is going back to 1999. in 2000. Yeah. So it was amazing to, to start to see the impact that I was having on performers and musicians.
And then I had this knowledge and this information that Australians did not have. And also the U S were unaware of, and to be able to be someone who could pick up the phone and say, Hey, I've got hundreds of thousands of dollars for you. Would you like it? Was a pretty cool gig.
CW: That's a nice phone call to make.
SC: Yeah. So it was just, it was wonderful, you know, to be able to, to do that for, for musicians. And I guess from there, it just really took over in terms of my passion and my anger and my fight to be able to get performers and musicians paid
CW: which is an ongoing one, right? It's still like a long way to go and things in this space keep moving and keep changing and keep developing. But if we can just go back to what you were saying a moment ago about when this change first came in, why did that change happen and where did that come from?
SC: Well, Australia, we are a signatory to what's called the Rome convention. So, which basically means that our sound recordings are protected. Um, so that's not, not an issue, but this is a treaty that came about via the WPPT, which is the, the WIPO performers treaty, which basically said that performers should enjoy this right to what's called equitable remuneration.
I don't want to bore the listeners too much, but it's a right to equitable being fair remuneration being pay. So fair pay, uh, for musicians. Because the record companies, anytime their sound recording, uh, gets played on radio have always received 100 percent of this income. And then 1996 when this WPPT treaty was signed and founded, essentially the performers then were able to receive a right 50 percent of, uh, what the record companies had always been receiving.
Yeah, so it was an opportunity for performers to claim, you know, their fair share, obviously, fair pay. Um, for the sound, the broadcast of the sound recording. The thing with Australia is we didn't tick that particular box, which is 15. 1 of the WPPT. So it basically means that, you know, we don't pay performers and we don't value performers in the same way that the rest of the world does.
So what actually happened going back to 2013, so despite the fact that Australia never ticked this box, a lot of countries still paid us. But Australia never paid anybody else. So there's no reciprocity between Australia and the world. So the UK got pretty sick of that and decided, okay, we're not going to pay you anymore.
So in 2013, they turned the tap off, uh, in terms of royalties to Australian performance. And so if you think about all the hits at that time and, you know, things like Shepard or even Tones and That's Joy, you know, these kinds of artists. So the tap was turned off in terms of this income stream out of the UK.
So it's been my job, you know, since then, obviously to be an advocate for trying to change that up. Um, it, I guess, kind of being in, in the UK at the time and really being across the situation for Australians when the UK used to pay Australians and then of course looking into the U S as well, the impact on the U S performers and, um, yeah, it just kind of really.
I guess blew my mind in terms of how unfair the situation was. And so I was always coming up with ways that we can get Australians paid. So the Australian government decision to limit the application of article 15, I read in your creative industries article, that that decision, you know, has impacted Australians in a big way.
CW: So just as an example, you mentioned Tones and I. So Dance Monkey was, I think the fourth most played song in the UK in 2020 after Dua Lipa, Ed Sheeran, Ariana Grande, but because there's no reciprocal collection, that recording would have earned zero money in terms of the neighboring rights, which means it's around 500, 000 to a million dollars lost there, but if you were a session player that played on that song, potentially you would have received around 70, 000. Is that right? So like, this is a serious issue for session musicians here in Australia, for Australian writers. Another example, the British Australian collaboration Elton John, Dua Lipa and Penau's Cold Heart would only see the UK performance royalties delivered to Elton and Dua, but Pnau is not receiving any money. What is going on here? Why did the Australian government make this decision and what can we do about it? Because this isn't something you should be fighting on your own here. Like this is huge.
SC: Yeah, it's huge. And so there's a lot, a lot of obviously, um, going on. There's a lot that I have to say, but just let me point out also one fact that with session musicians, so you will get Australian featured musicians paid from Australia, uh, paid by PPCA on, on an ex gratia basis, which is, you know, out of the kindness, it's a benevolent payment, so they don't have to make the payment. And it also means that all the other bundle of rights in relation to neighboring rights don't go along with that, um, in terms of how it's paid.
So you've only got one year to claim it. Uh, there's no allocated percentages. So, you know, but also, and most importantly is the session performers. So, you know, someone on a John Farnham record, the amount of times that you're the voices played on radio in Australia, those backing musicians who, you know, part of his long term band, uh, would not have received any money from Australia.
And we're just, just to add more salt to the wound, they wouldn't receive any money from Australia, but they could go to Germany as a session musician and get their money out of Germany. or the Netherlands. I mean, it's just bizarre. Australia is not paying their own musicians, whereas a country like Germany or the Netherlands do, but it might only be a matter of time when they also turn the tap off just like the UK did because we don't pay them.
CW: I mean, is there argument that they were paid at the time of recording? So too bad. Is that where they're coming from with this?
SC: Well, exactly. So, you know, sure, there's a session fee and there's, you know, whether you want to get into it or not, but there's, we certainly have performer rights in Australia, which basically mean I've got the right to be attributed as a performer.
But the thing is with performer rights, once you've been paid, essentially you're, you're giving up the right and you're giving it. You're transferring that right to the record company, usually in a performer clearance form or a record contract, um, so they fully own the sound recording and then any monies that are coming from the sound recording, you know, um, are going to the record company.
So this is totally different to performer's copyright. Performer's copyright exists in other countries as well as neighboring rights. So I don't think it's fair to say, uh, I don't think it's an argument to say, well, you get paid your session fee and you don't get anything else because the only income stream as a session player that you receive beyond that, uh, would be maybe touring.
Let's bring in COVID. So there goes that. So maybe touring and, um, yeah, performance and, and just trying to get as many sessions as you can. And of course they're not treated as workers. There's no super, there's no. Leave, you know, it just goes on and on. So this idea of neighboring rights and, um, equitable remuneration is one that is not transferable or assignable.
So you can't have a big record company coming in and saying, Hey, you want to be on this record. We know, you know, great. You could be on this great record, but give us all your rights. They can't do that. They will, the performer can still go ahead independently and get this money. And, uh, they have, you know, a limitation, six, seven odd years to claim it.
Featured performers and non featured performers receive the money. And, uh, there are certain allocated pots, so again, of money and percentages. So, again, you can't have a big corporation or a major artist turn around and say, Oh, you're only going to get five percent. Because they'll get what is their entitlement, what we allocated percentages. So there's a lot of, a lot more surrounding it in terms of what, um, performers can receive. And certainly non featured performers are really hard done by in Australia because they don't receive anything. So it's irrespective of, it's not based on catalogs, like publishing is or anything. It's like if you've played, you know, with Paul Kelly and John Farnham and you know, Tones and Vance Joy, and you know, because you're a great musician and you've spent your life.
Becoming a great musician. So all these people want you. You know, that's your discography. That's your life's work and you get paid as a performer on anything you contributed to. And that's how, you know, um, session players in the UK can earn up to a hundred thousand pounds a year. And in Australia they earn zero.
And, you know, that hundred thousand pounds does not include what your session fee is. You know, so these are royalties and the royalty, um, you know, lasts for 70 years in relation for the sound recording when it's first published. So, um, it's an ongoing legacy, um, in terms of, you know, you, you study something for 30 years to become a great musician, you know, that, that, that needs to be rewarded.
CW: Absolutely. So what are the next steps here? I understand there's a committee that you formed to look into the lack of reciprocity with other countries. Can you tell us about the committee and what those objectives and strategies are?
SC: We're not wanting to go in and change the whole Copyright Act. We just want the box 15.1 ticked. The advocacy group is called Genuine Article and it's soon to launch. We've been in discussions for the past 18 months, I'd say. And really the strategy has been. Uh, first of all, advising industry like PPCA, AIR, APRA about our presence and that we would like them to, to join us. So we needed to announce our presence. And secondly, is about going out to industry and to the wider public. But, uh, the strategy for that is being able to simplify the message because as you can probably tell just in this conversation, it can be really complex understanding neighboring rights.
But that's only because there's different legislation in each country and then of course it involves an individual performer. So in 2003, you established one of the first performer agencies in the world, International Royalties Rescue. Can you talk us through establishing IRR? Sure. Well, I was in the UK and I had had enough of the fact that, um, you know, PPL were coming along to absorb.
The Musicians Union Society. So as I said, we were set up by the MU in the UK and we were fighting for performance rights back then. We didn't have, you know, performers have a small voice. So the Record Company Society came along and said, Hey, we're going to take you over and we're going to. You know, market ourselves as very performer friendly and, um, there's a lot of money in it.
Of course, the record companies have lost 50 percent of the share that they used to get. So why not bring it in house and then take a percentage and then we can still have our fingers on that share as well. But it also makes sense because they are collecting the money and so they pay it out. But I, I'm just not in agreeance with them trying to, um, represent a record company society, represent performers internationally. But anyway, so, I was pretty annoyed that, uh, Pamera couldn't stand independently. So, I was offered a job, obviously, to work at PPL, like most of the people at Pamera. But I decided to leave and set up my own company, because I didn't want to work for the record company body. And I had no idea what I was doing.
All I had was a fire in my belly, and, uh, quite a fire at that. So I was in my, my North London bedroom, and I thought, Okay, I'm going to do this. The first thing I need to do is come up with a name. So, um, I was, uh, we came up with the International Rescue. And we thought, okay, let's, uh, let's, let's call the international royalties rescue.
So we had a name and then I was aware that I had no idea how to do business. And as an Australian, I couldn't get any support from the UK government to help with the company. So I came back to Australia, came back to Melbourne, applied to the Melbourne, uh, city council. I think it was that they were giving out grants for small companies.
And, um, they had no idea what I was talking about, had to, you know, submit a full business plan. But, um, by that point they gave me a grant to buy equipment and stuff, so we didn't really need much. And my first signing was Amiel from, um, The pure tone track, totally addicted to bass. Wow. Wow. Wow. Wow. Exactly.
So she, so I had a crappy house, um, in North Melbourne on Flemington Road. And, um, my partner, you know, he painted the front bedroom to make it look more like an office. And, you know, and I just remember how nervous I was. She came over to sign these little lemonade stand forms that I'd created. It was, it was hilarious.
And I'm like, wow, she's trusting me to collect her money from around the world. Um, and then pretty soon, um, from that came other artists like, um, jet empire for some, well, it was the sleepy Jackson, the vines. Um, and Lusty. Uh, who passed quite recently from Winterburn and Goldstein. They really didn't understand what it was that I was doing, but they had faith and, um, I'm going to put their artists through us.
And I can tell you that those artists are still with us today.
CW: That's incredible. And so fast forwarding to 2019, you set up Good Neighbor in partnership with the Mushroom Group. I read you had a call from Michael Chugg to call you to talk about royalties with one of his artists. And then the next night you had a call from Michael Godinski wanting to partner with you. Can you tell us about that phone call?
SC: Yeah, it's a little bit inside out. But... So, um, so obviously I'd set up the Australian company and we had, um, continued to grow and sign great artists. I went back to the UK in 2006. And established after I learned a bit about business established IRR in the UK and had incredible signings.
So the two separate companies essentially, but both called IRR had incredible success with signing artists like Rihanna and Beyonce. And the reason for that again, comes down to the fact that as I was saying, as a little Aussie in the UK, I looked to the situation, the problems for performers that were.
Non UK, non EU. So Rihanna was born in Barbados. So it was like, I reckon we can get her to qualify, you know, and, uh, get some money [00:33:00] to her. We came up with some solutions for Beyonce via her lawyer in LA about how to get money to her via a performer share agreement. So there's all these crazy and great ideas to be able to find a way to get performers to qualify who wouldn't otherwise.
So great success there. I left that company, the UK company in, uh, 2012 and, um, continued to grow the Australian company. Um, I got sick, so I got cancer. So I was very sick and had my, uh, son and I was now a single mom as well. Oh my goodness, Susan. Yeah. So it was a really, really tough time, but what had happened is, um, from years back from RMIT when I had been lecturing in copyright, there was someone that was in that class.
Um, cause I would come to and fro from London, um, to supplement my income. And I would, I would teach about neighboring rights and. Lo and behold, one of those people had a job at Mushroom and they were starting to talk about neighbouring rights and she said, Hey, and hi, Mary, if you're listening, she said, Hey, I know someone that knows lots about neighbouring rights.
And so Mushroom pursued this over a number of years. And I think there was a lot of talk in Michael Gavinsky's ear about, Hey, this is a, this is an important income stream that mushroom should get into. So there was a bit of chatter. So the deal with mushroom happened before I had that conversation with, like I'd had a conversation with Chuggy's people previously about Shepard and they were like, what were you on about?
Like. But Michael Gudinski is the one that stepped up and, um, after years and years of, you know, to ing and fro ing because I wasn't prepared to sell, didn't want to sell, um, didn't make sense to me, that they ended up, uh, doing this joint venture, um, and International Royalty's Rescue became Good Neighbour.
And so one of the first people I spoke to was Chuggy. And so it was all very new to Mushroom, and again, they're always, you know, deciding whether they've done the right thing or made the right decision. And certainly I was put through the ringer, because they're always so professional, uh, to make sure that it was going to be a right fit for Mushroom, and I was a right fit.
And Michael actually said, OK, it all looks good on paper, but we need to meet Susan. We need to see if she's got the vibe. So I didn't know what that meant, but, um, that's when my first meeting with Michael and the team occurred. Um, but after that, um, newly minted as good neighbor, I then had a meeting with Chuggy finally in person.
And when I sat down and spoke to him about it, because of the situation to do with Shepard, he rang up Michael Gudinski and said, mate, you've got to, you know, said something to Michael. And then suddenly, um, Gidinski rang me up and said, get up into my office now, you know, I was like, Oh God. From that, there was a lot more respect.
A lot of change occurred because obviously someone like Chuggy, his word meant a lot to Michael. And, um, yeah, and so that kind of changed things up, uh, for Good Neighbour, I guess, so.
CW: And is the philosophy of Good Neighbour the same as that original ethos that spurred you on with IRR?
Yeah, and that's, you know, part of why it needed to be a joint venture and it needed to be, still needed to be my lemonade stand, you know, with the might and the power of ushering behind it. I think, I think Michael appreciated that about... Me, he would always give me a nudge and a wink and say, Oh, you took long enough to sign. I love it. Sorry. Sorry. I always do the Michael voice. I can't help it. And, um, but I think he, I think he understood why, because it's great to still be able to go out there and, you know, to get up and, and, and say, well, this is something, you know, I created for a reason all those years ago.
And it really fit that mushroom ethos of. Looking after performers and, um, you know, and again, 50 years in, that's the reason why they're still around. So I think that just really fit with them. And, um, so yeah, certainly that fire is still there. And, and, um, now my little soap box that I had in 2013, when they turned the tap off, has become a much bigger soap box and we can get, you know, a lot more attention to the cause as a result.
CW: So, so throughout the pandemic, Good Neighbour actually experienced a period of growth, the results were up. 34 percent I believe between 2020 to early 22 and the growth was forecast for this year around 67%. Can you talk to us about this?
SC: Yeah. Well, a lot of that comes from, um, obviously that was going through COVID and everything.
Um, a lot of it comes from just having that idea, that expertise of knowing how to get more juice. the, the orange.Um, so how we can find a way, um, to, to, to make more claims, um, to make sure more countries are paying. Cause a lot of countries, um, especially in relation to Australians, they really resist paying, uh, performers.
Um, so. You know, we had a lot more opportunity to go in and fight and bat, you know, to open up more territories for Australian performers and international performers, because we represent international performers as well, not just Australians. So I think that that's where that growth had come from. Um, and certainly this year is, um, is a lot about recruitment, a lot more performers, a lot more managers.
I think to build trust in the industry takes. Many years. And I think that's certainly good neighbor has really positioned itself into being that good neighbor and actually increasing the revenue. For artists in comparison to a lot of other avenues they might have used previously to try and get this money.
CW: So some questions for musicians that are listening. If they believe that they're owed neighbouring rights from international airplay, how would they go about finding an agent or getting a game plan together to try and put in a claim and, and start to kind of wade through the process? Yeah, we see this, this is the problem.
You know, obviously a good neighbor is a one stop shop. So you can come to us and we We know the inside out of every country and that's just because obviously of the years that I'd spent at PAMRA Helping form reciprocal agreements and just the years on the ground doing neighboring rights So if you were an independent performer and you didn't have an agent like um Um, you know, you can go to a PPL and put your hand up and say, Hey, give me all my money and they'll give you what they believe is there for you.
But the problem with neighboring rights is that, uh, in order for a record company to be paid, they do not need to list who the contributors are. So unless you go in and independently make claims in each country. You're not going to receive that income. So you can get like a Kylie Minogue track and, but it might say can't get you out of my head by Kylie Minogue, but who is the performer in Kylie Minogue?
Oh, it's Kylie and Minogue. But if her name is not listed as an independent performer or contributor underneath that even someone like Kylie wouldn't get that money. So you can only imagine, you know, if you're a session performer to be able to kind of say, hey, I played guitar on this. It's very difficult.
So, you know, you might get some money but there's no one true way to, you know, be able to go and reach out to all the societies. Um, we're hoping to obviously roll out some kind of app so we can help more people navigate registration directly with each country and upload discographies. But because each society's system and portal is different.
It's, um, it does make it very, very difficult. So I wish I had an easier answer there.
CW: Well, can you tell us about RDX, the Global Recorded Music Data Portal, which was commissioned by IFPI and WIN, built and run by PPL. And the purpose of that is to enable rights holders to directly share track metadata, right?So is this the kind of game changer we need? Is that working? Is it going to affect change in this space?
SC: Again, I wish I had a more positive answer, but look, that is a, that that's a language that, um, essentially, let's say labels, it's, it's all on the rights holder side, so it doesn't exist in, in terms of neighboring rights.
And the reason for that is, as I explained before, neighboring rights is something that's very manual where you have to go in and add a performer's name, a contributor to the sound recording. Um, lots of countries like Australia. You know, we don't, we don't even, um, pay non future performers, so you wouldn't even go in and...
Add a performer's name. They don't require that information. Whereas someone like PPL does require that information. And so this language that expects you to, you know, have all this, uh, all this data, um, all the societies are after different data when it comes to neighbouring rights. Um, on that rights holder side of things, there's no one actually really utilizing it at this stage.
It's hundreds of thousands of dollars to build a system that can plug into that language. So we're a ways off, but again, this is going to benefit the rights holders and even, you know, independent labels, of course, struggle with, with being able to have something that could plug into that language because of the cost is, you know, extensive.
But I think, you know, there are people. Uh, working on something that you can buy out of the box, you can license, you know, in the future, um, to be able to plug into that, to that language.
CW: So let's say the government here in Australia does say, yes, we're on board, we're going to tick Article 15. What happens after that?
SC: We all have a big party. Woo! We're invited. Um, so, well what happens after that? Essentially, what would then happen is all the non featured performers would be paid in Australia. Um, the money is already being collected, so that's not a problem. So the featured performers and the non featured performers would be paid, but then we would also have, um, a reciprocal agreement in place with, um, the rest of the world.
So when, let's say, an Ed Sheeran track is played on radio. In Australia, uh, instead of that money going to Sony Australia and then onto Sony UK, uh, it would go back to the licensing body, um, in UK PPL. And then, um, it's, it's share would go directly to him. Um, and, um, so, you know, and, and I know like talking about Ed Sheeran, someone who's got, you know, huge amounts of money and as a songwriter and everything, like you, you've got to remember that there's a lot of other artists that get huge amount of airplay in Australia that aren't receiving this money directly. It's just going straight back to the record company. So once we tick 15. 1, they will be able to actually finally get money out of Australia for airplay of those sound recordings. Um, and of course it happens in reverse.
So then, you know, people like the Tones and I, anybody, you know, from Pnau to non featured performers who've been on, you know, a track like You're the Voice, which continues to get airplay even to this day, will be able to receive money out of the UK and a bunch of other territories that, um, you know, don't like to pay Australians.
So, yeah, so it'll be a big change. It would make sure that session performers essentially can make a living, sustainable living. and can aspire to, you know, young artists, young musicians who are going through the courses at all the different colleges can feel that they could actually, this could actually be a fully fledged career if they, you know, spend enough time practicing and working on their art, that it could be, they could actually receive, a sustainable income, monies that will come in, you know, above and beyond touring above and beyond a session fee, you know, and, um, like an income stream for them. So I think the health of our music industry will greatly improve. We are, I think the message I've wanted to get across is that Australian musicians are undervalued and in comparison to the rest of the world. We need to change that. We need to, you know, this has an impact not only on musicians, but on studios in Australia. For instance, you can go and record in, um, Sweden or the UK and qualify. How does that impact Australian, you know, studio recording studios? If people are heading overseas to record as a result.
So studios, sound engineers, producers, non featured performers, feature performers. The whole mecca of the music industry will be positively impacted by nabbing rights. So that's why we're pushing so hard for it.
CW: So how can artists keep across the developments in this space and with changes that are happening?
SC: uwe can put it up, um, at some stage by this podcast, but the advocacy group is called genuine article.
Um, we have, we're in the process of just rolling out all of our socials. And so we currently have a Facebook page called Genuine Article and on that it will roll out to the other socials. Great. There'll be obviously a petition, but we're currently gathering videos from well known artists and session musicians as well to simplify the language, to help people.
And what the real problem is and so very short videos and they're the things that will be going to the parliamentary inquiry But we will be sending out links to a petition to get people across it and you know So we can also send that across to the powers that be to, to have some further impact. Um, so yeah, if you have a look at, um, genuine article, and of course we can provide links as need be to those socials.
Yeah, great. We can put those links in the show notes.
CW: I've got a couple more questions for you. Longtime listeners of this podcast know that I'm a huge fan of Kylie Minogue and knowing that IRR and Now Good Neighbour represents her work, I have to ask, have you met Kylie?
SC: No, I haven't.
CW: Okay. Not yet.
SC: Not yet.
CW: But Padam Padam is going off. So that must be keeping you all very busy.
SC: It's keeping us very busy. It's keeping me very happy. Um, it was a great time to sign her. It's really come down to, um, you know, the people that she works with, incredible professionals. And it's really come down to a lot of trust. You know, within, uh, what good neighbor, um, is doing what we've done over the years.
And of course, in this day and age, you know, there's a lot of stuff you can research about someone and decide if they, you know, they got the vibe or the people that you want to work with, but also have the systems to be able to deliver. So it's keeping us really busy, but you know, it's keeping us dancing around the lounge room, you know, we put on really loud.
CW: So, yeah, I love it. It's so good. My last question, what do you still hope to achieve?
SC: Um, well, this advocacy is really important, of course. To mentor more people in this, in this, in this. but also obviously there's a lot of talk around, uh, women in industry. And I have to say that, um, in many ways I haven't, I hadn't experienced in many ways as an artist, I did experience a lot of those issues in terms of horrible things, you know, sexual harassment and all, all that kind of stuff, uh, on that business side of things, I haven't experienced it.
And I think it's just because someone asked me once I did an interview about whether it was ever a problem being a female in the industry. And I, my response was, Oh, I, I didn't realize I was, I am just human. I'm a person who. Has a fire in their belly about something and, and no one else was putting their hand up about it.
So I did. I didn't go, I'm a woman. I can't do that. I didn't even cross my mind and maybe others thought that about me and, um, maybe it closed some doors and open some doors. I did have someone say to me once that I couldn't recruit artists because I didn't drink beer and talk football. But obviously that's not true because we wouldn't be where we are today, but I had things like that said to me.
Um, but they're the first where I kind of realized, Oh, that I had a gender because it was just about, you know, getting out there and doing it. You know, why let something, you know, get in your way. If something needs to be done, then get out and do it. So I think that that's important to me to get that message across.
Um, that we talk a lot about gender, but maybe we should just be talking about, you know, feeling, you know, enabled to go and, and push and pursue something if it needs doing. Yeah. I guess it's also about ensuring that we create environments where people do feel safe and they do feel enabled. And I think Chelsea what you were saying before we, we were on, you know, on air, um, it's, it's very difficult as a woman, um, raising family. So there's a lot of expectation, obviously, that we put on ourselves about raising family and doing everything that needs to be done around the home, um, as well as being an executive, a person in the industry, being able to be there on time or You know, are you leaving early? Cause you've got to pick up the kids or, or whatever, um, that is never, certainly never ever questioned at mushroom.
It's just, it's a given. Um, and as long as you're doing the job, um, then that's what matters, but yeah, there's a lot of extra pressure, I think, on women to be able to hold all of those.
Um, but it is true that, you know, you do, I think you need to overextend yourself, um, sometimes as a, as a, as a company, as an organization to kind of, you know, realize that, that, that status quo has always been very male focused and, um, So overextending, not just the platitudes, but actually, you know, putting it in action, um, that women sometimes might need additional support because they're also picking up a lot of the work at home. It's certainly the case for me.
CW: Susan, thank you so much for taking the time to chat with me on the control podcast. Thanks so much Chelsea. It's been an absolute pleasure.
And I loved your Gudinski voice. I thought that was awesome. There's plenty of that. I've got one other fun one for you. He used to walk behind me and he would sing Neighbours. So he would go ‘Neighbours’.
