Can you tell me what a sunset clause is because people are talking about it and I have no clue haha! Thank you!
This isn’t my area of law so I can’t give you a super professional opinion. It’s just layperson commentary.
From my brief reading/understanding, a sunset clause is essentially something that keeps an artist paying a manager commission, for a specified duration, after they leave that management.
Eg Dave was an artist with Music Records Management, he leaves and goes elsewhere, his contract with MRM had a sunset clause meaning for x amount of time, he has to pay a certain percentage to MRM.
In theory it seems to be about mitigating loss for labels/management, in the sense that they might really invest in an artist, and they leave, and they are left out ‘in the cold’.
I have seen people throw around the term ‘sunset clause’ as if its a clause that keeps ot5 within the control of Syco/Modest past the end of their contract, and as far as I can tell, that is not how they work or what they are for. It is purely about paying a commission for a specified amount of time. It is not some invisible legal hand demanding x amount of solo albums or requiring Harry or Niall do xyz.
I think a decent portion of this fandom speculates on contract law a bit too much, without having a legal education. For instance, I’ve seen people think that Harry is under several different contracts (eg is being held back by the 1D contract, whilst now being signed to Columbia), hence the push and pull of his image.
That’s unlikely (indeed, I’d say its plain silly). I fully suspect One Direction’s contract was essentially over once Made in the AM came out. As far as I know, a lot of recording contracts (eg Kesha’s) specify a five album deal. 1D might not own all of the rights to their music, but I really doubt this ‘contract’ is still sitting in place controlling their lives. If it was, we would have a sixth album and another tour.
I suspect that Harry then signed with Columbia, and he had quite a bit of leverage doing so. Harry was always going to be the member with the best shot/platform to get a hugely profitable solo career out of, so he could have shopped around for the best contract. I really, really doubt he signed anything that deeply restricted how he presents as an artist, and I further would be flabbergasted if he signed anything/anyone wrote anything to the tune of ‘you can’t be a gay artist with us or come out, we control it entirely’.
I’ve said this before but I suspect a lot of Harry’s closet now is about being practical re his career, Louis’ career, his ambitions. I think Harry could probably come out as queer and taken if he wanted to, but he knows that it would limit his success and market. I think he and his team have essentially come to an agreement (not a legal one, just an understanding) that he can be x amount of visibly queer and y amount of potentially straight, to allow for a combo of authenticity and success. I also suspect he may want to come out with Louis, which makes things more complicated from a joint career perspective.
Not to mention, I think some people think there’s this really complex, almost bird nest or ball of rope, of contracts affecting the boys with different strings everywhere and different groups having claim to certain things all over the place. Contract law exists to make relationships between entities/people/business arrangements, plain and understood. They are about making who owns what very clear, and making obligations very clear. Massive corporations do not deal in ambiguous and obscure and messy contract arrangements.
