At first glance, it might not be obvious why this contest is so objectionable. After all, each selected video’s creator will get a £10,000 ($12,340) prize, with three more cash prizes distributed to the top three selections including a huge £100,000 award for the best of the lot, voted on by a “panel of experts” that includes Pink Floyd’s Nick Mason and Aubrey ‘Po’ Powell (Pink Floyd’s creative director).
It’s strange, however, that while acknowledging the importance animation has played in establishing the legacy of many of the group’s songs, the terms and conditions of the contest show no respect for participants whatsoever. Besides structuring the contest on a spec-work basis (which everyone knows is a big no-no in the arts), the pr-friendly announcement neglects to mention that the rights to all submitted works, even those that don’t win, are immediately surrendered to Pink Floyd Music Ltd in perpetuity.
Perhaps it could be argued that the competition was launched naively with the best of intentions, except that the legalese in the terms and conditions clearly demonstrates that those in charge were well aware of what they’re doing.
Points 23 and 24 of the contest’s terms and conditions read (bolding added by Cartoon Brew):
23. In consideration of the Promoter granting you the limited license of rights set out in clause 22 above, you hereby agree and acknowledge that in submitting your video entry you irrevocably, exclusively and with full title guarantee assign to the Promoter, including by way of a present assignment of future rights, all rights in and to the your video entry (including, without limitation, all copyrights and/or other proprietary rights as defined in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act (1988) and/or pursuant to laws in force throughout the world (and any amendments, extensions and revisions thereto) free from all claims and encumbrances for the Promoter to hold the same unto itself, its successors and assigns absolutely for exploitation at its sole discretion in all media, formats and/or configurations (whether now or in the future developed) throughout the world for the full period of copyright and all possible renewals, reversions, revivals and extensions thereof and thereafter (insofar as may be or become possible) in perpetuity, and without restriction and/or further payment to you and/or any third party.
24. Without in any way limiting the generality of the assignment of rights set out in clause 23 above, the Promoter will have the sole right to monetize and use the submitted video entry content from the winners including, without limitation, on Pink Floyd’s YouTube channel and its other social network pages including, without limitation, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and/or Snapchat.
One can only wonder how willing Pink Floyd would be to write, record, and produce a full soundtrack for an animated short then hand over the rights to the songs forever, all for the chance to win a few pounds. Perhaps the band can’t afford to pay artists for their work because they’re struggling financially. After all, they’re only charging £267.42 ($329.74) for the 50th anniversary Dark Side of the Moon box set.
Among the many hundreds of comments from artists criticizing the contest, here are a few that efficiently sum up the problem with the contest: