he actually wants 41%

I recently finished writing a song called "From Chelsea Street to Avon Road." It's a lamentation of lost youth and lost dreams.

The song had been a work in progress for several years -- I don't know. exactly how many, but I'm pretty sure it's more than five. I don't write songs fast. Anyway, I remember mentioning the idea to a colleague* when I first had the idea, so I happened to mention to him that I had finished it. Offhand comment. Not a big deal. Of course he didn't remember the earlier conversation, but that's beside the point.

I was describing the song to my colleague, and he made a quick quip about the concept. That quip gave me an idea for the bridge. I already had a bridge, but I felt that this idea was stronger. On the spot I wrote new lyrics for the bridge, based on what my colleague had said. I didn't use his words -- just the idea.

Now, strictly speaking, I can run merrily along with this. I don't owe him a co-writing credit or a share of the royalties (if there are ever royalties to be had, but I'm not holding my breath). An idea like that isn't subject to copyright. If he had actually written the lyrics for a new bridge, that would be a different matter.

But I want to be on the up and up (and I do work with him), so I asked if, assuming I use the new lyrics, does he want a co-writing credit. "Of course," he responded grinning like Cheshire Cat. I asked what percentage ownership he wanted. He said he'd get back to me.

Meanwhile, I did my own calculation.

• The song is structured as verse, chorus, verse, chorus, bridge, verse, chorus, extra chorus.** That's eight segments. The bridge, being one of these eight segments, is one eighth of the song.
• The idea at hand affected the lyrics, not the melody. So we're talking about half the bridge. And we're down to one sixteenth.
• But remember that my colleague didn't write the lyrics; he came up with the concept. Surely that makes the contribution less than if he had written the lyrics. On that basis, I'm going down to one thirty-second.

So, by reckoning, a fair offer is 3.125%. I would maintain an ownership share of 96.875%.

The next day he came back with his thought. He wants 41% of the song. As near as I can figure out, he came up with the figure because 41 is his wife's lucky number.

Unfortunately, he has been intransigent. He is firm at 41%. He has argued that the change would make the song a hit, so my choice is between 96.875% of nothing and 59% of millions of dollars. It's safe to say that his tongue was firmly planted in his cheek; he doesn't really believe there's any actual money to be made. The fact, there is potentially some money at stake -- I have been toying with the idea of recording an album. If I do so, and I include a song that he cowrote, I'd owe him a share of royalties. I don't know the numbers, but if I were to press a thousand copies, the difference between 3.125% and 41% could be $20 or so. It's not a lot of money, I'll admit. But the thought of signing over 41% and implicitly saying that he wrote nearly half the song bothers me. Even if it there's no money at stake.

So, sadly, I'm sticking with the bridge I had.

*To honor his wishes, I won't reveal his name here. Suffice to say you can't pronounce it without making sounds.

** Typical of how I've been writing songs recently, each occurrence of the chorus has different lyrics. They all end with the same anchor line or phrase, but they each get there differently. In that sense they're, lyrically, like verses. But melodically they act as choruses. So that's what I'm calling them.