{ "_meta": { "title": "The Music Business Lexicon", "publisher": "Overtone", "license": "CC-BY-4.0", "license_url": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/", "attribution": "Data by Overtone. Free to reuse, including commercially, with attribution and a link back.", "as_of": "2026-08-11", "refresh_cadence": "continuous", "version": 2, "method": "Each entry defines a term used in the recorded-music and publishing industries, states the mechanism by which it moves money, gives a worked example, names what it is commonly confused with, and links a primary source. Entries are written to be extractable in isolation: the definition field stands alone without the rest of the record.", "scope_note": "Mechanisms, not rates. Statutory and negotiated rates are jurisdiction- and period-specific, so this dataset teaches how a term works rather than quoting a figure that would be stale within a year.", "schema": { "slug": "url-safe identifier, stable, never reused", "term": "the term as the industry writes it", "aka": "other names the same concept is filed under, for retrieval", "domain": "credits | economics | ownership | networks | lexicon", "definition": "one sentence, must stand alone if extracted", "mechanism": "what it actually does to the flow of money", "example": "a worked example, with arithmetic where arithmetic applies", "confused_with": "array of {slug|name, difference}", "matters_because": "why a working artist should care", "sources": "array of {name, url} primary or authoritative", "status": "live | draft", "sections": "optional array of {h2, body[]} for entries that warrant long-form depth. The dataset must carry EVERYTHING the page shows, or the page and the open dataset diverge.", "faq": "optional array of {q, a}", "pull": "optional pull-quote string" } }, "entries": [ { "slug": "recoupment", "term": "Recoupment", "aka": [ "recouping", "unrecouped", "recoup" ], "domain": "economics", "definition": "Recoupment is the process by which a record label recovers money it advanced to an artist out of the artist's share of revenue only, rather than out of total revenue.", "mechanism": "An advance is charged to the artist's account on day one and repaid from the artist's royalty percentage. Because that percentage is a minority share, the advance clears far more slowly than its face value implies, and the label retains the majority share throughout.", "example": "A $200,000 advance at a 20% royalty rate requires roughly $1,000,000 of revenue before the artist's share reaches $200,000. At that moment the artist has received exactly the money they were already given and the label has collected $800,000.", "confused_with": [ { "name": "Debt", "difference": "A standard advance is recoupable but not returnable: if the record never earns out, the artist does not owe the shortfall as cash and the label absorbs it." }, { "slug": "360-deal", "difference": "Recoupment is how the label recovers what it advanced. A 360 deal governs which income streams the label participates in at all." } ], "matters_because": "It is the single most common reason a visibly successful artist reports no income from recordings, and almost every artist who signs one misjudges how much revenue is required to clear it.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live", "pull": "Recoupment is not the label lending the artist money. It is the artist funding their own career from a minority share, while the majority share is retained by the party that advanced it.", "sections": [ { "h2": "What is recoupable, and this is where it gets worse", "body": [ "Recoupable costs are rarely limited to the advance. Depending on the agreement, the artist's account can also be charged for recording costs, producer fees, mixing and mastering, music video production, marketing and promotion, independent radio promotion, and tour support. Each of those is spent by the label, and each is charged back to the artist's share.", "This produces the outcome that surprises people most: the more aggressively a label promotes a record, the deeper the artist's account goes before it can begin to recover. Promotional spend is not a gift, it is an addition to the balance." ] }, { "h2": "Recoupable is not the same as returnable", "body": [ "Recoupment is commonly confused with debt, and the distinction matters in the artist's favour. In a standard recording agreement the advance is recoupable but not returnable: if the record never earns enough for the artist's share to clear the balance, the artist does not owe the shortfall as a cash debt. The label absorbs it.", "That is a real protection and it is why advances are described as non-returnable. It is also why the balance follows the artist forward: an unrecouped account can be carried against future releases under the same agreement, so a first record that underperforms can suppress the earnings of a second one that does well." ] }, { "h2": "How to check it in a real statement", "body": [ "An artist royalty statement shows the account balance rather than the revenue. The number to find is the running unrecouped balance, then the itemised charges applied in the period. Charges are where the disagreement usually lives: whether a given marketing expense was recoupable at all, and whether it was charged at the rate the agreement specifies. This is what an audit clause exists for, and audit rights are one of the most commonly unexercised provisions in a recording agreement." ] } ], "faq": [ { "q": "Does the artist owe the money back if the record flops?", "a": "Not as a cash debt under a standard recording agreement. The advance is recoupable but not returnable, so the label absorbs the shortfall. The unrecouped balance can still be carried against future releases under the same agreement." }, { "q": "Why does a bigger marketing budget hurt the artist?", "a": "Because marketing spend is usually recoupable. The label spends it, then charges it to the artist's account, so the balance the artist's share must clear grows with the promotional push." }, { "q": "Where do the actual rates come from?", "a": "Royalty rates are negotiated per agreement and vary widely. Statutory rates that apply to compositions are set by regulation and change over time, which is why this entry teaches the mechanism rather than quoting a rate that would be stale within a year." } ] }, { "slug": "black-box-royalties", "term": "Black box royalties", "aka": [ "unmatched royalties", "unallocated royalties", "undistributed royalties", "suspense account" ], "domain": "ownership", "definition": "Black box royalties are royalties that were successfully collected but could not be matched to the person or company entitled to them.", "mechanism": "A payment can only be routed when usage data and ownership data agree. Registration gaps, name mismatches, incomplete splits and title variations break that link. After a holding period, undistributed money is generally allocated by market share, which sends it to the largest rights holders rather than to whoever earned it.", "example": "A song registered by one co-writer but not the others produces a payment with no confirmed destination for the unregistered shares. If it is never claimed, that money is distributed in proportion to existing matched market share.", "confused_with": [ { "name": "Unpaid royalties", "difference": "Unpaid royalties are owed by a counterparty that has not paid, which is a contractual dispute. Black box money has already been paid and is sitting with a collector that cannot identify the recipient." }, { "slug": "recoupment", "difference": "Recoupment concerns earned money being applied against an advance. Black box concerns earned money never being attributed at all." } ], "matters_because": "Almost all exposure is a registration problem, which is the one part an artist controls without a lawyer, and the holding period is finite.", "sources": [ { "name": "The MLC", "url": "https://www.themlc.com/" }, { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live", "pull": "The black box is not a vault of stolen money. It is a filing failure with a deadline, and the deadline has a default beneficiary that is not the artist.", "sections": [ { "h2": "Why royalties go unmatched in the first place", "body": [ "A single piece of music carries at least two separate rights, the recording and the underlying composition, and they are frequently owned by different parties, registered in different databases, and collected by different organisations. A payment can only be routed if the usage data and the ownership data agree.", "They routinely do not agree. A composition may be registered under a slightly different title, a writer's legal name may differ from the credited name, a split may be registered by one co-writer and not the others, a song may be unregistered entirely, or the usage report may carry a misspelling. Each mismatch produces a payment with no confirmed destination." ] }, { "h2": "Market-share distribution, which is the part that matters", "body": [ "When the holding period expires, the remaining undistributed money is generally allocated by market share. Each participating rights holder receives a portion proportional to the share of matched royalties they already receive.", "Follow that logic to its conclusion. The money in the pool is, by definition, money that could not be matched, and unmatched works are disproportionately independent, self-released, older, or administratively neglected. The money is then distributed in proportion to matched market share, which is dominated by the largest publishers and labels. The pool of money earned mostly by the unrepresented is paid mostly to the well-represented.", "This is why the black box is described as structural rather than fraudulent. No party has to behave badly for the outcome to occur. The rule produces it automatically." ] }, { "h2": "What an artist can actually do", "body": [ "Almost all black box exposure is a registration problem, and registration is the one part an artist controls without a lawyer. Register every composition with a performing rights organisation, including features, and confirm the split totals 100% across all writers. Register recordings and compositions consistently, since they are tracked separately. Keep credited names and legal names linked in every database, because a mismatch is the single most common cause of an unmatched payment. Confirm co-writers have registered their side. And claim historical works actively rather than waiting, because the holding period is finite and the default beneficiary is not you." ] } ], "faq": [ { "q": "How large is the black box?", "a": "Published estimates vary by roughly an order of magnitude depending on what is counted, which territories are included, and whether recording and publishing royalties are combined. We are not going to repeat a single figure as fact, because the number is exactly the sort of claim this publication exists to check rather than to pass along." }, { "q": "Can I claim old unmatched royalties?", "a": "Sometimes, within the holding period, by registering the work correctly and submitting a claim to the relevant collecting entity. Once the pool has been distributed by market share, that money is gone." }, { "q": "Does this only affect independent artists?", "a": "No, but it affects them disproportionately, because the allocation rule rewards existing matched market share and independent catalogues are more likely to be incompletely registered." } ] }, { "slug": "360-deal", "term": "360 deal", "aka": [ "multiple rights deal", "ancillary rights deal" ], "domain": "economics", "definition": "A 360 deal is a recording agreement in which the label takes a percentage of income streams beyond recorded music, such as touring, merchandise, endorsements and publishing.", "mechanism": "Traditional recording agreements participate only in recorded-music revenue. A 360 deal extends participation across the artist's other income, on the argument that label investment builds the whole career rather than only the records.", "example": "An artist whose records under-earn but whose touring is profitable can find the touring income participating in a recording deficit, where the agreement also permits cross-collateralisation.", "confused_with": [ { "slug": "cross-collateralisation", "difference": "A 360 deal defines which income the label shares in. Cross-collateralisation defines whether a deficit in one area can be recovered from another." }, { "slug": "recoupment", "difference": "One is scope of participation, the other is the mechanism of repayment." } ], "matters_because": "It changes what the label is entitled to from activity it may not have funded, and combined with cross-collateralisation it widens the pool a recording deficit can consume.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "cross-collateralisation", "term": "Cross-collateralisation", "aka": [ "cross collateralization", "cross-collateralized" ], "domain": "economics", "definition": "Cross-collateralisation is a contractual term allowing a label to recover the unrecouped balance of one project out of the earnings of another.", "mechanism": "Without it, each project settles on its own account. With it, the accounts are pooled, so a deficit on one release is cleared from the proceeds of a later one before the artist participates.", "example": "An artist whose first two albums remain unrecouped can find a successful third album clearing those deficits before it pays them anything.", "confused_with": [ { "slug": "recoupment", "difference": "Recoupment is repayment from the artist's share. Cross-collateralisation determines which projects' shares are available to repay from." } ], "matters_because": "It is the clause that most often explains why a hit record produces no payment, and it is negotiable more often than artists assume.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "controlled-composition-clause", "term": "Controlled composition clause", "aka": [ "controlled comp", "controlled composition" ], "domain": "economics", "definition": "A controlled composition clause reduces the mechanical royalty a label pays a songwriter-artist on songs that artist wrote or controls, and typically caps how many songs per album are paid at all.", "mechanism": "Mechanical royalties are otherwise set by statute per composition. The clause contracts around that for compositions the artist controls, commonly at a reduced percentage of the statutory rate and with a cap on the number of tracks counted per album.", "example": "Under a clause capping payment at ten tracks, an artist who writes fourteen songs on their own album is paid mechanicals on ten of them, at the reduced rate.", "confused_with": [ { "name": "Performance royalties", "difference": "Performance royalties are collected by PROs for public performance and are not affected by this clause, which concerns mechanicals." } ], "matters_because": "It applies specifically to artists who write their own material, so the more of your own album you wrote, the more it costs you.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "master-vs-composition", "term": "Master versus composition", "aka": [ "two copyrights", "sound recording vs song", "master rights" ], "domain": "ownership", "definition": "Every piece of recorded music contains two separate copyrights: the composition, which is the underlying song, and the master, which is the specific recording of it.", "mechanism": "The two are owned, licensed, registered and paid separately, often by different parties. Labels typically hold masters; writers and publishers hold compositions. A licence for one does not licence the other.", "example": "A film wanting to use a track must clear both the master from whoever owns the recording and the composition from the publisher. Either can refuse independently.", "confused_with": [ { "name": "Publishing", "difference": "Publishing is the business of administering the composition side. It is not a third copyright." } ], "matters_because": "Almost every ownership dispute, catalogue sale and re-recording is about which of the two is being discussed, and conflating them makes any deal unreadable.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "mechanical-royalty", "term": "Mechanical royalty", "aka": [ "mechanicals", "mechanical licence" ], "domain": "economics", "definition": "A mechanical royalty is money owed to the owner of a composition when a recording of that composition is reproduced or streamed.", "mechanism": "It attaches to the composition rather than the recording, and for digital services in the United States it is administered collectively. Rates are set by regulation rather than negotiated per use.", "example": "When a song is streamed, the recording generates money for the master owner and the composition separately generates a mechanical for the writer and publisher.", "confused_with": [ { "name": "Performance royalty", "difference": "Performance royalties are for public performance and are collected by PROs. Mechanicals are for reproduction." }, { "slug": "master-vs-composition", "difference": "Mechanicals are one of the payments arising from the composition side of that split." } ], "matters_because": "It is the payment most often lost to registration failure, which is why it dominates the black box.", "sources": [ { "name": "The MLC", "url": "https://www.themlc.com/" }, { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "split-sheet", "term": "Split sheet", "aka": [ "writer splits", "songwriter split agreement" ], "domain": "credits", "definition": "A split sheet is a written record of what percentage of a composition each contributor owns, agreed at the time the song is made.", "mechanism": "Ownership shares must be registered consistently by every party. Where contributors disagree or fail to register, the payment cannot be matched and the shares fall into the unmatched pool.", "example": "Three writers agreeing 40/30/30 in the room, and all three registering those figures, produces a work that pays cleanly. One writer registering 50% while another registers 40% produces a conflict that suspends payment.", "confused_with": [ { "name": "Credits", "difference": "A credit is who is named. A split is who is paid, and the two frequently differ." } ], "matters_because": "It takes minutes in the room and is nearly impossible to reconstruct years later, and its absence is the most common single cause of unmatched royalties.", "sources": [ { "name": "The MLC", "url": "https://www.themlc.com/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "pro", "term": "Performing rights organisation", "aka": [ "PRO", "ASCAP", "BMI", "performance rights organization", "collecting society" ], "domain": "ownership", "definition": "A performing rights organisation licenses the public performance of compositions on behalf of writers and publishers, collects the resulting money, and distributes it to its members.", "mechanism": "Venues, broadcasters and services take blanket licences rather than clearing each song. The organisation tracks usage, matches it to registered works, and pays the registered owners.", "example": "A song played on radio generates performance income that reaches the writer only if that writer is a member and the work is registered with correct shares.", "confused_with": [ { "name": "Publisher", "difference": "A publisher administers and exploits compositions commercially. A PRO only licenses and collects for public performance." }, { "slug": "mechanical-royalty", "difference": "PROs handle performance. Mechanicals are administered separately." } ], "matters_because": "Unregistered works earn performance income that cannot be paid to anyone, and membership is the precondition for collecting it.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "advance", "term": "Advance", "aka": [ "signing advance", "recording fund" ], "domain": "economics", "definition": "An advance is money paid to an artist up front against future earnings, charged to the artist's account and repaid out of their share of revenue.", "mechanism": "It is a prepayment rather than a fee. The artist receives it immediately and earns nothing further until their share of revenue has repaid it in full.", "example": "A $200,000 advance at a 20% rate is repaid once the artist's share reaches $200,000, which requires roughly $1,000,000 of revenue.", "confused_with": [ { "name": "A fee", "difference": "A fee is kept. An advance is repaid from money the artist would otherwise have received." }, { "slug": "recoupment", "difference": "The advance is the sum. Recoupment is the process of recovering it." } ], "matters_because": "The headline number in most deal announcements is an advance, which means it is a loan being reported as an income figure.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "per-stream-rate", "term": "Per-stream rate", "aka": [ "payout per stream", "how much does spotify pay per stream", "streaming rate" ], "domain": "economics", "definition": "A per-stream rate is not a fixed price paid per play; it is an average derived after the fact by dividing a service's payable revenue pool among rights holders by share of total streams.", "mechanism": "Most services distribute a percentage of revenue rather than paying a set amount per play. Each rights holder receives a share proportional to their share of total streams in the period, so the effective rate moves with subscriber revenue, listener territory, subscription tier and total platform volume.", "example": "The same track can produce materially different effective rates in two months with identical stream counts, because the pool and the denominator both changed.", "confused_with": [ { "name": "A price per play", "difference": "There is no fixed unit price to be paid. Any quoted figure is an average that has already happened." } ], "matters_because": "Every published figure differs, and the reason is structural rather than dishonest. Planning revenue on a quoted rate assumes a price that does not exist.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "points", "term": "Points", "aka": [ "royalty points", "producer points" ], "domain": "economics", "definition": "A point is one percentage point of the artist royalty on a recording, most often used to describe a producer's participation.", "mechanism": "Producer points are usually carved out of the artist's royalty rather than added on top, so each point a producer receives reduces the artist's share by the same amount.", "example": "An artist on 20 points who gives a producer 3 points retains 17. The label's share is unchanged.", "confused_with": [ { "name": "Publishing splits", "difference": "Points concern the master royalty. Publishing splits concern ownership of the composition, and the two are separate negotiations." } ], "matters_because": "Producer points are commonly agreed casually and paid for the life of the recording, and they come out of the artist rather than the label.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "reversion", "term": "Reversion", "aka": [ "rights reversion", "termination right", "getting your masters back" ], "domain": "ownership", "definition": "Reversion is the return of rights to their original owner, either because a contract term provided for it or because a statutory right allows a transfer to be terminated after a defined period.", "mechanism": "Contractual reversion happens on conditions written into the agreement. Statutory termination is a separate right created by copyright law, exercisable within specific windows and requiring notice in a prescribed form and timeframe.", "example": "An artist whose recordings were assigned decades ago may become able to terminate that assignment, but only by serving notice inside the statutory window.", "confused_with": [ { "name": "Buying your masters back", "difference": "A purchase is a negotiation at whatever price the owner sets. Reversion is a right that does not require the owner's agreement." } ], "matters_because": "The windows are strict and the notice requirements are formal, so the right is routinely lost by inaction rather than refused.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "audit-clause", "term": "Audit clause", "aka": [ "right to audit", "royalty audit" ], "domain": "economics", "definition": "An audit clause is the contractual right for an artist to examine a label's or distributor's books to verify that royalties were calculated and paid correctly.", "mechanism": "It defines who may audit, how often, over what period, at whose cost, and within what window after a statement is issued. Statements typically become final and unchallengeable once that window closes.", "example": "A clause allowing audit within two years of a statement means errors in a statement three years old are generally no longer recoverable, regardless of size.", "confused_with": [ { "name": "A dispute", "difference": "An audit is an inspection right exercised under the contract, not litigation, and is frequently resolved without any." } ], "matters_because": "It is one of the most commonly unexercised provisions in a recording agreement, and the right expires on a clock most artists never track.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "publishing", "term": "Publishing", "aka": [ "music publishing", "publishing deal", "publisher", "admin deal" ], "domain": "ownership", "definition": "Publishing is the business of owning, administering and exploiting the composition, which is the song itself, as distinct from any particular recording of it.", "mechanism": "A publisher registers compositions, licenses them, collects the income they generate and takes a share. Deals range from full publishing, where the publisher takes ownership of copyright shares, to administration deals, where the writer keeps ownership and pays a smaller percentage for the collection work.", "example": "A writer on a full publishing deal may assign a share of the copyright in exchange for an advance. A writer on an admin deal keeps the copyright and pays a percentage, typically much smaller, purely for registration and collection.", "confused_with": [ { "slug": "master-vs-composition", "difference": "Publishing concerns the composition side of that split. It is not a third copyright, it is the business built around one of the two." }, { "slug": "pro", "difference": "A PRO only licenses and collects for public performance. A publisher administers the composition across every use, including sync and mechanicals." } ], "matters_because": "Most artists sign a recording deal understanding it and a publishing deal not understanding it, and publishing is the side that keeps paying long after the recording stops.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "distribution-fee", "term": "Distribution fee", "aka": [ "distro fee", "distribution cut" ], "domain": "economics", "definition": "A distribution fee is the percentage a distributor takes for delivering recordings to streaming services and stores and collecting the resulting revenue.", "mechanism": "It is deducted before the artist's share is calculated, which places it ahead of almost everything else in the chain. Models vary between a flat annual fee with no percentage, a percentage of revenue, and a percentage plus recoupable services.", "example": "On a 15% distribution fee, $10,000 of streaming revenue becomes $8,500 before any label split, recoupment or publishing is applied. The same $10,000 through a flat-fee distributor leaves the full amount less the subscription.", "confused_with": [ { "name": "A label deal", "difference": "A distributor delivers and collects. A label typically also funds, markets and takes a far larger share, and usually takes rights." }, { "slug": "recoupment", "difference": "A distribution fee is taken off the top continuously. Recoupment is repayment of a specific advance from the artist's share." } ], "matters_because": "It comes off the top, so it compounds against every other percentage downstream, and it is the single easiest term to compare between competing offers.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "escalator", "term": "Escalator", "aka": [ "royalty escalator", "rate escalation" ], "domain": "economics", "definition": "An escalator is a contract term that increases an artist's royalty rate once defined sales or streaming thresholds are reached.", "mechanism": "The rate steps up at agreed milestones, and the increase usually applies only to units sold above the threshold rather than retroactively to everything sold before it.", "example": "A deal at 18% escalating to 20% at 500,000 units typically pays 18% on the first 500,000 and 20% only on units after that, so the headline improved rate applies to a smaller base than it appears to.", "confused_with": [ { "slug": "points", "difference": "Points describe the size of the royalty. An escalator describes the conditions under which that size changes." } ], "matters_because": "Escalators are presented as upside in negotiation while the thresholds are frequently set where most releases will never reach them, so the improved rate is real but rarely paid.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" }, { "slug": "playlist-placement", "term": "Playlist placement", "aka": [ "playlisting", "editorial playlist", "playlist pitch" ], "domain": "economics", "definition": "Playlist placement is the inclusion of a track on a streaming service's editorial or algorithmic playlist, which raises stream volume and therefore payout.", "mechanism": "Editorial placements are chosen by service staff and pitched through official channels. Algorithmic placements are generated from listener behaviour signals such as save rate, completion rate and skip rate. Both increase the numerator in the pool-share calculation that determines payout.", "example": "A track added to a large editorial playlist can multiply monthly streams, but because payout is a share of a revenue pool rather than a fixed price per play, the resulting income depends on the pool and the total streams across the platform in that period.", "confused_with": [ { "name": "Paid playlist promotion", "difference": "Official editorial pitching is free and internal. Third-party paid placement on unofficial playlists is a different market and can trigger artificial-streaming enforcement." }, { "slug": "per-stream-rate", "difference": "Placement changes how many streams you get. The per-stream rate is determined separately by the pool-share model." } ], "matters_because": "It is the single largest short-term lever on streaming income, and the difference between official pitching and bought placement is the difference between growth and a takedown.", "sources": [ { "name": "US Copyright Office", "url": "https://www.copyright.gov/" } ], "status": "live" } ] }