Clause & Effect

The Supreme Court of New York, New York County, found valid the commissions and service-charge provisions of an agency agreement to procure commercial-marketing opportunities for musical artist Beyonce Knowles. Wilhelmina Artist Management LLC (WAM) v. Knowles, 601151/03. Knowles had signed for WAM to act as her “sole and exclusive representative” in the field of “Commercial Marketing Activities” defined as “modeling, runway, fashion, commercials, spokesperson deals, tour sponsorship, celebrity endorsements, merchandising … and product placements, and includes without limitation all licensing or other agreements with respect thereto.”

Knowles agreed to pay WAM 10% of “all gross monies or other consideration … relating to [Knowles'] modeling and all other Commercial Marketing Activities,” and from any “television commercials, industrials, usages and/or renewal fees” from activities covered by the agency contract. Knowles acknowledged in her agreement with WAM that the agency “will be entitled to receive a service charge or fee in the amount of twenty (20%) (but not more than 20%) of the overall payments made” for the services of Knowles' or her group Destiny's Child from “some and/or all of the clients who utilize” the services. The agency agreement stated that the service charge was “in addition to” WAM's commissions from Knowles and that an “entitlement to such a service charge or fee, [was] an additional inducement for [WAM] to act on [Knowles'] behalf.”