Radius clauses

Have you ever wondered why some artists who play at some important festivals do not perform anywhere around in the same period of time? That probably is because of radius clauses.

By definition, a radius clause is a form of non-compete clause used in the live music industry, especially in major music festivals. In essence, it gives the promoter a form of territorial exclusivity stipulating the period of time that an artist have to wait after that show to play in the same market and how far the artist can perform again within the time frame.

Well known festivals like Bonnaroo, Coachella or Lollapalooza Chicago among others have been involved in big controversies by accusations of using radius clauses with some of their performers (supposedly Lollapalooza Chicago has a radius clause for six months before and three months after the festival and Coachella allegedly has a five-state, five-month clause).

With festivals budgets growing insanely, promoters take big risks and when major festivals are in the hands of big and wealthy corporations, it's not a surprise that these clauses exist. Some affected voices claim that they are forced to use radius clauses because agents are every year asking for more and more money multiplying by two or three festival budgets, emphasizing as well that bands always have the option to have radius clauses exemptions by lowering down their cachets.

It´s a complex issue but I see two problems here: small and medium bands and independent festivals.

Obviously if you are Beyonce you are not gonna be affected by these restrictions but what happens when you are a band that gets 10.000 $ to perform in a major festival? As for independent festivals they obviously can not compete against these big brands forcing themselves to get creative in terms of lineup and experience.

So, with the music industry being something close to a monopoly, are these clauses really necessary?