deadmau5 Turning Down Disney and the Future of Corporate/EDM Collaborations

With news of deadmau5 revealing that Disney wanted the (possibly similar to Mickey Mouse-logo'd) DJ/producer to re-imagine Fantasia, it's as good of a time as any to stop and discuss brand development, progressive models of brand engagement, the music industry, and electronic dance music. Ask anyone in a tall marketing/advertising building wearing a gray suit these days, and they'll happily tell you that DJs are the new rappers and both are the update on the rock star tradition. However, what may be most intriguing about EDM–and highlighted by the Disney versus Deadmau5 trademark case–is the lack of desire for DJ/producers (in some cases) to not want "rock stardom," but rather be perfectly happy in being "punk rock" stars thumbing their nose at the establishment and marching to the four-on-the-floor beat of their own drummer.

However, in the money being there on the table for the taking, or possibly rather easily (and independently) accessible in the marketplace, who's winning, why are they winning, and how can everyone potentially be a winner, too? There's certainly the potential of there being enough money for everyone, so if either wanting to mimic the Rolling Stones or Bad Brains, the potential for "rock stardom (from classic to punk)" as an EDM act is more than attainable.

While deadmau5's stance against Disney is admirable, it's not a stance advisable for everyone. Deadmau5 can take a stance against the multimedia conglomerate because of the fact that he largely controls the distribution of his material himself. Thus, as a creator, artist, label executive, A&R, and distributor, he solidly has a finger on the pulse of his fanbase at all times. As well, then being able to engage with them via ultra-honest social media posts, a constant (and hand-picked) touring schedule, and wholly unique marketing campaigns, he's set a new standard by which stardom in music (or any other industry) can be judged.

Aggressively wanting to control his trademark, deadmau5 has raised the ire of Disney because, according to an article in The Hollywood Reporter, the company "doesn't want any Mickey Mouse fans to be confused about the source of Deadmau5's goods and services, especially when the musician is attempting to register his mark for everything from toys and backpacks to mayonnaise and walking sticks [as well as BMX bikes, pencil sharpeners, coffee extracts, Christmas tree decorations, mustard, noodles and alimentary pastas, too]." Ideally, in wanting to work with Deadmau5 in 2013, Disney would have likely been able to leverage the Fantasia partnership into a deeper corporate tie-in with deadmau5 iconic branding.

Potential imaging for the project even went so far as to involve deadmau5 as the sorcerer's apprentice instead of Mickey Mouse, as well as a series of potential concerts where deadmau5 would've played "Fantasia"-branded concerts around the world (including the Hollywood Bowl). Calling Joel Zimmerman "the most innovative musician of our time," and Disney "the most successful entertainment brand to ever exist," the project would have "[provided] an incredible opportunity that could touch millions of people around the world."

Thus, Disney blocking deadmau5 from appearing on the Jimmy Kimmel Live program's Halloween episode feels like a corporation looking for a classic rock star to take its brand into the 21st century tasting the sour grapes of realizing that their chosen one is more than happy to attain a punk-style ideal.

Dillon Francis' soon-to-be released debut artist album is called Money Sucks, Friends Rule. That being said, the producer/pop star does have a unique relationship with Taco Bell, one that has allowed him to retain underground credibility in dance music while not having to be a smiling face shoving Mexican tacos down his throat on a billboard. Is there even an agreement on paper between Francis and the fast food distributor? Who knows? Nevertheless, the corporation's willingness to align itself with an artist that has a less-than capitalistic view of success is bold, and was executed in a manner that bolstered both parties.

While we're not certain if Dillon Francis made any coin from Taco Bell, let's be certain that with brands like T-Mobile partnering with SFX and Scion working alongside Steve Aoki, that the moment when a brand and artist reach perfect synergy is not far away. A DJ/producer feeling like a corporate shill will likely get laughed out of the room. Though debatable, the U2/Apple partnership showcased a moment where artists with a long-standing, globally-respected, and unique brand got in bed fully with a corporation and much lacked in the success (or lack thereof) of the partnership. To be successful in a marketplace where fans and artists are now closer than ever before (especially in EDM), the corporate brand must allow the artist room to breathe and be able to adequately explain to their fanbase why the brand is involved. If that's Dillon Francis tweeting at Taco Bell's official Twitter, or Steve Aoki leaping in the air in front of a Scion automobile on Instagram, it has to feel organic, or else it will not be successful.

A connection with a brand need not be a one-time occurrence. Corporate integration into every aspect of the creative process can allow an artist to create a unique space that in being both corporate and independent can be potentially quite advantageous. For as many artists are signing major label deals, there's also a potential space to use corporate willingness to rush into the EDM space to one's advantage. A fan of Skrillex using a video game to launch his album Recess? The next level of this is obvious, that in following the in the footsteps of rapper Jay Z's Samsung partnership for Magna Carta: Holy Grail's phone release, or any artist using BitTorrent as well-branded (or unbranded) disruptions of distribution will likely become commonplace. When the day comes that a release will not require "physical" distribution, too, an artist will be able to use a separate corporate brand/or their own controlled (and fanciful) independent distribution model to evolve the industry.

As well, with touring models at the top end of the EDM spectrum becoming more based within festivals controlled by Live Nation, SFX, or Goldenvoice, the streamlining of the model actually allows for artists to be able to integrate themselves with either the existing brand sponsors within the models or be available as bridges between corporate brands wanting in on EDM's wealth and the establishing chiefs of the event industry. Of course, one must consider the digital space here, and if deadmau5 can literally control his career from his website and Yahoo wants to broadcast concerts 365 days a year, the obvious synergy of a major artist controlling the streaming of their own events from their own platform (for a nominal fee to be paid by those accessing the stream) is not far away. When artists making insane sums of money decide to take this money and invest it back into themselves, the future of dance as possibly caused by the "wild west" atmosphere of the music industry in this era is incredible to contemplate.