To anyone confused by the "12. THE INVALIDITY OR UNENFORCEABILITY OF ANY PROVISION HEREOF SHALL NOT AFFECT THE VALIDITY OR ENFORCEABILITY OF ANY OTHER PROVISION HEREOF." language, you need not fear. This is what we call, in the industry, boilerplate. Lots of professional contracts (the vast majority of them) include such language for a simple reason: If a judge decides that some particular language is "offensive" and "unenforceable," you don't want the judge to say the entire contract is therefore void. For example, imagine that you have a contract that says you agree to send them $1 every time someone mentions their name (remember, this is just a hypothetical - I haven't seen their contract). The other provisions, however, say that they'll pay you nicely whenever they sell an album. Now, you go into court because they haven't paid you. The judge says, "What's this nonsense about you having to pay them $1 when their name is mentioned - that's ridiculous ... and void." Without that exculpatory language (sorry for the legalese), the judge might very well find that you are not entitled to your money either. In a single stroke of his pen, he says, "This contract has bad language - I'm not enforcing any of it. Case dismissed." At that point, if this language is in the contract, you say, "But Judge, the invalidity of one small piece doesn't affect the whole thing. Look at section 12." Now, having said that, and without judging a contract I haven't read, what it probably means is, "We may be over-reaching in our contract, but we're not sure. If a judge thinks we're asking too much of the artist in one section, that doesn't mean that we want the contract declared invalid. Please judge, if we are being naughty, don't enforce the naughty bits, but let us keep the rest." Sometimes this clause works for you - sometimes it works against you. Regardless, if you don't understand the language, don't make any assumptions. Talk to a lawyer because it is your music and your passion that is at stake.