Theland - // Do you know of similar? //
It depends entirely on the contract the artist signs, and what is in the small print.
If the artist is smart, he has a specialist lawyer to read the contract for him, and assess its actual value, which avoids the rip-offs that routinely do occur.
Back in the day - and that includes the '80's and beyond, contracts were routinely ruinous to artists and firmly weighted in the favour of the label.
Seriously savvy operators like Michael Jackson, having established their worth, re-negotiated deals heavily in their favour - he got Sony to pay in £2 per album in royalties for Thriller. Yes the label still made billions, but not the tens of billions they would have made otherwise.
These days, bands can make far more from spin-offs like merchandising, and the result of the internet opening access to everyone, the days of the major record deals and serious rip-offs, are gone.
I remember reading about The Beatles' first merchandising deal, and we have to remember that merchanidsing was unknown in those days - but the company who approaching Brian Epstein to buy the image rights for the band, on handbags, talcum powder, etc. came in with a view to hoping not to have to lose more than ten per cent of their profits.
Mr Epstein opened ngeotiations saying he couldn't possibly accept less than ten per cent for the band , leaving the company with the other ninety per cent.
Those guys must have been good poker players because they didn't burst into tears of grattitude at being made multi-millionaires with one sentence, but as I say, those naive days are very long gone.
The rule is - read the contract, and if you don't understand it, give it to someone who does, before you sign anything.
Sadly, in the 1960s', and for the next thirty years, there were far too many star-struck musicians with their eyes on a record release, and not who ultimately paid for it.