- This topic has 7 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 7 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
In looking at RF libraries I would like to work with, I came across an RF library (ML) that states: “We do not require our clients to report the use of the music we distribute to performing rights agencies (an important point to consider).”
I understand (or believe I understand) that while Performance Free libraries do not require clients to file cue sheets for TV broadcast uses, Royalty Free libraries dot.
So if an RF library states they do not require clients to report use to PROs, does that make them more of a Performance Free library?
Thanks!
I’m curious, too…
There is a massive difference between a RF library not requiring its clients to report usage to the PROS and a library requiring a composer to sign away those rights.
There are lots of ways a RF work performance could be picked up and paid out by a PRO even without any reporting involved. Fingerprinting, YouTube Content ID, etc.
Also, the platforms (e.g. Netflix, Amazon, etc.) on which those cues are played, aired, streamed, whatever, would still have to have a PRO license that creates $ for composers. Performance-free means they wouldn’t.
Or psychologically worse, if your music did end up on a Netflix series you wouldn’t get anything from ASCAP or BMI while the music around you did!
There is a massive difference between a RF library not requiring its clients to report usage to the PROS and a library requiring a composer to sign away those rights.
Thanks again @videohelper for clarifying a very important point.
@Paolo, the library that you’re referring to will provide PRO info to its client’s when requested — a world of difference from “Performance Free.”