One of our readers, Ev, came up with the suggestion to have a section devoted to newbie questions regarding music libraries, music licensing, copyright, music publishing etc. There a lot of experienced people on this site and many are happy to share their wisdom. So, if you are a newbie (or not), and have a question, try leaving it here.
Of course many questions have already been answered here. First try searching in the search bar in the upper right hand corner. Also Google is your friend! I have found one of the best ways to search a site is use site specific criteria at Google’s web site. In other words, to search for a specific keyword, say “contracts”, type it in at Google like this “contracts site:musiclibraryreport.com”. Do not use the quotes.
If you still can’t find your answer then leave a comment here and someone will most likely come to your rescue!
Do people here generally make more money in back-end, or license sales, per year? What has your experience been?
As noted before I make 99.9% of my income from working with exclusive UK libraries. On average I make about 25% of that from publishers, the rest is performance royalties, or back-end, as you refer to it 😉
Man that is totally awesome! I need to find out how you have become so successful.
Darkstar, would be willing to help me out by answering a few questions? Since you are very successful with exclusive UK music libraries, maybe you can help me to become better.
1. What libraries do you work with?
2. What genres of music do you create?
3. How often do you submit new material to libraries?
4. What equipment do you use?
5. How often do you get paid?
6. What has been your biggest payment to date? (License fee, royalty check, etc.)
7. Where can I hear some of your music?
8. How long have you benn working with music libraries?
9. Is music your main source of income?
10. Who taught you how to create music?
Any information you could share would be so awesome. I have not worked with any UK libraries. Hopefully I can get more insight as to what it takes to be successful. I think that you would probably be a perfect role model for someone like me!
“Darkstar, would be willing to help me out by answering a few questions? Since you are very successful with exclusive UK music libraries, maybe you can help me to become better.”
Thats very kind, but there are a lot of composers out there with a lot more talent and success than me.
This being such a public forum, you’re going to have to excuse me not answering all your questions in detail :
“1. What libraries do you work with?”
About half a dozen exclusive libraries.
“2. What genres of music do you create?”
Whatever I’m asked to, I’ll have a go at. Generally speaking it’s working to specific brief’s and if thats Mastodon meets Lady Gaga, performed by Tuvan throat singers, I’ll try and figure out how to do it. Obviously I’m better at some things rather than others, but I learned pretty fast if you do one style only, you limit your opportunities.
“3. How often do you submit new material to libraries?”
All the time. I aim to place at least 50 tracks per year. More if possible. Some libraries take things track by track, others take full albums.
“4. What equipment do you use?”
Nothing special, a long in the tooth MAC and Logic with and ton of plugins and as many real instruments as I can play. I do on occasion work with other writers and session players if I need something I can’t do myself, like vocals, brass, banjos, whatever….
“5. How often do you get paid?”
The PRO payments are quarterly, the publishers pay out twice a year. But collection from overseas PRO can take years. I just got a payment from a bunch of US and European usage from 2008. So it takes a while.
“8. How long have you benn working with music libraries?”
Placed my first track 10 years ago. More by accident than design.
“9. Is music your main source of income?”
Yes. But it’s taken a while to get to that position.
“10. Who taught you how to create music?”
Classically trained till I picked up a guitar and a fuzz box, after that it’s self taught all the way.
Though to be fair I did a lot of commercially released music before switching to Library and also ran a recording studio while that was still a viable proposition, long long ago in a galaxy far far away.
Hope that helps and isn’t too much of ramble.
Being a pom are you following the “Ashes” Darkstar
Hah, no, afraid not.
I think there should be an Music Library Report X-mas party and everyone should buy Art a beer
+1 !!!!!!!
I’ll second that !
Thanks everyone. Actually Robin and I were talking about that yesterday. We have a very small place so couldn’t have more than 10 or 12 people. If any of you live close enough to Los Angeles and want to attend please let me know through the contact page https://musiclibraryreport.com/contact/. I’ll probably make an announcement through the mailing list. Of course if someone has a larger place and would like to host it that would work too!
OK. So having now removed my songs and being in the process of
A) tracking down the others involved in those old recordings
B) tracking down the source of what might or might not be an uncleared sample
I have a practical request.
A) any suggestions where I might get an agreement form to send to those involved and what that agreement form should say ie. do I agree to give them all a % of anything I make on the recording or just ask for a waiver?
B) how do I go about getting a sample cleared? Is there a clearance agency or do I need to contact the record company?
Cheers
MTB
A) sure there must be some co-writer agreement somewhere online. These though can be pretty simple, just need to agree a % split that everyone involved is happy with. Thats the tricky bit though. Good luck.
B) You’re joking right, you didn’t actually sample from a commercially released album / recording ??? If thats the case, you’ll need to clear it with : the record label – who own the master recording, the publisher who owns the publishing rights, and no doubt the artist who wrote the thing in the first place. I’m no expert, but they’ll probably want money, all of them. And a % of any usage.
If you really have gone down this route, I’d say forget that material now, or replace the samples with your own work, asap.
If B) is refering to a commercial sample library – check out the manufacturer’s terms. Most ( but not all ) allow usage in library music without any real problems.
I honestly believe that mylesthebaker would not run into any issues by simply re-recording the songs. If he created the original compositions and did not have any legal contract regarding compensation to other parties, he would not be legally entitled to get permssion from anyone to exploit those works. Myles would not owe anyone any money from those songs. If those other guys did contest the rights to ownership, the burden of proof would be with them.
Also, re-recording would solve the issue of using those samples/loops. Since the new composition would not use any of those samples/loops, there would be no infringement.
I know that many people here believe that they are experts or that years of experience entitles them to have the correct opinion. But the truth is that there are arguments and counterarguments for many issues. A law in the books today can be overturned. A new law can replace the old law.
I do not claim to be an expert, but I believe my opinion to be valid. I also am thankful that other people question my opinion and challenge me to defend myself. I learn from others and they also learn from me. It is good to exchange ideas without making others feel bad.
Enough of my craziness. I guess that I need to get back to the studio.
Best of luck!!!
I was going to write a long response, but decided that it was pointless.
Nameless, I have a law degree and I passed bar exams in two states. I suppose that gives me just a slight edge on you when it comes to legal analysis.
I don’t mean to make you, or any one else, feel bad, but your perception of law has no basis in reality.
Do you also go into hospitals and argue with doctors over their diagnosis of patients’ ills?
No one should EVER take legal advice from a non lawyer.
Please write music. I’m sure that it is what you do best.
Michael
@ MichaelL: I do not believe that you fully understand where I am coming from. I have never stated that I was a lawyer or an expert on the law. I respect that you are a lawyer. You are a very smart person. But you are not a copyright attorney. I do not believe that you have the final say-so regarding copyright law.
Since you are a lawyer, you should be able to view my side of the story as well. Lawyers often agree on things This does not make one lawyer worse than the other.
I believe that I am correct. I base this off of what I have read and what I have experienced. I have recreated songs that had originally contained samples. A copyright owner can attempt to sue a musician for creating a sound-a-like track. But it would be left to a judge’s or jury’s discretion to decide if a copyright was violated.
Just because two songs sound alike does not neccessarily mean that a copyright was violated. I actually hear soundalike tracks used on TV shows all of the time. Chords may be changed a bit, but the basic melody instantly strikes me. I can guarantee that the TV show composer has about a one in a million chance of being sued. The chances of that artist losing are about one in a million also.
Taxi actually has listing that ask for artists or songs that sound like such and such. Music Dealers has had several calls for remakes of songs that were once popular. I am sure that these companies would not do this if they thought they were going to get sued.
I know that legal issues can be complicated and scary. But I am not intimidated by lawyers. I have an attorney available to represent my business interest. If I ever needed to go to court, I would hire her for my legal needs.
I have learned a great deal from our exchange. I will call it a day regarding this issue.
Best of luck!!!
OK, I get it I’m on Candid Camera.
You win Nameless.
Best of luck to you!
Well, without wanting to drag out this exchange much further, I’d like to add a footnote to this :
“I have an attorney available to represent my business interest. If I ever needed to go to court, I would hire her for my legal needs.”
I have a lawyer I’m real happy with too. Problem is he’s not an entertainment or copyright specialist. About 15 years ago I found myself in need of legal help to sort out a deal gone bad with a record label. My own lawyer simply wasn’t in a position to help. I ended up engaging a specialist music lawyer at around £250 an hour. As you can imagine, when the dust settled and he’d got me what I was entitled to, I ended up paying him a big chunk of it.
So with all respect to anyone in the legal profession, they tend to be the winners in these situations 🙂
@darkstar: that is why I’ve noted in previous posts that in the US copyright litigation is very expensive. First, your copyright must be registered, and 2) you need $75,000 worth of damages. Proving that requires other experts, like accountants. It adds up to hundreds of dollars per hour, or more.
In the case of Mylesthebaker, the issues are a little more nuanced, because Namless has perhaps confused the unlicensed use of samples/loops with using samples of other peoples’ music, which is apples and oranges.
While using unlicensed samples/loops could be a copyright issue, it is also a breach of contract by the person who originally bought the samples. 1) When you buy a sample library from East West, for example, its terms of use do not allow you to let another person use those samples.
2) If MTB uses those samples and avers to his music library/publisher that he was authorized to use those samples, he is violating the terms of his agreement with the library/publisher, which is also not a copyright issue. So apart from the copyright issue, there are simple contract claims, which could be brought in any court of proper jurisdiction.
Depending upon the fine print, there could be a “choice of law” clause in the license agreement that states whose law will apply, and in what jurisdiction. Thus, someone from the UK could end up defending themselves in the US. Conversely, someone from the US could end up in court in the UK or Germany.
A lawyer should always advise a client of the potential cost going in, and the possible outcome, so that the client can make an informed decision whether to proceed.
*********
With respect to continuing this discussion: I have offered opinions based upon my knowledge as an attorney. Engaging in pointless debate with someone, who shall remain nameless, is a waste of my time and only confuses the issues for the rest of you. So, to use a legal term, I am going to opt-out from answering future posts on legal matters.
Anyone that has a legal question should consult with their own attorney and not seek advice from non-attorneys on an open forum.
Best of luck,
Michael
Al least Mylesthebaker, you ARE learning, and appear to grasp that this is a business, and that there are possible far reaching implications to the actions that you take.
Congratulations, you’re well on your way to being a professional!
I think that I’ve finally hit the wall and concluded that this is a huge time vacuum, which is draining away from valuable writing time.
Back to music.
Cheers,
Michael
For me the main issue is who played what and I guess as it was recorded such a long time ago I didn’t really think it was a big issue but now I see that it is, so best to be professional from the start. I am learning I need to tread my way carefully in this business as I understand more how it works. A mistake I have now rectified by either removing or requesting removal of all the tracks I can’t be sure of from all the website I put them up on.
To put a bit of perspective on this I have only recently started putting tracks up on these website and as yet have only sold 3 licenses all with tracks recorded completely by me ( in fact only using the built in synths from Cubase SX1).
Now if I can upgrade to Cubase 5 and muck around with the vocals a bit I think I can do a good job of re recording some of these tracks.
I think that you guys are making a big deal out of something small. I believe that mylesthebaker will do what he thinks is best. I was just offering my opinion based off of the knowledge that I have.
I myself would definitely re-record the songs and submit them to libraries. By doing this, Myles could bypass the issue of using a sample of a song. Since a new composition was created, there would be no violation of copyright.
Hip hop producers get sued for using uncleared samples because they use the master recording to make a new song. If those producers got some band off of the street to make a new version of the song and sampled that, those producers would not be liable for using the master recording.
I think that musicians should focus on creating music. Let the lawyers and pundits dictate the definitions for a copyright and other intellectual property issues. The musicians need to focus on creating hits and getting paid.
Thanks for the advice, guys. You all bring up some good points.
Best of luck!!!
Now I’m going to not speak like a lawyer (which I am).
@ Nameless — Dude, I think that you missed the point. MTB is not talking about using samples of songs. I believe that he is talking about the samples, specifically loops, that were used in recording the songs.
Every sample library, has limitations in its user agreement license that forbids certain uses of the sounds/samples. One in particular is that the person using the samples/loops needs to be the original licensee.
When MTB signs a contract with a library he will be asked if he was licensed to use the samples/loops that he used. If he says yes, but that is not true, that is a big problem for him AND the library.
As far as your spin on hip hop producers and master recordings goes, you aren’t even close on the law. You’re absolutely wrong.
Michael
“When MTB signs a contract with a library he will be asked if he was licensed to use the samples/loops that he used. If he says yes, but that is not true, that is a big problem for him AND the library.”
Yup. My experience ( as previously noted, with UK based Exclusive Libraries ) is that they will expect you to sign a sample release form, showing you have the permission as writer to use those samples. Not uncommon to ask you to provide copies of end user agreements from sample libraries to confirm this.
Likewise if you’ve used session players, they’ll need copies of session agreements, waivers, invoices etc etc.
You the writer, by signing with them, become *personally* liable for any infringement.
Guys, I cannot stress how important these contract terms are. By all means go ahead, take a risk and use something uncleared. Just be aware how much money you are risking, we’re not talking small change here
.
Personally I’d rather play russian roulette than take that gamble.
Darkstar, you obviously have a grasp on the business that escapes Nameless.
MTB gets it.
Thanks for your input.
Michael
It’s interesting to me that we are on a website whereby if a composer thinks a library did the slightest thing inappropriate or supposedly acted unprofessssionally, they will publicly rip the library to shreds.
But am I reading that a composer feels it’s OK to act unprofessionally and use samples or other copyrighted material that he/she is not authorized to use? If you used an uncleared sample or steal someone else’s copyrighted composition (e.g. re-recording a sample) and you sign contracts attesting otherwise you are asking for trouble and frankly, deserve it.
Be honest in all your dealings. Treat others as you would want to be treated. If you are about to sign a contract and are unsure about something, ask.
it’s best to stick to the samples in your plugins anyways
or sythesizers or whatever you’re using
they don’t charge royalties on the samples in your recording software
@ mylesthebaker: I would re-record the songs and submit them. Sometimes you have to take chances in life. I know that everyone believes that you should play it safe and forget those songs. But I believe that musicians are too risk-averse these days. Getting sued is a possibility, but it is not likely.
If you really believe in those songs, you can re-record them. That is the equivalent of doing a cover song. Since a song has two forms of copyright (master recording and composition), you would only be found guilty of using the composition with authorization. I am not sure how it works in the UK, but in the United States you can get a compulsory license to make a cover of a song.
Do not be scared! You can re-record the songs, send them out to companies, and seek out the original co-writers and publishers. I see no point in being scared. Be bold, my friend. This is how you become powerful. Learn to manage risk, not run away from it!
Best of luck!!!
“I would re-record the songs and submit them. Sometimes you have to take chances in life. I know that everyone believes that you should play it safe and forget those songs. But I believe that musicians are too risk-averse these days. Getting sued is a possibility, but it is not likely.”
That attitude stinks. So, what you’re saying is it’s effectively OK to shaft other musicians who – should any songs become succesful – have a legitimate claim to a proportion of royalties.
You won’t get far with that attitude my friend.
You’re a music library’s nightmare Anonymouse.
Thanks! 🙂
You’re welcome. 😀
“You’re a music library’s nightmare Anonymouse.” John the other John, I’m not sure what you mean by that. Maybe you’re confusing Anonymous with Nameless.
@ Nameless, MTB never said that anyone who played on his songs was a CO-WRITER. MTB never said that the songs were published. You’ve made a huge leap based on assumptions. If MTB is the sole author and the works are unpublished, He can do what he wants. All the talk of copyrights and compulsory licenses etc, is irrelevant.
However, the risk for MTB is more practical than worrying about getting sued. As I’ve said before on this forum. There are are several criteria for initiating a copyright lawsuit including, that the work must be registered, and you need 75K worth of damages.
The more practical risk for MTB is that if there is an issue, he’s dragging the library into it. Risk taking is necessary and admirable under certain circumstances — like deciding whether or not to buy that expensive new string library, or to quit your day job. But, the kind of risk taking that you’re talking about is irresponsible because if it goes wrong it will involve others, i.e., the library, who was not informed of the risk, and thus didn’t have the opportunity to avoid it. Oh yeah, like John the Other John said, that would be fraud. or as we lawyers say a material misrepresentation.
If MTB followed your advice and it backfired — do you think that library or any other would go near him with a ten foot pole in the future?
Your little spiel on musicians being too risk averse is romantic BS. Music in the context of writing for libraries is a business. Jeopardizing your long-term relationships is foolish.
This is my opinion and is not to be construed as legal advice (had to say that).
Cheers,
Michael
PS. Nameless, unless you are a lawyer, please stop injecting “fuzzy law” into the discussion. AND, if you are a lawyer please stop injecting fuzzy law into the discussion. No one should offer second-hand legal advice, especially not lawyers. Anyone with a legal question about copyrights should HIRE a lawyer, with expertise in the area of intellectual property.
Yeah, you’re right MichaelL, I was referring to mylesthebaker (and Nameless now that you mention it). Sorry Anonymouse!
Actually all the songs are my own compositions and it’s mainly a case of tracking people down for the clearances as musicians and for the odd sample. If I can’t find them then as they are my own songs, re recording is probably my best choice.
I guess I thought I didn’t need to chase all these things up but talking to you guys and the PRS I am best sorting it all out first.
I only hope I don’t p**s off any of the sites or people I already sent the songs to.
Some of the songs are a bit dated (like me) so writing and recording a bunch of new stuff more suited to production music needs was phaze 3 of my masterplan but I guess it just got bumped up to phaze 1
Of course you mentioned this mylesthebaker: “The tracks recorded with the production team included them playing some parts and adding ideas” – this could include them on the copyright – depending on their input.
Mylesthebaker:
You’ve gotten good advice, and made the good choice.
You would be asking for trouble, potentially placing yourself and the library at risk.
In your place, I would start over. If you are the only writer on the tracks, why not re-cut them? They’re probably a bit dated anyway.
Michael
PS. my opinion is not to be construed as legal advice
I have a question concerning ownership and samples
A lot of the music I am in the process of uploading to various site was recorded a few years ago mostly on 16 track reel to reel. The tracks were recorded with the help of friends and friends of friends who were producers/studio engineers.
So here are my questions
1) On some songs there are drum loops of which I don’t know the origin so how important is it to get these cleared (it may prove difficult to track them down)
2) on some tracks various musicians and members of the production team/engineer played who I have no idea of the whereabouts anymore so what do I do about their share of the royalties?
3) The tracks recorded with the production team included them playing some parts and adding ideas so how does that affect the royalties etc
I guess what I am asking is ‘do I need to bother getting all these things cleared before trying to place these tracks’ or should I just go ahead and deal with any claims that might arise if the songs are placed.
Also how does this relate to my PRS membership and track registration.
Maybe I should just dump all the old stuff and start with a clean slate, or try and rerecord them?
Any thoughts?
Unless you can get these issues resolved, I’d start with a clean slate. In the future make sure you have any musicians playing on your tracks sign release forms.
Without knowing the origin of the drum loops, you would be creating fraud with the companies you sign agreements with (unless they accept them with your explanation).
Start with a clean slate.
Absolutely – it’s hard to say this, but really you can’t place tracks with libraries if :
1) you aren’t 100% sure you have the right to use any samples those tracks contain.
2) you have to have writer splits agreed.
3) you are 100% agreed on any royalties due to performers on these works.
Failure to do the above, at the very worst is likely to result in very nasty and expensive legal actions.
So really, start with a clean slate.
Just IMO…
I think it would be wrong to use tracks that have no evidence of ‘library friendly’ samples and if you can’t provide musicians buyout/release forms. The scenario you describe above sounds highly risky to me and I would forget about those tracks.
KPM for example require information on all samples used on an excel document. In addition, all musicians sessions have to be bought out for set fees and their release forms signed and returned etc.
You never know when these things come back to bite you in the ass! So I say play safe!
(To use the work of these musicians you mention you would have to track them down and get them to sign release forms – which would also require you having to pay them fees).
Just IMO.
Well that’s all pretty clear then
Thanks for the feedback guys and time to start pulling down some of my tracks.
Onwards and upwards (well sideways I guess!)
Cheers