6 thoughts on “Production Music Association Meeting”

  1. Thanks Art. Some interesting points, especially on watermarking/fingerprinting technologies, which as i said somewhere here, are DEFINITELY HERE TO STAY. Coupled with point 9) about indeminification, the GOOD SIDE about this, is that the knock on efffect will eventually shore up the values of music yet again, as multiple placements from one source audio file wont be possible with the same ease anymore, which the retitling model allows.

    Again, however, on the flipside, i did mention ( i think it may have been privately ), that the PRO’S wont be in too much of a rush to fix re-titling. I can surmise that one of the reasons , is the cut in revenues will also be reduced for them.

    So as they say in soccer in the UK , “its a game of two halves”. It now remains to be seen as to WHICH HALF wins out in the long term.

    • Re-titling will not cut revenue for the PRO’s but it will cut it for the writers that have music that will not be able to be identified correctly due to this practice. Pro’s will still get there money but will not know who to pay… so that money will become available for music that is identified properly… same as it is now when cue sheets are not turned in properly. Re-Titling will soon give you the same result as not turning in cue sheets… NO MONEY.

      PRO’s due not negotiate based on how many tracks are used on a network but on the value of it’s members base.

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

X

Forgot Password?

Join Us