- This topic has 10 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 7 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
I’m currently in contract negotiations with a library. I asked them to strike the following language in the contract:
“Notwithstanding the foregoing, company shall have the right to issue gratis licenses to its licensees at Company’s sole discretion.”
They refused. I asked for this line to be removed because I didn’t like the idea of the library giving away my music for free in order to promote their library. Am I misunderstanding something here?
Also, with respect to blanket license, the contract stated:
“Promptly following the termination of the Term, Company will remove the Content (as defined below) from Company’s website and from any physical embodiments of Company’s catalog created following the termination of the Term, provided, however, that Company shall have the continuing right to license any Content distributed to any potential third party licensees pursuant to any so-called “blanket” license(s) prior to the termination of the Term.”
I asked if my music will be subject to a blanket license. The response was “Sometimes we do blanket licenses with companies.” How am I to know if and when a blanket license is in effect, and to which of the library’s clients?
Thanks in advance for your input.
Time to move on.
I wouldn’t be in such a hurry to turn this down. Instead of asking them to strike sentences, it’s better to first get clarification on what they mean.
First, different people use the term “Gratis License” differently. It could simply mean no upfront license fee (not at all unusual today) but you would collect on the back end. Sometimes the back end makes it worth it.
And blanket licenses are very common, often resulting in the writer collecting decent back end. A blanket is not *necessarily* gratis in that the library does collect a fee. Unfortunately many libraries do not share any portion of the blanket fees with the writers.
Most important is whether or not the library has a track record for placing PRO revenue generating placements.
And DI… You said “Time to move on” after you were willing to sign tracks to that library offering PRO-free deals? Huh?
And DI… You said “Time to move on” after you were willing to sign tracks to that library offering PRO-free deals? Huh?
Yes, I did.
Steve has to do what is best for him. I will always do what is best for me.
Ok, now that everybody has their righteous indignation going over “gratis” blanket licenses….reality check:
Although the programming suggests otherwise, network execs are not stupid. They are not going to pay two, or three times for the exact same music.
How would you feel if you bought three brand new guitar sample sets from three different stores and, lo and behold, even though they had different names, when you loaded them into Kontakt, they were identical? That would suck big time, and YOU would feel ripped off.
That is reason number one, why networks have the leverage to say, “we are not paying sync fees on non-exclusive material.”
Now, lets say the library is collecting some “secret” sync fees. It’s not like licensing a cue for a commercial. It’s a blanket. So, what if the network pays $10,000 for an annual blanket? Divide that by 100,000 cues and take your 50%. Do you want the library to cut you a check for your $5, or would you like that put into your Paypal account?
Interestingly, the libraries like S*** and J*** that do a lot of blanket deals with no upfront to composers are forcing everyone into their exclusive model. But they still aren’t sharing blanket fees.
I’m not sure what your exact point is here, Michael. There really isn’t any turning back as far as most reality TV cues being blanket with no fee to composer. If one stays out of that market (a personal choice), they certainly need a good alternative to bring in income. I know you are big on the RF model and that is one alternative. But not everyone is able to make as much money in RF as they are in reality TV with PRO.
Some writers make a large share of their income from back end only.
😀
What I mean Advice is:
1) Every one seems to be assuming that the pro-rata share of a blanket license must be significant. Chances are it’s very little, if anything.
2) I have written for money upfront exclusives for 35 years. They generally do not share blanket license fees. So, I’m used to the concept.
I know you are big on the RF model and that is one alternative.
I prefer it as a viable outlet for certain types of music.
Some writers make a large share of their income from back end only.
Most of my music income is backend.
I really think this is where the differences between traditional concepts of “production music libraries” and “licensing agents” differ.
I think the current climate. i.e. gratis licensing is really geared toward “volume” composers, not toward writers who labor for days, or weeks to craft a cue or a song.
I posted this thread in Chuck Mott’s “General Question” thread.
Read it closely. Look at how “RiffWrath” and “Chillbot” describe their work methods…several cues per day.Perhaps there are some libraries that take a more boutique approach in selecting a representing songs/cues. But, it appears that outside a core group of in-house composers, most writers are part of the “volume licensing” side of things for the libraries that you mentioned.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.